The Trump administration has filed an emergency petition with the U.S. Supreme Court seeking to overturn lower court rulings that block President Donald Trump’s authority to federalize the Illinois National Guard for deployment in Chicago.

The petition follows a series of rulings by two Illinois judges and a three-judge panel of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals that limit the President’s power to call Guard units into federal service during civil unrest.

The conflict began on October 4, 2025, when President Trump determined that conditions in Chicago had become too dangerous for federal personnel conducting law enforcement operations, including immigration enforcement actions.

In a written directive, the President ordered Secretary of War Pete Hegseth to “call into Federal service at least 300 members of the Illinois National Guard, until the Governor of Illinois consents to a federally-funded mobilization, under Title 32 of the United States Code, of the Illinois National Guard under State control. The members of the Illinois National Guard called into Federal service shall protect ICE, FPS, and other United States Government personnel who are executing Federal law in the State of Illinois, and Federal property in the State of Illinois.”

Two days later, on October 6, Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker filed a lawsuit seeking to block the mobilization.

The case was assigned to U.S. District Judge April Perry, who issued a 14-day temporary restraining order prohibiting “the federalization and deployment of the National Guard of the United States within Illinois,” including out-of-state Guard units.

Judge Perry wrote that she found no “credible evidence of a danger of rebellion” or any inability by state authorities to enforce the law.

This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year

She added that deploying federalized Guardsmen could “add fuel to the fire.”

The administration immediately appealed to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

On October 11, the appeals court issued a partial stay of Judge Perry’s order, permitting the President to federalize National Guard troops but not to deploy them for riot control or security patrols.

On October 17, a three-judge panel upheld the district court’s temporary restraining order in full.

In its opinion, the panel wrote, “Although we substantially agree with the definition of rebellion set forth by the district court in Newsom, we emphasize that the critical analysis of a ‘rebellion’ centers on the nature of the resistance to governmental authority.

Political opposition is not rebellion. A protest does not become a rebellion merely because the protestors advocate for myriad legal or policy changes, are well organized, call for significant changes to the structure of the U.S. government, use civil disobedience as a form of protest, or exercise their Second Amendment right to carry firearms as the law currently allows.”

The judges concluded that there was “insufficient evidence of a rebellion or danger of rebellion in Illinois,” ruling that the actions of demonstrators, though sometimes violent, did not meet the statutory threshold required for federal intervention.

The panel included judges appointed by Presidents Barack Obama, George H.W. Bush, and Donald Trump.

In response, Solicitor General John Sauer filed an emergency petition with the Supreme Court, arguing that the rulings unlawfully strip the President of his constitutional authority as Commander in Chief.

This is an EXCEPTIONAL piece of work out of the Solicitor General’s Office yesterday.https://t.co/wZRwoTv8QE

— Shipwreckedcrew (@shipwreckedcrew) October 18, 2025

“At bottom, the plaintiffs seek to use this suit to second-guess the President’s judgment that recent and repeated acts of violence targeting federal facilities and personnel in Illinois warrant calling up the National Guard—including because the violence has left the President sufficiently ‘unable’ to ensure faithful ‘execut[ion]’ of federal law,” Sauer wrote.

The administration contends that the federal courts have overstepped by substituting their judgment for that of the President.

The filing states that the lower court rulings “cause irreparable harm to the Executive Branch by countermanding the President’s authority as Commander in Chief, jeopardizing the lives and safety of DHS officers, and preventing the President and the Secretary of War from taking reasonable and lawful measures to protect federal personnel from the violent resistance that has persisted in the Chicago area for several months.”

The Solicitor General’s brief urges the Supreme Court to reaffirm that the authority to federalize National Guard units rests solely with the President under 10 U.S.C. § 12406, which grants the executive the power to determine when “insurrection, invasion, or rebellion” conditions require such action.

The plaintiffs, including Governor Pritzker and several Illinois officials, have until 5 p.m. Sunday to file their response.

The administration is expected to submit a rebuttal shortly thereafter. A Supreme Court decision on whether to take up the case could come within the next two weeks.