WASHINGTON \u2014 The Supreme Court on Tuesday rebuffed the Trump administration over its plan to deploy National Guard troops in Illinois over the strenuous objections of local officials.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The court in an unsigned order turned away an emergency request made by the administration, which said the troops are needed to protect federal agents involved in immigration enforcement in the Chicago area.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Although the decision is a preliminary one involving only Chicago, it will likely bolster similar challenges made to National Guard deployments in other cities, with the opinion setting significant new limits on the president’s ability to do so.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“This is an important step in curbing the Trump Administration\u2019s consistent abuse of power and slowing Trump\u2019s march toward authoritarianism,” Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, a Democrat, said in a statement Tuesday.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The decision marked a rare defeat for President Donald Trump at the Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, after the administration secured a series of high-profile wins this year.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said in a statement that Trump had deployed the National Guard to protect federal law enforcement and property in order to fulfill a campaign pledge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“Nothing in today\u2019s ruling detracts from that core agenda. The Administration will continue working day in and day out to safeguard the American public.\u201d she added.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The court rejected the Trump administration\u2019s starkly expressed view that the situation on the ground is so chaotic that it justifies invoking a federal law that allows the president to call National Guard troops into federal service in extreme situations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Those circumstances can include when \u201cthere is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion\u201d or \u201cthe president is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The court ruled against the administration on a threshold question, finding that the law’s reference to the “regular forces” only allows for the National Guard to be called up if regular military forces are unable to restore order.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The court order said that Trump could only call up the military where they could “legally execute the laws” and that power is limited under another law called the Posse Comitatus Act.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“At this preliminary stage, the Government has failed to identify a source of authority that would allow the military to execute the laws in Illinois,” the court said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As a result, the Trump administration has failed to show that the National Guard law “permits the President to federalize the Guard in the exercise of inherent authority to protect federal personnel and property in Illinois,” the court added.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The decision saw the court’s six conservative justices split, with three in the majority and three in dissent. The court’s three liberals were in the majority.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The dissenters were Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“I have serious doubts about the correctness of the court\u2019s views. And I strongly disagree with the manner in which the court has disposed of this application,” Alito wrote in a dissenting opinion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“There is no basis for rejecting the President\u2019s determination that he was unable to execute the federal immigration laws using the civilian law enforcement resources at his command,” he added.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Trump\u2019s unusual move to deploy the National Guard, characteristic of his aggressive and unprecedented use of executive power, was based on his administration\u2019s stated assessment that the Chicago area was descending into lawless chaos.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
That view of protests against surging immigration enforcement actions in Chicago is rejected by local officials as well as judges who have ruled against the administration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The deployment was challenged in court by the Democratic-led state of Illinois and the city of Chicago, with their lawyers saying Trump had an ulterior motive for the deployment: to punish his political opponents.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
They argued in court papers that Trump\u2019s invocation of the federal law was not justified and that his actions also violated the Constitution\u2019s 10th Amendment, which places limits on federal power, as well as the Posse Comitatus Act, which generally bars the military from conducting law enforcement duties.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
U.S. District Judge April Perry said she \u201cfound no credible evidence that there is a danger of rebellion\u201d and issued a temporary restraining order in favor of the state.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals largely reached the same conclusion, saying \u201cthe facts do not justify the president\u2019s actions.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The court did narrow Perry\u2019s order, saying that Trump could federalize the troops, but could not deploy them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Supreme Court has frequently ruled in Trump\u2019s favor in recent months as the administration has rushed to the justices when policies are blocked by lower courts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Trump\u2019s efforts to impose federal control over cities led by Democrats who vociferously oppose his presidency are not just limited to Chicago. He has also sought to deploy the National Guard in the District of Columbia, Los Angeles and Portland, Oregon.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Most recently, hundreds of National Guard troops deployed in Illinois and Oregon were set to return to their home states.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The deployment in the District of Columbia, which is a federal enclave with less local control, has also been challenged in court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A federal appeals court allowed the Los Angeles deployment, and a different panel of judges on Oct. 20 ruled similarly in relation to Portland.<\/p>\n\n\n\n