On September 2, 2025, a political firestorm erupted after Fox News reached out to Republican senators with a provocative question: Should President Trump deploy the National Guard in their states’ blue cities? According to reporting by Truthout, Fox News received the answer it seemed to be seeking. Several GOP senators expressed support for the idea, encouraging Trump to use the military in urban areas largely controlled by Democrats, ostensibly to combat crime. This move, openly supported by congressional Republicans, has intensified fears that the president is considering using federal force not just to maintain order, but to intimidate political opponents and their constituents.
The controversy centers most visibly on Chicago, where Illinois Governor JB Pritzker has emerged as a leading critic of Trump’s approach. As reported by The Week, Pritzker condemned Trump’s threat to send the National Guard into Chicago, labeling it both illegal and “un-American.” The governor argued that Trump’s plan was less about fighting crime and more about laying the groundwork to circumvent democracy, militarize cities, and potentially undermine future elections. “It’s an invasion with U.S. troops, if they in fact do that,” Pritzker told CNN. He further pointed out that Chicago has seen a 32% drop in homicides compared to the previous year and that many Republican-run cities actually have higher murder rates, challenging the rationale for federal intervention.
Trump, meanwhile, has been anything but subtle in his rhetoric. At an Oval Office event, he dismissed legal questions about his authority to deploy troops without a governor’s approval, declaring, “I have the right to do anything I want to do. I’m the president of the United States.” He has repeatedly cited Chicago, New York, and Baltimore as possible next targets for federal intervention, claiming that his takeover of Washington, D.C.’s police force and the deployment of National Guard troops and federal law enforcement agents to the capital had made the city safe. Trump described Chicago as “a killing field” and boasted that he could “solve Chicago” in a week or less. In a September 1 post on Truth Social, Trump condemned opposition from Pritzker and Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, writing, “Wouldn’t it be nice to say that about Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, and even the Crime Drenched City of Baltimore??? It can happen, and it can happen FAST! Work with us!!!”
Behind the scenes, the Pentagon has reportedly spent weeks drafting plans to deploy thousands of Illinois National Guard troops in Chicago, with the use of active-duty troops also on the table, according to The Washington Post. Trump has taken concrete steps to enable such deployments, signing an executive order directing Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to create a “quick reaction force” in the National Guard, making it available for rapid nationwide deployment to “cities where public safety and order has been lost.” Under Hegseth’s orders, some of the more than 2,200 guard troops in D.C. have begun carrying weapons on patrol, with many stationed in heavily touristed areas like the National Mall and some assigned to tasks like trash removal and landscaping.
The planned operation in Chicago, according to CNN, could begin as soon as Friday, September 5, and may involve agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Customs and Border Protection, and potentially be backed by National Guard forces in a peacekeeping role. Illinois officials, however, say they have not been contacted by the Trump administration about these plans. “So, it’s clear that in secret they’re planning this,” Pritzker said, expressing alarm at the lack of communication and transparency from federal authorities.
Chicago’s response has been swift and unequivocal. On August 30, Mayor Brandon Johnson signed an executive order to protect the constitutional rights of Chicagoans amid the possibility of imminent militarized immigration or National Guard deployment by the federal government. “With this executive order, we send a resounding message to the federal government: we do not need nor want an unconstitutional and illegal military occupation of our city,” Johnson said in a statement. “We do not want military checkpoints or armored vehicles on our streets and we do not want to see families ripped apart.”
Residents and activists in Chicago are not waiting idly. As reported by Truthout, dozens of activists have convened to discuss how best to protect their communities, particularly those most at risk, such as unhoused people, trans folks, Black and brown people, disabled people, and immigrants. They have begun organizing robust networks of care and defense throughout the city. On Labor Day, September 1, Chicagoans took to the streets in a “Workers Over Billionaires” rally, decrying the prospect of military occupation. “I do not want a government takeover, a military takeover of Chicago,” resident Terry McCaskill told CBS News Chicago. “How do we come back from that? They’ve taken over the capital. We’re the only ones standing in the way of dictatorship.”
The debate over Trump’s use of federal force is not confined to Chicago. In June, similar anti-immigrant raids in Los Angeles, which involved armored vehicles, tactical gear, and weaponry, prompted mass protests. Despite opposition from California Governor Gavin Newsom, Trump sent in thousands of National Guard troops and hundreds of Marines to quell demonstrations. A federal judge has since ruled that Trump’s deployment of troops in Los Angeles violated the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits the use of the military in domestic law enforcement.
Commentators across the political spectrum have weighed in. The Chicago Tribune editorialized, “No thank you. We’ve seen what’s unfolded in D.C., where residents have endured the dystopian presence of armed soldiers patrolling neighborhoods that fit nobody’s definition of crime-riddled.” The Boston Globe’s Kimberly Atkins Stohr described the occupation as bearing “all the hallmarks of a fascist regime,” while NBC News reported on the palpable sense of fear in immigrant neighborhoods, where ICE agents have been seen grabbing men off the streets and setting up checkpoints.
Experts warn that using the military for domestic law enforcement could have dire consequences. Retired Maj. Gen. Randy Manner told ABC News, “Trump wants units whose purpose is to dominate and police the American people. And that is extremely disturbing.” Retired Maj. Gen. Linda Singh added, “What happens if there’s an escalation and civilians are killed? We are setting precedents we can’t come back from.”
Despite the controversy, polls suggest that Trump’s actions may have support among a significant portion of the national electorate. A recent Harvard poll showed that 54% of voters believe Trump’s actions in Washington were “justified and necessary,” even as eight in ten Washingtonians opposed the occupation.
Trump’s executive order also calls for every state to create specialized National Guard units focused on “public order issues.” However, as CNN points out, the order does not clarify what authority these new units would report to if deployed over a governor’s objection, nor does it specify how they would train or coordinate across states. The upshot, as William Kristol noted in The Bulwark, is that the National Guard is being “turned into the president’s own rapid domestic deployment force, to be used at his unchecked discretion.”
As the nation watches Chicago, the broader implications of Trump’s approach to urban law enforcement and the use of military force at home remain deeply contested. With fears of authoritarian overreach on one side and calls for law and order on the other, the coming days could set precedents that shape American democracy for years to come.
