Chicago, Illinois – October 12, 2025 – In a pivotal decision that underscores deepening tensions between the federal government and Democratic-led states, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled on Saturday that National Guard troops in Illinois can remain under federal control but are barred from active deployment on state soil while the broader appeals process unfolds. The ruling, issued by a three-judge panel, partially stays a lower court's temporary restraining order (TRO) from earlier in the week, allowing President Donald Trump's administration to maintain command over the troops but preserving the prohibition on their use in operational activities. This development, first reported by CNN, represents the latest front in a nationwide legal battle over the president's authority to federalize state militias for domestic law enforcement, particularly in the context of protests against aggressive immigration enforcement.
The Seventh Circuit's order came swiftly after the Trump administration appealed a TRO issued on October 9 by U.S. District Judge April M. Perry of the Northern District of Illinois. Perry's ruling had blocked the deployment of approximately 500 National Guard members—300 from Illinois and 200 from Texas—for at least 14 days, citing a lack of "credible evidence" of any rebellion or insurrection justifying federal intervention under Title 10 of the U.S. Code. "I have seen no credible evidence that there has been rebellion in the state of Illinois," Perry stated in her oral decision from the bench, following a marathon three-hour hearing that drew sharp scrutiny of Department of Homeland Security (DHS) assessments. She described those reports as "unreliable," referencing recent judicial rebukes of federal claims in unrelated Chicago cases involving protester treatment and evidence handling. Perry further warned that introducing armed troops would "only add fuel to the fire that defendants themselves have started," pointing to ICE's tactics—such as the use of chemical munitions against journalists and legal observers—as primary agitators for the unrest.
The appeals court's nuanced response reflects a careful balancing act. "Pending a decision on the request for a stay pending appeal, the district court’s October 9, 2025, order is temporarily STAYED only to the extent it enjoined the federalization of the National Guard of the United States within Illinois," the panel wrote in a concise one-page order. This means the troops, currently stationed at the U.S. Army Reserve Center in Elwood, Illinois—about an hour southwest of Chicago—can continue "planning and training" under federal oversight, as confirmed by U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM) in a Friday update. However, no "operational activities" are permitted, effectively sidelining them from protecting ICE facilities or dispersing crowds. "Members of the National Guard do not need to return to their home states unless further ordered by a court to do so," the ruling added, averting an immediate logistical scramble but leaving the soldiers in a state of suspended animation.
This Illinois skirmish is emblematic of a broader constitutional showdown that has pitted Trump's aggressive immigration agenda against state sovereignty claims. Since early September 2025, the administration has ramped up "Operation Midway Blitz," a multi-state initiative targeting undocumented immigrants in urban centers. In Chicago, ICE raids in neighborhoods like Little Village and Brighton Park have netted over 1,200 arrests since Labor Day, according to DHS figures, but they've also ignited nightly protests outside the Broadview ICE detention center. Demonstrators, including faith leaders and immigrant rights advocates, have decried the operations as "state-sponsored terror," with viral videos capturing federal agents in unmarked vehicles deploying tear gas and rubber bullets. On October 4, a standoff in Little Village escalated when Border Patrol agents fired on a crowd, wounding a 28-year-old protester who authorities claimed "ambushed" their convoy; the incident, captured on bystander footage, prompted 13 arrests and calls for an independent investigation from Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul.
Similar scenes have unfolded in Portland, Oregon, where protests at the ICE headquarters have drawn parallels to the city's 2020 unrest. Trump, who has repeatedly labeled Portland "war-ravaged" and Chicago a "hellhole of crime," authorized the federalization of 200 Oregon National Guard troops on September 27, citing "brazen hostility" toward federal personnel. Yet U.S. District Judge Karin J. Immergut, a Trump appointee, issued a TRO on October 4 blocking any deployment, noting that recent demonstrations were "small and uneventful" compared to earlier summer violence in Los Angeles, where 4,000 Guard members were mobilized in June without legal challenge at the time. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals echoed the Seventh Circuit's approach last Wednesday, temporarily allowing federal control of Oregon's Guard but upholding the no-deployment order pending full review. Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield hailed it as a "breakdown prevention of constitutional rule of law," while a panel including two Trump appointees questioned whether courts should fixate on "day-by-day" conditions rather than historical threats.
The legal salvos trace back to federal statutes like the Insurrection Act of 1807 and Title 10, which empower the president to call up the Guard in cases of rebellion, invasion, or when state authorities cannot enforce federal law. Critics, including 24 Democratic attorneys general who filed amicus briefs in the California and Oregon cases, argue Trump is exploiting these powers for political theater, targeting "disfavored jurisdictions" like blue cities to stoke his base ahead of the 2026 midterms. Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, a vocal Trump critic and potential 2028 presidential contender, sued alongside Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson on October 6, alleging the deployment "infringes on Illinois’s sovereignty and right to self-governance." Pritzker, who rejected federal overtures to voluntarily mobilize the Guard, called it an "invasion" in a fiery statement post-ruling: "Donald Trump is not a king—and his administration is not above the law. Today, the court confirmed what we all know: There is no credible evidence of a rebellion in the state of Illinois. And no place for the National Guard in the streets of American cities like Chicago."
White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson fired back, asserting that "President Trump will not turn a blind eye to the lawlessness plaguing American cities and we expect to be vindicated by a higher court." The administration's appeal, filed late Thursday, frames Perry's TRO as an overreach that endangers federal agents, pointing to clashes where protesters hurled rocks and bottles at ICE vehicles. Legal scholar Alan Dershowitz, speaking on Newsmax Saturday, predicted Trump would ultimately prevail, arguing that appellate courts and potentially the Supreme Court—now with a 6-3 conservative majority—would defer to executive discretion in national security matters. "The president has broad latitude here," Dershowitz said. "This is more about politics than precedent."
On the ground, the ruling's immediate impact was felt at the Broadview facility, where tensions simmered through a drizzly Saturday. A faith-led "prayer march" organized by local clergy aimed to deliver communion to detainees but was denied entry by ICE, leading to a peaceful gathering of about 150 that dispersed without incident by evening. However, Illinois State Police reported 15 arrests throughout the day for minor violations like blocking roadways, underscoring the fragile calm. Community leaders, including representatives from the ACLU of Illinois, which filed a parallel suit against DHS for excessive force, worry that even non-deployed troops nearby could escalate paranoia. "These soldiers are trained for war, not community policing," said ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt. "Their mere presence militarizes the streets."
Broader implications ripple across the country. In Memphis, Tennessee—a Republican stronghold—500 Guard troops began patrols Friday alongside state police, unhindered by local lawsuits, to support ICE operations. California, where a summer deployment was deemed illegal by a district judge (though stayed on appeal), has seen a 40% drop in protests since troops withdrew in August, per LAPD data. Yet experts like Georgetown law professor Rosa Brooks caution that repeated federal-state clashes could erode trust in institutions. "This isn't just about immigration; it's a test of federalism in a polarized era," Brooks said. "If courts keep intervening, Trump has hinted at the Insurrection Act—last invoked in 1992 for the L.A. riots—which bypasses the Guard altogether."
As the clock ticks toward Perry's next hearing on October 22, all eyes turn to the Seventh and Ninth Circuits for merits decisions, potentially landing at the Supreme Court by spring. For now, Chicago's streets remain a flashpoint: a city where crime rates have plummeted 15% year-over-year, per Chicago Police Department stats, yet federal rhetoric paints it as besieged. Protesters chant "ICE out of Chicago," while Guard members in Elwood drill in limbo, rifles at rest. In this legal limbo, the true battle—for hearts, minds, and the soul of American governance—rages on.
