Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito (Erin Schaff/The New York Times via AP, Pool, File)
The lawsuit stemmed from Trump invoking a rarely used federal law to federalize about 300 members of the National Guard and deploy them to protect federal personnel and buildings.
The Trump administration argued that protesters were obstructing, assaulting and threatening ICE officers, and the National Guard was needed because Illinois’ resistant Democratic leaders and local law enforcement were not adequately addressing the matter, the administration said.
Illinois sued, and the lower courts blocked the National Guard’s deployment, finding that Trump had not satisfied criteria in the law that said the president could only use the reserved forces when he was "unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States." The Supreme Court’s decision upheld that finding while the case proceeds through the courts.
The Supreme Court's majority said in an unsigned order that "regular forces" meant the U.S. military, not ICE or other civilian law enforcement officers. The majority said that since Trump had not identified any justification for using the regular military for domestic purposes in Chicago, there was no way to exhaust that option before using the National Guard.
JUDGE BLOCKS TRUMP NATIONAL GUARD DEPLOYMENT IN LOS ANGELES
A demonstrator waves an American and Mexican flag during a protest in Compton, California, June 7, 2025, after federal immigration authorities conducted operations. (Ethan Swope/The Associated Press)
Requiring Trump to exhaust use of other military forces before using the National Guard would lead to "outlandish results," Alito said.
"Under the Court’s interpretation, National Guard members could arrest and process aliens who are subject to deportation, but they would lack statutory authorization to perform purely protective functions," Alito wrote. "Our country has traditionally been wary of using soldiers as domestic police, but it has been comfortable with their use for purely protective purposes."
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Illinois had argued that ICE protests were mostly peaceful and that local law enforcement had unrest under control. The state would suffer irreversible harm if the courts did not block Trump from using the National Guard, state attorneys argued.
"The planned deployment would infringe on Illinois’s sovereign interests in regulating and overseeing its own law enforcement activities," the attorneys wrote, adding that Illinois' "sovereign right to commit its law enforcement resources where it sees fit is the type of ‘intangible and unquantifiable interest’ that courts recognize as irreparable."
Ashley Oliver is a reporter for Fox News Digital and FOX Business, covering the Justice Department and legal affairs. Email story tips to ashley.oliver@fox.com.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/alito-rips-supreme-court-majority-unwise-blocking-trumps-national-guard-plan