Chicago Strikes Back, With an Assist from Republican Governors

In the White House view of the world, five vibrant American cities—Washington, Los Angeles, Portland, Memphis, and Chicago—are putrid hellholes, so dangerous and crime-choked that local law enforcement needs federal backup.

Last week, President Trump sent in hundreds of Illinois and Texas National Guard members. Their mission was slightly at odds with the claim of urgently needing federal crime-fighters. As in Los Angeles, the Guard troops ended up protecting federal agents and federal buildings. But their real mission was to intimidate and to menace residents and to occupy sections of the city.

Gov. JB Pritzker (D-IL) sued the federal government to end the occupation, citing harms to residents and businesses, the local economy, and depleted tax revenues. Last Thursday, District Court Judge April Perry ruled that the Illinois deployments violated the Tenth and Fourteenth Amendments, issued a 14-day restraining order, and labeled the Trump administration’s perception of events “simply unreliable.”

A bipartisan group of 26 former governors, including Democrats and Republicans, filed an amicus brief in the case. The document is a window into how governors view the unprecedented use of the military to punish certain cities for having the temerity to vote for a Democratic candidate for president.

But how do current Republican governors view this constitutional crisis? Two men stepped up with answers last week, and they were surprisingly frank. Gov. Kevin Stitt of Oklahoma echoed the sentiments in the amicus brief. “As a federalist believer, one governor against another governor, I don’t think that’s the right way to approach this,” he told The New York Times, adding, “Oklahomans would lose their mind if Pritzker in Illinois sent troops down to Oklahoma during the Biden administration.”

Phil Scott of Vermont said at a press conference: “I don’t think our Guard should be used against our own people. I don’t think the military should be used against our own people. In fact, it’s unconstitutional.” He made an exception for an insurrection, referring specifically to the events of January 6, 2021.

Their willingness to speak out against the broadly unpopular policy suggests that the pushback could grow.

If you’re reading this, you already know: democracy depends on an informed, engaged public. Our mission at The American Prospect is to cut through the noise, counter cynicism, and empower people to take action – and that only happens with readers like you.

Right now, we’re in the middle of our fall fundraising campaign, and we need your help to reach our goal. Independent journalism is one of the strongest defenses against authoritarianism, and we need your support to keep it alive. 

This fall, we set an ambitious fundraising goal so we can expand our capacity to report on the ideas, politics, and power dynamics that shape our world – at a time when this work is needed most. Your contribution, no matter the size, directly supports our vital reporting and helps us continue fighting for the informed democracy we all depend on.