Attorneys for Illinois on Monday urged the U.S. Supreme Court to deny the Trump administration’s request to send National Guard troops to the Chicago area to assist with immigration enforcement while the matter is under appeal. The state described the administration’s petition as a “dramatic” move that would be inappropriate for the high court to address at this stage, given that a district court’s decision remains under review.
In a 46-page response, Illinois lawyers argued that the Trump administration failed to provide a meaningful rebuttal to the factual basis for U.S. District Judge April Perry’s October 9 temporary restraining order. The filing highlighted that declarations from immigration officials—citing alleged violence against agents and uncontrolled protests—“simply did not hold water.”
“In fact, applicants do not even attempt to rebut that much of the activity the declarants complained about was constitutionally protected,” the state’s response stated.
This filing came just hours after a divided appeals court in Oregon overturned a lower court’s decision, ruling that President Trump does have the authority to send National Guard troops into Portland. The deployment there aimed to quell what the president described as a prolonged and violent siege of government buildings. However, the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals noted in a footnote that the situation in Illinois is different. Unlike Portland, immigration facilities and other government buildings in Illinois have remained open despite ongoing protests.
On Friday, the Trump administration requested that the Supreme Court issue a stay on Judge Perry’s order, labeling the Illinois case part of a “disturbing and recurring pattern” that “improperly impinges on the President’s authority and needlessly endangers federal personnel and property.” The administration asked for permission to deploy approximately 700 troops to Illinois—300 from the Illinois National Guard and an additional 400 federalized troops from Texas.
The solicitor general’s petition also sought an immediate administrative stay “given the pressing risk of violence.” Instead, the Supreme Court granted Illinois attorneys until 4 p.m. Chicago time (5 p.m. Eastern) on Monday to respond.
The fight is unfolding on an unusually expedited timeline. President Trump appealed just one day after the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals refused to grant a stay on Judge Perry’s order. The appellate court held that Perry’s findings were not “clearly erroneous” and that “the facts do not justify” the president’s actions in Illinois.
A three-judge panel unanimously agreed with Perry, acknowledging the president’s “great deference” in calling up the military but finding no evidence that troops were needed to support immigration enforcement or to quell any organized rebellion.
The opinion stated, “The spirited, sustained, and occasionally violent actions of demonstrators in protest of the federal government immigration policies and actions, without more, does not give rise to a danger of rebellion against the government’s authority.”
The judges further noted that although the Trump administration claimed protesters and local politicians were hindering immigration enforcement, the evidence and even the administration’s own statements failed to substantiate those claims.
Notably, two of the three judges on the panel—Ilana Rovner and Amy St. Eve—were appointed by Republican presidents, with St. Eve’s appointment occurring during Trump’s first term. The third judge, David Hamilton, was appointed by Democrat Barack Obama.
This is a developing story. Check back for updates.
https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/10/20/illinois-responds-supreme-court-national-guard/