According to a report by Breitbart News, the Supreme Court delivered a significant blow to President Donald Trump’s immigration enforcement efforts on December 23, blocking his attempt to deploy 300 Illinois National Guardsmen to protect federal agents conducting operations in Chicago.
In October, Trump had attempted to authorize the National Guard deployment to support ICE agents, but a federal judge, nominated by former President Joe Biden, halted the action with a temporary restraining order.
When the Trump administration petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit to suspend the judge’s ruling, the judicial panel rejected the administration’s request.
Following that refusal, the Trump administration turned to SCOTUS to suspend the federal judge’s ruling so National Guardsmen could be sent to Chicago.
On Tuesday, SCOTUS determined in a 6-3 judgment that the Trump administration “has failed to identify a source of authority that would allow the military to execute the laws in Illinois,” and consequently the administration’s petition for a stay was rejected. In its judgement, the court stated:
“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 President has not invoked a statute that provides an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act. Instead, he relies on inherent constitutional authority that, according to the Government, allows him to use the military to protect federal personnel and property. But the Government also claims consistent with the longstanding view of the Executive Branch that performing such protective functions does not constitute ‘execut[ing] the laws’ within the meaning of the Posse Comitatus Act. If that is correct, it is hard to see how performing those functions could constitute ‘execut[ing] the laws’ under §12406(3). (‘This Court does not lightly assume that Congress silently attaches different meanings to the same term in the same or related statutes’). Thus, at least in this posture, the Government has not carried its burden to show that §12406(3) permits the President to federalize the Guard in the exercise of inherent authority to protect federal personnel and property in Illinois. We need not and do not address the reviewability of findings made by the President under §12406(3) or any other statute. The application for stay is denied.”
Justices John Roberts, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Amy Coney Barrett, and Ketanji Brown Jackson appeared to support the unsigned ruling while Justice Brett Kavanaugh authored a concurring opinion.
Justice Samuel Alito authored a dissenting opinion, which Justice Clarence Thomas endorsed. Justice Neil Gorsuch penned a dissenting opinion as well.
“Whatever one may think about the current administration’s enforcement of the immigration laws or the way ICE has conducted its operations, the protection of federal officers from potentially lethal attacks should not be thwarted,” Alito stated in his dissenting opinion. “I therefore respectfully dissent.”
The case is Trump v. Illinois, No. 25A443 in the Supreme Court of the United States.
The determination illustrates why America First policy strategies demand not merely executive resolve but also legislative measures to guarantee federal immigration statutes can be implemented without hindrance from antagonistic local governments that favor illegal aliens over American citizens’ security.
