Trump asks Supreme Court to federalize Illinois Guard for ICE. Lower courts blocked deployment.

On Oct. 4, 2025, President Trump issued an order federalizing 300 🌽Illinois National Guard members to support Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations in Chicago. Trump also directed 200 🤠Texas Guard members and 16 🌴California Guard members to deploy to Illinois. These deployments occurred without the consent of Illinois Governor JB Pritzker or the governors of Texas and California.

Federal JAJudge Apr. Perry issued a temporary restraining order on Oct. 9, 2025, blocking the Guard deployment. Perry ruled that Trump had not demonstrated "no credible evidence of rebellion" in 🌽Illinois as required by federal law to justify federalizing Guard forces. She stated that "political opposition is not rebellion" and ordered the National Guard to remain under state control pending further court proceedings.

Trump's legal team appealed to the Supreme Court on Oct. 17, 2025, with Solicitor General D. John Sauer filing a 43-page brief arguing that courts lack authority to second-guess the president's military judgment. Sauer claimed that federal agents in Chicago had been threatened, assaulted, shot at with fireworks, and attacked in planned ambushes. He argued that protesters constituted a security threat requiring National Guard deployment.

Judge Perry questioned whether the Trump administration's characterization of events was reliable. She noted that protests outside the ICE facility in Broadview, 🌽Illinois, had never exceeded 200 people. Perry gave credence to allegations that federal agents were often the aggressors in clashes with protesters and predicted that deploying the National Guard "will only add fuel to the fire that the defendants themselves have started."

The Supreme Court surprised both sides on Oct. 29, 2025, by requesting additional briefing specifically asking whether Title 10 federal law even applies to civilian law enforcement agencies like ICE. Georgetown Law Professor Martin Lederman had argued that Title 10 historically referred only to military forces, not civilian agencies. The Court's framing suggested the justices questioned the Trump administration's legal theory about federalizing troops for ICE operations.

Title 10 permits the president to federalize National Guard forces only when there is "rebellion or danger of rebellion" or when the federal government is "unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States." The term "regular forces" was last heavily invoked during the 1967 Detroit riots when President Lyndon Johnson deployed Guard troops to respond to civil unrest. Trump's invocation for ICE immigration enforcement marked a different application of the statute.

Governor JB Pritzker called Trump's federalization an "invasion of 🌽Illinois" and sued Trump in federal court. Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson pledged the city would resist the deployment. A coalition of 20 or more states filed amicus briefs opposing the federalization, with 🦀Maryland and others arguing that Trump's use of the Guard exemplified "concentration of power that the Founding Generation feared."

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Oct. 18, 2025, that Guard members could remain federalized but not deployed. The three-judge panel allowed the administration to keep the troops under federal control while preventing their operational deployment. Trump-appointed JAJudge Amy St. Eve joined two colleagues in this decision, though all three disagreed with some aspects of Perry's reasoning.

The Supreme Court indicated briefs would be due through mid-Nov. 2025 and a decision was unlikely before Nov. 17, 2025. The outcome would determine whether future presidents could deploy National Guard forces to support civilian law enforcement agencies during immigration enforcement, deportation operations, or other federal policing activities without state governor consent.