Here's an analysis of the case Illinois v. Trump decided by the Seventh Circuit on October 16, 2025. You can read the full text by clicking here.
The case involves President Trump invoking 10 U.S.C. § 12406 to federalize and deploy the Illinois National Guard against the state's Governor's objection. The President justified this by citing violent assaults against federal immigration agents and property in Illinois, especially around the Chicago area and an ICE facility in Broadview.
The State of Illinois and Chicago sued, arguing that the statutory requirements for federalizing the Guard under § 12406 were not met and that the move violated the Tenth Amendment and the Posse Comitatus Act.
The District Court granted a temporary restraining order blocking the federalization and deployment, finding insufficient evidence that either a rebellion or inability with regular forces to execute federal law existed in Illinois.
The Seventh Circuit reviewed the case preliminarily and agreed with the District Court’s factual findings, which were supported by the record and not clearly erroneous. The Court emphasized:
- The statutory conditions for federalization under § 12406 are specific: either an invasion, a rebellion/danger of rebellion, or inability with regular forces to execute the laws.
- The protests and occasional violence in Illinois did not rise to the level of a rebellion. A rebellion requires organized, violent resistance aimed at overthrowing the government, not just protests with some unlawful acts.
- The evidence showed that federal immigration enforcement continued effectively despite protests, so the President was not "unable" with regular forces to execute the law.
- The President’s discretion is entitled to deference but is not absolute or unreviewable by courts. The judiciary has a role in interpreting whether statutory predicates for federalization are met.
- The Tenth Amendment claim depends on the success of the statutory claim. Since federalization under § 12406 was not lawful, the Tenth Amendment rights of Illinois were likely violated.
- The balance of harms favored the plaintiffs (Illinois and Chicago), especially since the Guard deployment was over state objection and there was no demonstrated need given the effective law enforcement by local and federal agencies.
The Seventh Circuit denied the administration’s motion to stay the restraining order for deployment pending appeal, allowing the Guard to remain federalized but not deployed in Illinois.
Overall, this case highlights the limits on presidential power to federalize National Guard troops under § 12406, especially when the factual predicates of invasion, rebellion, or inability with regular forces are not clearly met. It underscores judicial oversight of such executive actions and protects state sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment against federal overreach absent proper justification.
The Girards Law Firm specializes in severe injury and wrongful death cases, especially those that involve birth injuries, brain damage, heart damage, spinal cord injuries, severe burns, commercial plane crashes and commercial trucking crashes nationwide, and especially in Texas, Arkansas and Oklahoma. James E. Girards is a private pilot licensed to fly single- and multi-engine aircraft in both visual and instrument conditions. Contact us at www.girardslaw.com by using the chat feature for more information.