“In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court has decisively halted President Donald Trump’s attempt to deploy the National Guard to Chicago, reinforcing the limits of executive authority.”
“The Supreme Court, citing an 1878 law prohibiting military involvement in domestic policing, rejected President Trump’s bid for broad authority to deploy troops on U.S. soil. The ruling emphasized that the administration failed to prove the statute allows federalizing the National Guard under inherent presidential powers. While the Court has often supported Trump’s efforts to expand executive authority, this decision draws a clear line on the limits of presidential power.”
“In a 6–3 decision, the Supreme Court issued a preliminary injunction blocking President Trump’s attempt to deploy the National Guard to Chicago. The majority cited an 1878 law barring military involvement in domestic policing, ruling that the administration failed to show the statute permits federalizing the Guard under inherent presidential authority. Justices Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch dissented, with Alito arguing that protecting federal officers from lethal attacks should not be hindered. The White House echoed this stance, insisting the Guard was activated to safeguard law enforcement and federal property. Yet, for decades, federal agencies have fulfilled these duties without military backup—perhaps a stronger focus on vetting and training ICE agents would reduce concerns about their ability to protect themselves.”
“Illinois Governor JB Pritzker hailed the Supreme Court’s decision as a critical check on executive overreach, calling it ‘an important step in curbing the Trump administration’s consistent abuse of power and slowing Trump’s march toward authoritarianism.’ Pritzker stressed that National Guard members ‘should never be used for political theater and deserve to be with their families, especially during the holidays.’
Trump’s push to deploy the Guard in Democratic-led cities has faced repeated legal setbacks throughout the year. Federal judges have blocked similar efforts in Memphis and Portland and ordered the withdrawal of Guard units from California and Washington, D.C.—underscoring the judiciary’s resistance to expanding presidential authority in domestic law enforcement.”
“Morale among Guardsmen has plummeted, with some openly questioning the purpose of these deployments in private group chats. Despite the Supreme Court’s injunction, repeated legal challenges, and growing discontent within the ranks, The Guardian reports that President Trump has approved sending 350 National Guardsmen to New Orleans ahead of the new year. This move comes even as federal law enforcement already maintains a strong presence in the city, including a recent Border Patrol-led immigration crackdown earlier this month.”
“Whether this latest deployment will face legal challenges remains uncertain. Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry, a staunch Trump ally, has voiced strong support, framing the move as a public safety measure. ‘It’s going to help us further crack down on the violence here in the city of New Orleans and elsewhere around Louisiana,’ Landry said during an appearance on Fox News, praising both Trump and federal authorities for their efforts.”
So while the New Orleans deployment looks like it will proceed without any legal pushback, the Supreme Court’s ruling may make it harder for Trump to continue deploying the National Guard in the new year.
