Supreme Court refuses to allow Trump to deploy National Guard troops to Chicago


Summary

Supreme Court decision

The Supreme Court declined to allow the Trump administration to deploy National Guard troops to Chicago and the surrounding areas, according to The Associated Press.

Reasoning for deployment

The Trump administration has argued the deployments are needed "to protect federal personnel and property from violent resistance."

Multi-state endeavor

The Trump administration has deployed National Guard troops to several cities, including Chicago, Los Angeles, Washington and Memphis, often following protests or supporting local law enforcement.


Full story

The Supreme Court declined Tuesday to allow the deployment of National Guard troops to Chicago and the surrounding areas, handing a defeat to President Donald Trump. At Trump’s direction, troops have been used in several states to assist with his crackdown on illegal immigration.

The White House had filed an emergency request with the Supreme Court to overturn a lower court decision that blocked the Chicago deployment. The justices refused to hear the request.

QR code for SAN app download

Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.

Point phone camera here

While the court’s decision is not final, it could still have an effect on other lawsuits challenging Trump’s deployments around the country. 

Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch publicly dissented from the majority decision. 

What did lower courts rule?

The Trump administration argued the troops were needed “to protect federal personnel and property from violent resistance.” The Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in the western Chicago suburbs of Broadview has seen tense protests over the past few months. Federal agents have deployed tear gas and other nonlethal deterrents on protesters and journalists. 

However, U.S. District Judge April Perry ruled that the administration’s reasoning that a “danger of rebellion” was happening in Illinois was unsubstantiated. Perry also said that she didn’t believe the protests in the area had interfered with Trump’s immigration crackdown. 

Perry initially blocked the deployment for two weeks but extended the order indefinitely as the Supreme Court reviewed the case. 

This case is one of many regarding the president’s deployment of the National Guard. 

District of Columbia Attorney General Brian Schwab sued to halt the deployment of the Guard there. According to The Associated Press, 45 states have entered filings in federal court, with 23 supporting the deployment and 22 supporting the lawsuit. 

An appeals court recently allowed the deployment in Washington to continue. More than 2,200 National Guard troops are stationed in the capital.

In Oregon, a federal judge permanently blocked the deployment of troops in the city. Federal officials said they were recalling the 200 troops sent from California under Trump’s orders.

In June, Trump deployed at least 4,000 National Guard and 700 Marines to Los Angeles following protests against ICE raids in immigrant communities. The administration reassigned about 150 troops to support the state’s wildfire response in July. However, by September, troops had left the city after a series of legal fights. 

The Trump administration appealed the California and Oregon rulings to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. National Guard troops deployed to Memphis, Tennessee, in September after Trump ordered the creation of the Memphis Safe Task Force. By October, residents began seeing troops conducting patrols alongside local law enforcement. A Tennessee state court ruled in favor of Democratic officials who sued to end the ongoing Guard deployment in Memphis. 

Tags: , , , ,

SAN provides
Unbiased. Straight Facts.

Don’t just take our word for it.


Certified balanced reporting

According to media bias experts at AllSides

AllSides Certified Balanced May 2025

Transparent and credible

Awarded a perfect reliability rating from NewsGuard

100/100

Welcome back to trustworthy journalism.

Find out more

Why this story matters

The Supreme Court declined the White House's request to deploy National Guard troops to Chicago, highlighting ongoing legal battles over federal authority during protests and immigration enforcement actions across multiple states.

Federal vs. state authority

Legal disputes are testing the balance between federal directives and state or local jurisdiction over National Guard deployments in response to protests and immigration enforcement.

Judicial oversight

Court decisions at various levels are shaping the government's ability to use the military domestically, with rulings both blocking and permitting deployments based on perceived threats.

Protests and civil unrest

Recent demonstrations at federal facilities and in major cities are influencing national debates about appropriate government response to public dissent and immigration policies.

SAN provides
Unbiased. Straight Facts.

Don’t just take our word for it.


Certified balanced reporting

According to media bias experts at AllSides

AllSides Certified Balanced May 2025

Transparent and credible

Awarded a perfect reliability rating from NewsGuard

100/100

Welcome back to trustworthy journalism.

Find out more

Daily Newsletter

Start your day with fact-based news

Start your day with fact-based news

Learn more about our emails. Unsubscribe anytime.

By entering your email, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.