Article Summary
- Deployment of the National Guard in Illinois will remain blocked indefinitely after the Trump administration on Wednesday proposed extending U.S. District Judge April Perry’s temporary restraining order until final judgment in the case.
- The agreement follows the administration’s emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court on late last week asking the justices to stay U.S. District Judge April Perry’s Oct. 9 restraining order.
- It’s unclear how quickly the high court might weigh in on the matter, but after a Supreme Court ruling, the case could head to an expedited trial or other accelerated hearing that would result in a final judgment.
- The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the part of Perry’s ruling blocking the deployment of the National Guard, writing that “political opposition is not rebellion.” But the Trump administration argues that a president’s military actions are not subject to judicial review.
This summary was written by the reporters and editors who worked on this story.
CHICAGO — A federal judge’s order blocking the Trump administration from deploying National Guard troops to Chicago will remain in place indefinitely, setting up a possible trial when the U.S. Supreme Court weighs in on the case.
The administration has been barred from deploying guardsmen in Illinois since U.S. District Judge April Perry’s temporary restraining order Oct. 9. But that 14-day order was set to expire Thursday evening.
Read more: Judge calls feds ‘unreliable,’ temporarily blocks National Guard deployment to Illinois | Former military leaders decry National Guard deployment in Illinois
Department of Justice lawyers originally had proposed extending that order another 30 days in a Tuesday filing. But because a temporary restraining order can only be extended once and there’s no way of knowing when the Supreme Court may rule on the administration’s plea to stay Perry’s ruling, the judge warned Wednesday that “whatever extension we make has to be the right one” to prevent a gap in judicial orders “that would allow troops be deployed on the streets.”
But if the U.S. Supreme Court does stay Perry’s temporary restraining order, the National Guard could be immediately deployed anyway. If that happens, Christopher Wells, a top lawyer in Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul’s office, said the state would be seeking a “quick trial” or other expedited injunction hearing. Either would result in the type of final judgment that would end Perry’s now-extended restraining order.
Read more: Trump asks U.S. Supreme Court to allow National Guard deployment in Illinois
Wells and his colleagues agreed Wednesday with the DOJ’s indefinite extension proposal but said he wanted it made very clear on the legal record that it was the Trump administration’s suggestion.
“We’re very concerned about possible gamesmanship in other courts and about how what’s happening here will be portrayed,” he said near the end of Wednesday’s hearing.
A similar case in Portland, Oregon, is moving to an expedited trial next week after the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday overturned another temporary restraining order blocking National Guard deployment to the West Coast city.
Appeal to SCOTUS
In its filing to the Supreme Court on Friday, U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer argued the judicial branch has no right to “second guess” a president’s judgment on national security matters or resulting military actions. The administration maintains that National Guard deployment is necessary to protect federal immigration agents and property from protesters.
“A federal district court lacks not only the authority but also the competence to wrest control of the military chain of command from the Commander in Chief,” he wrote.
Read more: Immigration officials seek to justify use of force on Chicago-area protesters | Judge grants restraining order protecting protesters, journalists in Chicago-area protests
Lawyers for the state of Illinois shot back in its own filing Monday, citing two U.S. Supreme Court decisions from the last century, including one “invalidating presidential seizure of steel mills during the Korean War.”
“Furthermore, ‘federal courts are fully empowered to consider’ claims ‘resulting from military intrusion into the civilian sector,’” lawyers in Attorney General Kwame Raoul’s office wrote, citing a 1972 decision. “There are numerous indications that the questions presented here … fall within this duty.”
President Donald Trump’s Oct. 4 order to federalize, or take control of, 300 members of the Illinois National Guard, along with the deployment of 200 Texas guardsmen and another 16 troops from California, has been blocked since Perry heard hours of arguments earlier this month, culminating in her temporary restraining order.
Read more: Illinois sues to block Trump’s National Guard deployment to Chicago | Over Pritzker’s objections, Trump sending 300 National Guardsmen to Chicago, governor says
The judge said the Department of Justice’s arguments of violence added to a “growing body of evidence that (Department of Homeland Security’s) version of events are unreliable” as the administration’s narrative about “violent” protests in Chicago differed so strongly from the accounts of state and local law enforcement.
Perry also found there was “no credible evidence that there is a danger of rebellion in the state of Illinois.” The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals backed up Perry last week, with a three-judge panel writing in an opinion published Thursday that “political opposition is not rebellion.”
The three-judge appeals panel did stay the portion of Perry’s order blocking the administration from federalizing National Guard troops. But the administration accused the 7th circuit of “judicially micromanaging the exercise of the President’s Commander-in-Chief powers” as the appellate judges still sided with Perry on the actual deployment of guardsmen.
Capitol News Illinois is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service that distributes state government coverage to hundreds of news outlets statewide. It is funded primarily by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation.
