Supreme Court Wants Clarity on National Guard Use
The U.S. Supreme Court is currently grappling with a complex question: What exactly does "regular forces" mean in a law that governs when a president can use the National Guard?
The Case in Question
This question arose from a case involving President Donald Trump's attempt to send National Guard troops to the Chicago area. The justices have asked both sides—Illinois, Chicago, and the Trump administration—to submit written arguments by November 10 to help them understand the law better.
The Law in Question
The law in question allows a president to deploy National Guard troops if they are needed to:
- Suppress a rebellion
- If the president cannot enforce federal laws with "regular forces"
The Justice Department's Argument
The Justice Department argues that:
- "Regular forces" refers to non-military federal agents who enforce federal laws
- If these agents cannot do their job, the president can call in the National Guard
Judge April Perry's Ruling
U.S. District Judge April Perry disagrees. In her ruling, she stated that:
- "Regular forces" means only those who are regularly enlisted in the military, like the Army and Navy, not the National Guard
- The administration did not try to use these regular forces before turning to the National Guard
Perry's decision was upheld by the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which agreed that there was not enough evidence to justify the use of the National Guard.
The Broader Debate
The case highlights the ongoing debate about the use of the military for domestic law enforcement. The National Guard typically operates under state governors but can be called into federal service by the president.
- The administration has portrayed the protests in Chicago as a reason for the deployment
- The courts have not been convinced
The Supreme Court's Decision
The Supreme Court's decision to ask for more information shows that this is a complex issue. It also highlights the importance of clear language in laws, especially when it comes to the use of military force.
As the court deliberates, the outcome could have significant implications for how future presidents use the National Guard.