State of Siege - Illinois Sues to Stop Trump’s Deployment of Troops in Chicago

Chicago, Broadview, Springfield – on this Monday, the legal front line stretched across the Midwest. Hardly had a federal court in Oregon prohibited the deployment of National Guardsmen to Portland when the state of Illinois, together with the city of Chicago, filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration. Their goal: to stop the deployment of soldiers on the streets of the nation’s third-largest metropolis – a step unprecedented in the history of the state.

The complaint, filed in the morning with the U.S. District Court in Chicago, bears the signatures of Governor JB Pritzker and Mayor Emma Whitaker. Its wording is unusually direct: “The American people, regardless of where they live, should not live under the threat of a military occupation by the United States – especially not because their city or state has fallen out of favor with a president.”

Behind these lines lies more than legal outrage. It is a political emergency call – an attempt to save the federal order before it is finally dismantled.

A President on a Warpath

On Monday morning, the White House announced that around 700 National Guardsmen – 300 from Illinois, 400 from Texas – had been “federalized,” meaning placed under the direct command of the president. Official purpose: to protect federal buildings and agencies in Chicago. Unofficially: a show of force. For weeks, Donald Trump has painted a bleak picture of Democratic-led cities – “decaying hellholes,” “zones ruled by gangs,” “leftist terror enclaves.” In this rhetoric, sharpened through campaign speeches and talk show appearances, Chicago becomes the symbol of a “failed America” that he claims to restore – with the military, not with the tools of politics.

Governor Pritzker spoke of a “breach of the dam.” “This is not just the deployment of soldiers against citizens. It is the attempt to institutionalize fear.” As he spoke, Homeland Security helicopters were already circling over Broadview, and live images of armored vehicles taking position in front of the ICE building were circulating on social media.

The Escalation of Broadview

Broadview, that unassuming suburb west of Chicago, is both symbol and testing ground these days. For weeks, residents and activists have protested there against Trump’s mass deportation campaign, against raids in supermarkets, schools, and apartment blocks. It is the place where, just last week, Democratic congressional candidate Kat Abughazaleh was thrown to the ground and shot with pepper balls as she tried to mediate between officers and demonstrators. Now soldiers are to be sent there – armed, uniformed, under federal command. For Pritzker and Whitaker, it is a constitutional violation of states’ self-governance. For Trump, it is proof of resolve. “We will bring law and order back to these cities,” he said in the morning to reporters. “If the governors won’t act, we will.”

The Legal Front

In the lawsuit we were able to review, Illinois and Chicago base their case on Article I of the Constitution and the so-called Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits the use of the military on domestic soil without explicit consent from the states. They argue that by federalizing the National Guard, the president “undermines the sovereignty of the states and effectively suspends the separation of powers between the federal government and the states.” It is the same legal argument that succeeded the day before in Oregon, where Judge Karin Immergut blocked the deployment of troops. There, too, the administration had tried to move forces through neighboring states – first Oregon, then California, then Texas. Immergut called the maneuver “a direct violation of the federal structure of the United States.”

The parallels are unmistakable. While in Portland the National Guard has already been stopped, the same conflict is now rolling toward Illinois – this time with even greater political force.

The War of Images

The White House portrays the situation as a necessary measure to restore order. On the administration’s media channels circulate photos of damaged buildings, burning trash bins, and masked people – taken during earlier protests, some from entirely different cities. In reality, however, as local journalists and residents report, the protests are confined to a single city block in front of the ICE center. We ourselves were able to clearly demonstrate in the claims surrounding Portland that false or misleading images were used.

“No one here is armed,” says a young teacher who wishes to remain anonymous. “The only weapons I’ve seen are carried by those who claim to protect us.”

The Democratic Counterattack

Mayor Whitaker spoke in the afternoon of a “besieged Chicago.” “We are witnessing an attempt to discipline a city that dares to dissent with military force,” she said. “This is not a security problem, this is a democracy problem.” Her office announced that municipal security forces would provide no logistical support for the troop deployment. The Illinois State Police also declared that it would not participate in operations conducted “against the will of the state.” Pritzker, for his part, left no doubt that Illinois would take the confrontation all the way to the Supreme Court. “If the president believes he can treat American cities as hostile territory, he will be mistaken. And the court will remind him of that.”

The Situation in Broadview in the Evening

On Sunday evening, hundreds of people once again gathered in front of the ICE building in Broadview. They carried signs, faces full of determination. Among them were veterans, teachers, nurses – people who now hear the word “invasion” only with a cynical smile. “We live in a democracy,” said one of the demonstrators into the microphone. “And when soldiers are sent against us, that is not a war on chaos. It is a war on us.”

As night falls over Chicago, the legal line remains clear and the political one blurred. The president speaks of order, the states of the Constitution, and the people of freedom. But at its core, this is about something else entirely – about who the country belongs to, and who has the right to defend it when power turns into an assault.