Trump Loses Critical SCOTUS Battle
SCOTUS Blocks Trump’s Bold Move to Deploy National Guard in Chicago’s ICE Battle
The Supreme Court delivered a major blow to President Donald Trump’s immigration enforcement strategy Tuesday, rejecting his administration’s request to federalize Illinois National Guard troops for deployment to Chicago.
The 6-3 ruling prevents Trump from sending 300 Illinois National Guardsmen to protect Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents operating in the sanctuary city.
The decision marks a significant legal setback for the administration’s efforts to bolster immigration enforcement in jurisdictions that have resisted federal immigration policies.
Trump initially sought to deploy the National Guard in October to assist ICE agents facing hostile conditions. However, a federal judge appointed by former President Joe Biden blocked the move with a temporary restraining order.
The administration then appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, requesting the court stay the lower judge’s order.
That panel of judges denied the request, prompting the Trump administration to take the matter directly to the nation’s highest court.
The Supreme Court’s unsigned majority opinion stated the Trump administration “has failed to identify a source of authority that would allow the military to execute the laws in Illinois.”
The Court denied the administration’s application for a stay of the lower court’s order.
The majority opinion addressed the legal complexities surrounding the Posse Comitatus Act, which restricts the use of military forces for domestic law enforcement.
The Court noted the President had not invoked a statute providing an exception to this Act.
Instead, the administration relied on what it described as inherent constitutional authority allowing the President to use military forces to protect federal personnel and property.
The Court found this argument problematic given the government’s own position on the Posse Comitatus Act.
The opinion highlighted an apparent contradiction in the administration’s legal reasoning.
The government claimed that protective functions do not constitute executing the laws under the Posse Comitatus Act, yet simultaneously argued such functions fell within the scope of a different statute.
The Court emphasized it would not assume Congress attached different meanings to the same term in related statutes.
The justices concluded the government failed to meet its burden of proof at this preliminary stage of litigation.
Importantly, the Court specified it was not addressing whether presidential findings under the relevant statute are reviewable.
The justices limited their ruling to the specific circumstances and legal arguments presented.
Chief Justice John Roberts joined Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Amy Coney Barrett, and Ketanji Brown Jackson in supporting the unsigned order.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh filed a separate concurring opinion.
Three justices dissented from the majority decision.
Justice Samuel Alito authored a dissenting opinion joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, while Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote his own separate dissent.
Alito’s dissent expressed concern about the implications of the ruling for federal officer safety.
“Whatever one may think about the current administration’s enforcement of the immigration laws or the way ICE has conducted its operations, the protection of federal officers from potentially lethal attacks should not be thwarted,” Alito wrote. “I therefore respectfully dissent.”
The case arose amid reports of violent confrontations at an ICE facility in Broadview, Illinois.
According to reports, rioters have attacked agents at the location and chanted threatening slogans including “Kill ICE!” and “Shoot ICE!”
The decision represents a clash between federal immigration enforcement priorities and state-level resistance in sanctuary jurisdictions.
Chicago has been a flashpoint in broader national debates over immigration policy and federal-state relations.
The ruling does not address the underlying merits of the case but focuses on the preliminary question of whether the administration demonstrated sufficient legal authority for the deployment.
The case may continue in lower courts.
US Supreme Court rejects Trump bid to deploy National Guard to aid immigration enforcement in Illinois, says law limits use to when regular military is insufficient.
— Politics & Poll Tracker 📡 (@PollTracker2024) December 23, 2025
Alito, Gorsuch and Thomas dissent pic.twitter.com/HRaOI4mOPZ
The Supreme Court case is titled Trump v. Illinois, No. 25A443 in the Supreme Court of the United States.
Continue Scrolling for the Comments