<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd“>
Update: In a notable turn of events, Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett has opted not to grant an immediate administrative stay on Friday. Instead, she has mandated that officials from Illinois respond by the upcoming Monday.
UPDATE: Justice Amy Coney Barrett has called for a response from Illinois officials by Monday at 5 PM ET. However, she has refrained from issuing the immediate administrative stay sought by the Trump administration. More updates being provided by @kyledcheney @ShiaKapos https://t.co/jUblwFvEUd
â Josh Gerstein (@joshgerstein) October 17, 2025
This Friday, former President Trump requested the US Supreme Court’s intervention to facilitate the deployment of National Guard troops in Chicago. This follows a federal appeals court’s decision on Thursday, which upheld a ruling by a Biden-appointed judge that barred Trump’s proposed troop deployment.
On the previous Thursday, Judge April Perry issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) that halted Trump’s plans for the National Guard in Chicago, citing violations of the Posse Comitatus Act alongside concerns regarding the 10th and 14th Amendments.
Trump’s strategy aimed to mobilize Texas National Guard troops to protect Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents from what his administration characterized as violent attacks by leftist groups like Antifa. White House Advisor Stephen Miller previously asserted, âThe National Guard’s mission in Chicago is to guard federal lives and properties threatened by ongoing criminal threats. These troops are operating under federal command, akin to any federal force, and can be sourced from any state if necessary.â
Miller further criticized local Chicago and Illinois leaders, suggesting their actions constitute a form of obstruction against federal enforcement efforts that fund the broader US security landscape.
The National Guardâs mission in Chicago is to protect federal lives and property that are facing constant criminal assault. The guard protecting DHS is activated under *federal control* and therefore, like any federal troopsâŠ
â Stephen Miller (@StephenM) October 9, 2025
In a twist, last Saturday, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals lifted Judge Perry’s TRO related to Trump’s deployment of National Guard troops, yet upheld her block on the actual deployment itself. On Thursday, the Seventh Circuit unanimously reinforced Judge Perry’s initial ruling, asserting there was âinsufficient evidence of rebellion or threats of rebellionâ to warrant such military action.
As the courts grapple with the legal implications of these deployments, we note that Judge Karin Immergut, also a Trump appointee, recently blocked troop deployments to Portland as well. Interestingly, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously moved to lift Immergut’s TRO last Wednesday but maintained the restriction on troop deployment.
Thus, the saga plays on, fueling ongoing discussions about the role of the judiciary in navigating the tensions of state versus federal powers in the face of perceived national crises.
