Throngs of protesters march along Michigan Avenue to East Wacker Drive along the Chicago River across from Trump International Hotel & Tower to protest ICE and the arrival of the Texas National Guard in Chicago on Oct. 8, 2025.

WASHINGTON − The Supreme Court asked for more materials in the dispute over National Guard troops President Donald Trump wants to deploy to Chicago, postponing a decision on whether to lift a temporary hold from a lower court.

The National Guard, which typically operates under the control of state governors, can be called into federal service by the president only under certain circumstances. The Trump administration contends two of those circumstances are present in Chicago − a rebellion against the government and an inability to execute laws “with the regular forces.”

The justices on Oct. 29 asked the Justice Department and the city and state to file written briefings about whether the term “regular forces” means regular forces of the U.S. military. The justices also asked how the term relates to the National Guard.

The high court set a deadline of Nov. 10 for the government’s filing and Nov. 17 for the city and state to reply.

In an Oct. 9 ruling, U.S. District Judge April Perry said the initial evidence showed U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials can do their jobs without help from the military – and deploying troops is likely to lead to civil unrest.

The Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals largely agreed with the district judge.

But the Justice Department told the Supreme Court that it’s up to the president – not courts – to decide whether state-based military forces are needed. And even if judges can review a president’s deployment decision, Trump made the right call, they argued.

The situation in Chicago, the Justice Department wrote, “has become unsustainably dangerous for federal agents, who now risk their lives to carry out basic law enforcement functions.”

Chicago is not the first city where Trump has attempted to deploy guardsmen, but it’s the first case to reach the Supreme Court. Officials in California and Oregon are also suing to stop deployments.

State and local officials argue federalizing the troops is an unconstitutional infringement on state power.

The Chicago area has been at the center of the administration’s sweeping immigration crackdown, dubbed Operation Midway Blitz. Protests have erupted in response, often in front of an ICE facility in the suburb of Broadview.

Trump federalized about 300 members of the Illinois National Guard and about 400 from the Texas National Guard.

Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul told the Supreme Court that state and local law enforcement officers have handled the “isolated protest activities,” some of which he said is constitutionally protected behavior under the First Amendment.

And a group of former high-ranking military leaders said in a filing supporting Illinois that federalizing the National Guard should be a “last resort to avoid the politicization of the military, which inevitably erodes public trust, hurts recruitment, and undermines morale.”

“Peaceful protests of government actions are constitutionally protected speech deserving of the highest protection,” they wrote, “not intimidation by the military.”

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Supreme Court wants more information about Trump's use of National Guard in Chicago

Reporting by Bart Jansen and Maureen Groppe, USA TODAY / USA TODAY

USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect