Illinois Sues Trump Over National Guard Deployment

The state of Illinois and city of Chicago filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration on Oct. 6 in a bid to halt the federal government from deploying National Guard troops to Chicago.

The state and city are arguing in the new legal complaint filed in federal district court in Illinois that the federal government has no legal authority to intervene in the state’s law enforcement efforts.

“The American people, regardless of where they reside, should not live under the threat of occupation by the United States military, particularly not simply because their city or state leadership has fallen out of a president’s favor. To guard against this, foundational principles of American law limit the president’s authority to involve the military in domestic affairs. Those bedrock principles are in peril,” the lawsuit states.

Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker said on Oct. 5 that President Donald Trump was directing 400 Texas National Guard members to Illinois, Oregon, and other states amid federal immigration enforcement operations.

Pritzker described the deployment as “Trump’s Invasion.”

“There is no reason a President should send military troops into a sovereign state without their knowledge, consent, or cooperation,” the governor said.

On Oct. 4, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth invoked Section 12406 of Title 10 of the United States Code to federalize as many as 300 members of the Illinois National Guard, placing the Department of War in control of them, over Pritzker’s objections.

On Oct. 5, Hegseth called up 400 members of the Texas National Guard for deployment in Chicago, according to the lawsuit.

The court should block these military deployments “immediately and permanently,” the complaint said. It alleges the president is using the military as part of an effort to “punish his political enemies.”

The deployments are part of a plan announced by President Donald Trump at the Pentagon Sept. 30. The president said military personnel must prioritize “defending the homeland” against an “invasion from within” in U.S. cities, including Chicago.

White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson previously told The Epoch Times that the president authorized the deployment to Chicago to safeguard federal assets from “ongoing violent riots and lawlessness.”

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) assistant secretary Tricia McLaughlin said on Oct. 4 that law enforcement officers were rammed by vehicles and boxed in by 10 cars during a patrol in Broadview, a village several miles from Chicago, which led an agent to “fire defensive shots” at an armed driver.

McLaughlin also said the Chicago Police Department declined to assist federal agents in securing the area, prompting the DHS to deploy “special operations to control the scene” as a crowd gathered.

The same day the complaint was filed, the case was assigned to U.S. District Judge April Perry.

Perry ordered that the parties participate in a status hearing on the case at 2 p.m. local time on Oct. 6.

The new lawsuit in Illinois came after a federal judge in Oregon on Oct. 5 blocked a move by Trump to deploy members of the California National Guard or any other state’s National Guard to Oregon.

Responding to a lawsuit filed by Oregon and California Gov. Gavin Newsom, U.S. District Judge Karin J. Immergut issued a temporary restraining order directing the Trump administration not to deploy federalized National Guard troops to Oregon. The order expires on Oct. 19.

Newsom said in a statement that the deployment of his state’s troops to Oregon was a “breathtaking abuse of the law and power.”

U.S. District Judge Michael Simon disqualified himself from the Oregon case on Oct. 2, hours after the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed papers in the case stating that Simon’s wife, Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.), publicly criticized the president’s plan.

At a press conference with Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek, Bonamici said Trump’s plan to take over National Guard troops was a “gross abuse of power” and that “no military is welcome or needed here,” according to the DOJ.

Simon issued an order on Oct. 2 saying that he was recusing himself from the case “because it is necessary that the focus of this lawsuit remain on the critically important constitutional and statutory issues presented by the parties.”