In 2025, the use of the U.S. National Guard for domestic operations—especially in politically sensitive settings—has surged, raising constitutional questions, state vs. federal authority disputes, and public scrutiny. Below is a breakdown of some of the major developments involving Texas, Illinois, Washington, D.C., California, and the broader national guard deployments.
Texas National Guard in Illinois
In early October 2025, around 200 Texas National Guard troops were flown into Illinois —to a facility in Elwood, southwest of Chicago— as part of a 60-day mission ordered by the federal government.
The official purpose: to “protect federal personnel and property” during ongoing anti-immigration protests tied to a federal effort dubbed Operation Midway Blitz. However, a federal district court (Judge April Perry) issued a temporary restraining order blocking the deployment within Illinois, citing concerns over legality and state sovereignty.
The Trump administration appealed. But the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals declined to lift the block, stating that the federal government did not present sufficient justification (e.g. evidence of “rebellion”) to override Illinois’ authority. As a result, the Texas Guard personnel remain in a federal facility near Joliet and are barred from patrolling or operating in public areas within Illinois under that court order.
In a related development, seven members of the Texas contingent were removed from the mission after failing to meet “mission requirements” (reportedly during pre-deployment checks).
Central to the dispute: whether the president has authority under federal law to federalize and deploy state National Guard units over state objections, especially when the mission is within U.S. borders.
Courts have questioned whether “rebellion” or inability to enforce federal law must be shown to justify such deployments. One appeals court decision explicitly said “political opposition is not rebellion.” State officials, including Governor J.B. Pritzker, argue this deployment infringes on state sovereignty and violates constitutional limits on federal military involvement in domestic affairs.
National Guard in Washington, D.C.
In August 2025, the Trump administration invoked a public safety emergency in Washington, D.C., and moved to federalize law enforcement and deploy National Guard troops.
Around 800 troops from the D.C. National Guard were placed under federal control, with a number actively on duty. Some federal agents from agencies like FBI, ATF, ICE, and DEA were reassigned to operate under the U.S. Park Police chain of command in D.C.
Although crime statistics for D.C. were trending downward, the administration cited public safety concerns. Local leaders contest the move and raise concerns over civil liberties and overreach.
The D.C. deployment is part of a pattern in 2025 of federal forces (including National Guard) being used more aggressively in what had traditionally been civilian law enforcement domains.
California / Los Angeles National Guard Deployment
In June 2025, President Trump federalized as many as 4,000 members of the California National Guard and deployed around 700 Marines to Los Angeles in response to protests triggered by federal immigration raids.
The deployment faced immediate legal pushback. California filed suit (Newsom v. Trump), alleging the federal deployment violated the Tenth Amendment, Posse Comitatus, and overstepped federal authority.
In a significant ruling, District Judge Charles Breyer held on September 2, 2025 that the deployment did violate the Posse Comitatus Act and issued an injunction limiting or blocking further federal control of California Guard units.
Legal Implications
The California case illustrates core friction: the federal claim of authority to federalize and deploy state Guard forces for domestic purposes versus states’ rights and constraints on military involvement in civil affairs.
Courts are being asked to clarify the limits of Title 10 authority over Guard units, especially in non-combat internal operations.
Broader Use of National Guard in 2025 & Operation Midway Blitz
The ongoing federal strategy calls for deploying Guard forces in several cities to assist with immigration enforcement, crowd control, and protection of federal property. Operation Midway Blitz is a coordinated initiative started in September 2025 to surge ICE, CBP, and other federal agencies into Illinois in concert with potential military support. Some other cities have been targeted for future or ongoing deployments (or threats thereof), including Memphis, Chicago, Portland, and San Francisco.
Why This Matters: Legal, Constitutional, and Policy Stakes
The question at the heart of many of these disputes is: Can the president override state authority and deploy military forces (including federalized National Guard) into state territory, especially without a showing of rebellion or inability to enforce law? The states are pushing back hard.
- The Tenth Amendment reserves certain powers to states.
- Posse Comitatus Act limits federal military involvement in domestic law enforcement unless authorized by Congress.
- Courts are now being asked to navigate these thorny boundaries.
Precedent and Future Implications
If courts side broadly with federal authority, it could set a precedent for expanded military presence in American cities under the guise of protecting federal functions. That raises concerns about civil liberties, abuse of power, and militarized civilian life.
Public Perception and Politics
These deployments are deeply politicized. Supporters frame them as necessary for public safety, enforcing federal laws, and protecting federal personnel. Critics warn of overreach, erosion of democratic norms, and using troops as instruments of political intimidation.
What to Watch Going Forward
- The Supreme Court is being asked to intercede — e.g., in Illinois, the Trump administration requested emergency relief from a lower-court block.
- How courts define “rebellion” and the threshold for federal deployment will likely be key.
- The outcome of Newsom v. Trump and other state lawsuits will further clarify the boundaries of federal power over domestic deployments.
- Whether Guard troops actually move into cities or stay on federal property (as many courts have required) will influence public impact.
- The administrative and logistical capacity of the Guard and political pressure from states and localities will continue to shape how these deployments play out.
Sources:
https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-asks-us-supreme-court-allow-illinois-troop-deployment-2025-10-17
https://www.texastribune.org/2025/10/08/texas-national-guard-abbott-deployment-chicago/
https://apnews.com/article/913ecce44b6bcc5d0cba1b252dfd34ce
https://www.livenowfox.com/news/texas-national-guard-members-removed-mission-requirements
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-supreme-court-national-guard-illinois-chicago
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/17/trump-supreme-court-national-guard-illinois
