Legal Battles Over National Guard Deployment in Major Cities Continue

Sat Oct 25 2025 06:07:14 GMT+0300 (Eastern European Summer Time)

As President Trump strives to deploy National Guard troops in cities led by Democratic officials, a complex web of legal challenges unfolds across various jurisdictions.

The push for deploying National Guard troops in Democratic-led cities has sparked numerous court battles. With the U.S. Supreme Court set to weigh in on critical rulings, major cities like Chicago and Los Angeles face legal hurdles that could shape the future of military deployment amidst protests. As federal courts grapple with contrasting orders, the outcome remains uncertain, highlighting the tension between state and federal authorities.

CHICAGO (AP) — President Donald Trump's efforts to position military forces in Democratic-led cities, despite strong objections from local leaders, have triggered a multitude of court challenges and swirling legal rulings.

The U.S. Supreme Court is deliberating on whether to permit the National Guard in Chicago. Concurrently, a federal appeals court is examining California Governor Gavin Newsom's dispute regarding troop deployment in Los Angeles, with additional potential arrangements in Portland, Oregon, awaiting further legal clarifications.

Supreme Court Rulings Pending; Chicago Troop Deployment Blocked

A federal judge in Chicago recently halted National Guard troop deployments to the area for a duration of two weeks. A hearing on Wednesday will assess whether this temporary restriction should be prolonged. However, any decisions made could become irrelevant if the U.S. Supreme Court decides to intervene first.

Representatives for the Trump administration have expressed willingness in court to possibly extend the deployment hiatus for another 30 days while simultaneously seeking an emergency Supreme Court ruling to proceed with troop deployment.

“Every day this improper TRO remains in effect imposes grievous and irreparable harm on the Executive,” Solicitor General D. John Sauer articulated in a filing to the Supreme Court.

Chicago city and state attorneys are advocating for continued protection against troop deployment, describing it as a dramatic step.

Continued Uncertainty for Troop Deployment in Portland

Regarding Portland, a panel of 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals judges recently ruled that Trump could take command of up to 200 Oregon National Guard troops. However, a separate court order continues to block their deployment.

U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut had earlier imposed temporary restraining orders preventing this military action and even halted Trump's efforts to deploy California troops to bypass initial restrictions.

Legal Struggles in California Over Troops in Los Angeles

In Los Angeles, a panel of judges from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is prepared to hear arguments tied to the deployment of National Guard troops. California's legal challenge arose after a district court determined that Trump had breached federal laws while deploying troops amid protests against his immigration policies. Although Judge Charles Breyer granted Newsom an initial victory, the appeals court has since sided with the Trump administration, maintaining federal control of the troops during ongoing legal proceedings.

Attempts to Block Troop Deployments in D.C. and Memphis

In Charleston, West Virginia, a state court is reviewing a lawsuit aimed at preventing the deployment of the National Guard to Washington, D.C., where over 300 Guard members are currently assisting in various initiatives. Furthermore, in Tennessee, Democratic officials have initiated legal action to obstruct ongoing troop deployments in Memphis, arguing that such actions violate state constitutional provisions.

This collection of legal battles underscores the significant tensions between federal authority and state autonomy amidst a highly charged political climate.