A federal appeals court has denied the Trump administration’s request to immediately deploy National Guard troops to Illinois, upholding a lower court’s temporary order that halted the mobilization. The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that while federal authorities remain barred from deploying additional troops, out-of-state Guard members already in Illinois, including those from Texas, may stay for now.
The case stems from an earlier decision by U.S. District Judge April Perry, who questioned the administration’s justification for deploying troops to protect federal agents from alleged violent protesters. Perry’s injunction, issued Thursday, will remain in effect until at least October 23 and could be extended further.
This ruling follows a similar legal battle in Oregon, where another federal judge blocked President Donald Trump’s attempt to send troops to Portland. Although an appellate court appeared ready to overturn that decision, Democratic governors across several states have argued that the administration exaggerated unrest to rationalize federal troop deployments in largely peaceful demonstrations.
The Trump administration has defended its actions as necessary to maintain public order, citing previous deployments to cities like Los Angeles and Washington, D.C. However, a Los Angeles trial court previously ruled those actions illegal—a decision currently stayed pending appeal.
Under U.S. law, National Guard units typically operate under state control during domestic missions, such as disaster response or civil emergencies. Federalization of these forces without state consent remains a controversial step, one that critics say undermines state authority and escalates political tensions between the White House and Democratic-led states.
The ongoing legal disputes highlight deep divisions over federal power, states’ rights, and the proper role of military involvement in civil affairs as the nation continues to grapple with protest movements and political polarization.


Newly Released DOJ Epstein Files Expose High-Profile Connections Across Politics and Business
Federal Judge Restores Funding for Gateway Rail Tunnel Project
India–U.S. Interim Trade Pact Cuts Auto Tariffs but Leaves Tesla Out
US Judge Rejects $2.36B Penalty Bid Against Google in Privacy Data Case
Trump Administration Sued Over Suspension of Critical Hudson River Tunnel Funding
Missouri Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Challenging Starbucks’ Diversity and Inclusion Policies
U.S.-India Trade Framework Signals Major Shift in Tariffs, Energy, and Supply Chains
Court Allows Expert Testimony Linking Johnson & Johnson Talc Products to Ovarian Cancer
Uber Ordered to Pay $8.5 Million in Bellwether Sexual Assault Lawsuit
Norway Opens Corruption Probe Into Former PM and Nobel Committee Chair Thorbjoern Jagland Over Epstein Links
Federal Judge Rules Trump Administration Unlawfully Halted EV Charger Funding
Trump Signs Executive Order Threatening 25% Tariffs on Countries Trading With Iran
Trump Lifts 25% Tariff on Indian Goods in Strategic U.S.–India Trade and Energy Deal
Panama Supreme Court Voids Hong Kong Firm’s Panama Canal Port Contracts Over Constitutional Violations
Jack Lang Resigns as Head of Arab World Institute Amid Epstein Controversy
Federal Judge Signals Possible Dismissal of xAI Lawsuit Against OpenAI 



