U.S. President Donald Trump’s suggestion to deploy National Guard troops to Chicago and Baltimore has sparked intense legal and political opposition, with Democratic leaders and legal experts arguing he lacks constitutional authority for such actions . House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries emphasized that Trump “has no basis, no authority” to deploy federal troops to Chicago, citing declining crime rates and the absence of any emergency warranting military intervention. Illinois Governor JB Pritzker and Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson similarly condemned the move as an “authoritarian power grab” and “unlawful military occupation”.
Trump’s potential reliance on Section 12406 of Title 10 U.S. Code, which allows presidential deployment of the National Guard to “execute the laws” during rebellions or invasions faces scrutiny under the Posse Comitatus Act and the 10th Amendment. A ongoing lawsuit in California (Newsom v. Trump) challenges Trump’s earlier use of this statute to deploy troops during immigration protests, with Judge Charles Breyer noting that protests “fall far short of rebellion”. Legal experts argue that Chicago’s status as a sanctuary city does not constitute a failure to execute federal law, as immigration enforcement remains a federal responsibility.
Democratic leaders universally reject Trump’s claims of a crime crisis. Data shows homicides in Chicago dropped 30% year-over-year, while Baltimore recorded its lowest homicide count in 50 years (84 deaths in 2025). Governor Wes Moore of Maryland invited Trump to “walk our streets” to witness community-led safety efforts, rejecting troop deployments as politically motivated. Jeffries accused Trump of “manufacturing a crisis” to distract from policy failures and waning popularity.
While Pentagon officials conducted preliminary planning for a Chicago deployment, a routine practice for potential executive requests; no formal orders were issued, and senior officials remained uninvolved 1. Concerns include the risk of escalating tensions between residents and law enforcement, as seen during the June 2025 Los Angeles deployment where troops accompanied ICE raids despite local objections.
A deployment would likely trigger immediate lawsuits from Illinois and Maryland, arguing violations of states’ rights and the Posse Comitatus Act. The outcome could redefine presidential power over state militias, particularly regarding immigration enforcement. With crime rates falling and local leaders opposing militarization, Trump’s proposal appears more focused on political symbolism than public safety.