Introduction to the Conflict
Gov. JB Pritzker and Mayor Brandon Johnson on Monday declared there is no federal emergency that would require the presence of the National Guard in Chicago, as President Trump appeared to be tamping down his threat. Pritzker, Johnson and Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul said they are exploring all legal options should Trump deploy guardsmen.
The President’s Stance
For his part, Trump on Monday described Chicago as a “killing field” and signed a broad executive order to create a specialized National Guard unit that could be deployed to assist local law enforcement in Washington, D.C. — and potentially around the country — to ensure “the public safety and order whenever the circumstances necessitate.” But Trump later hedged on whether he would send federal troops into Chicago. “I didn’t get a request from the governor,” Trump said. “Illinois is affected maybe more than anybody else. And I think until I get that request from that guy [Pritzker], I’m not going to do anything about it.”
The Reaction from Chicago Leaders
There are more questions than answers about a potential deployment in Chicago, including about the legal justification and necessity. Even so, Democrats put Chicago on display in a massive downtown press conference overlooking the Chicago River, with Pritzker arriving via a water taxi. Flanked by Illinois Democrats, community advocates, business leaders and clergy, Pritzker and Johnson were unified in voicing that federal troops are not welcome or needed in Chicago.
The Governor’s Response
Flanked by elected officials and supporters, Gov. JB Pritzker speaks during a news conference Monday at River Point Park, discussing the prospect of President Donald Trump sending National Guard troops to Chicago. “This is exactly the type of overreach that our country’s founders warned against — and it’s the reason they established a federal system with a separation of powers built on checks and balances,” Pritzker said. “What President Trump is doing is unprecedented and unwarranted. It is illegal. It is unconstitutional. And it is un-American.” Pritzker rebuffed Trump’s comments that he should be asking him to bring in the National Guard to quell crime. The city has seen a 30% decline in homicides, a nearly 35% decline in robberies and 40% decline in shootings in a year.
The Mayor’s Plea
“Mr. President — Instead I say: do not come. You are neither wanted nor needed here. Your remarks about this effort over the last several weeks betray a continuing slip in your mental faculties and are not fit for the auspicious office you occupy,” Pritzker said. “Most alarming — you seem to lack any appropriate concern as our commander-in-chief for the members of the military that you would so callously deploy as pawns in your ever more alarming grabs for power.” Johnson implored Trump to instead listen to the needs of Chicagoans, and provide resources to stop the flow of guns into the city and build more affordable housing. The mayor also asked the Trump administration to release $800 million in violence prevention funds “that he stole back in April.” “The last thing that Chicagoans want is someone from the outside of our city who doesn’t know our city, trying to dictate and tell us what our city needs,” Johnson said. “As the mayor of this city, I can tell you that Chicagoans are not calling for military occupation. They are calling for the same thing that we’ve been calling for for some time, and that’s investment. “
Legal Implications
Asked how Chicago police officers would work with the National Guard, Johnson reiterated that “federal troops are not police officers.” “They don’t have the authority or that power,” Johnson said. “So the very thing in which the president is claiming he wants them to do, they don’t have the authority to do that.” Raoul called the potential deployment “a dangerous step toward authoritarianism that puts our communities at risk.” He said the state will use “every legal tool” to fight deployment but told reporters it was unlikely that a preemptive suit would be filed prior to a potential deployment. “This is an administration that frequently disregards our Constitution and federal law, but notwithstanding all of these lawsuits and all this prior federal overreach, it’s possible that deploying members of the U.S. military against Americans could be the most egregious violation,” Raoul said.
Conclusion
The potential deployment of National Guard troops to Chicago has sparked a heated debate between President Trump and local leaders. While Trump claims that the city needs federal assistance to combat crime, Pritzker and Johnson argue that such a move would be unwarranted and unconstitutional. The situation remains uncertain, with many questions still unanswered about the legal justification and necessity of a potential deployment.
FAQs
Q: What is the current situation with the potential deployment of National Guard troops to Chicago?
A: The situation is uncertain, with President Trump threatening to deploy troops to combat crime, but local leaders arguing that such a move would be unwarranted and unconstitutional.
Q: What is the legal basis for a potential deployment?
A: The legal basis for a potential deployment is unclear, with many questions still unanswered about the justification and necessity of such a move.
Q: How have local leaders responded to the potential deployment?
A: Local leaders, including Governor Pritzker and Mayor Johnson, have argued that a potential deployment would be unwarranted and unconstitutional, and have called on President Trump to listen to the needs of Chicagoans and provide resources to address the root causes of crime.
Q: What are the potential consequences of a deployment?
A: The potential consequences of a deployment are unclear, but could include an escalation of tensions between federal and local authorities, and potentially even violence.
