Illinois asks Supreme Court to deny Trump's 'dramatic' request to clear National Guard deployment

Jason Meisner, Chicago Tribune on Oct 20, 2025

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

CHICAGO — Attorneys for Illinois on Monday asked the U.S. Supreme Court to deny the Trump administration’s “dramatic” request to be allowed to send National Guard troops to the Chicago area to help with immigration enforcement while the issue is on appeal.

In the 46-page response, the state said it would be inappropriate for the high court to get involved at this stage in the proceedings, where a district court’s decision has yet to be decided on appeal.

The filing also said lawyers for Trump offered “no meaningful response” to the factual basis for U.S. District Judge April Perry’s Oct. 9 temporary restraining order, including that declarations submitted by a series of immigration officials outlining purported violence against agents and out-of-control protests simply did not hold water.

“In fact, applicants do not even attempt to rebut that much of the activity the declarants complained about was constitutionally protected,” the state response stated.

The filing came just hours after a divided appeals court in Oregon overturned a lower court’s decision and ruled that Trump does have the authority to send National Guard troops into Portland to quell what the president has described as a prolonged and violent siege of government buildings there.

But in a footnote in that opinion, the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals noted the situation in Illinois is different because, unlike in Portland, immigration facilities and other government buildings have remained open despite ongoing protests.

In its filing Friday asking the Supreme Court to issue a stay on Perry’s order, the Trump administration called it part of a “disturbing and recurring pattern” that “improperly impinges on the President’s authority and needlessly endangers federal personnel and property.”

It asked that President Donald Trump be allowed to deploy some 700 troops in Illinois — 300 from the Illinois National Guard and another 400 federalized out of Texas earlier this month.

The petition by the solicitor general also asked for an immediate administrative stay “given the pressing risk of violence,” but the court instead gave Illinois lawyers until 4 p.m. Chicago time on Monday to respond.

Supreme Court asked lawyers for Illinois to respond by 5 p.m. Eastern time on Monday.

The Supreme Court fight is playing out on an unusually quick track, with Trump appealing just a day after the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals declined to grant a stay to Perry’s order, ruling her findings were not “clearly erroneous” and that “the facts do not justify” Trump’s actions in Illinois.

The three-judge appellate panel unanimously agreed with Perry that, even giving the president “great deference” when it comes to his power to call up the military, there was no evidence that he needed troops to help enforce immigration law or quell any kind of organized rebellion.

“The spirited, sustained, and occasionally violent actions of demonstrators in protest of the federal government immigration policies and actions, without more, does not give rise to a danger of rebellion against the government’s authority,” stated the opinion by Judges Ilana Rovner, David Hamilton and Amy St. Eve.

The judges went on to note that while the Trump administration has claimed that protesters and local politicians are hampering immigration-enforcement efforts, the evidence — and even the administration’s own statements — don’t back that up.

Two of the three judges on the panel, Rovner and St. Eve, were appointed to the 7th Circuit by Republican presidents, with St. Eve’s appointment coming during Trump’s first term. Hamilton was appointed by Democrat Barack Obama.

______