On Monday, October 6, 2025, the political landscape in the United States was rocked by a dramatic escalation in the ongoing standoff between the federal government and several states over the deployment of National Guard troops. President Donald Trump authorized the Texas National Guard to send 300 troops to Chicago, Illinois, sparking fierce opposition from local and state leaders and igniting a wave of legal and political resistance.
The move did not come in a vacuum. Over the preceding days, Chicago had been the scene of mass arrests by federal immigration agents, with reports from NewsNation describing federal agents rappelling from Black Hawk helicopters to storm a five-story apartment building. Residents, including children and U.S. citizens, were zip-tied during these raids, according to the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights. Rodrick Johnson, a 67-year-old Chicagoan, recounted to the Chicago Sun-Times, “I asked if they had a warrant, and I asked for a lawyer. They never brought one.”
The tension reached a boiling point on Saturday, October 4, when federal agents on routine patrol in Broadview—a suburb of Chicago—were ambushed and boxed in by ten cars. According to Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin, one driver, identified as a U.S. citizen, was armed with a semi-automatic rifle. “The officers, who were rendered immobile, were forced to deploy their weapons and fire defensive shots at an armed U.S. citizen,” McLaughlin stated. The woman allegedly posted inciting messages online, urging others to confront federal agents. Remarkably, no law enforcement officers were seriously injured, and the woman drove herself to a hospital for treatment.
In the wake of these events, protests erupted outside the ICE processing center in Broadview, with demonstrators clashing with law enforcement and several arrests reported by Fox News. ICE agents reportedly used physical force, chemical munitions, and rubber bullets to disperse crowds, fueling further outrage among local residents and activists.
On Monday morning, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson signed an executive order “aimed at reining in this out-of-control administration.” Addressing the city, Johnson declared, “This raid wasn’t about public safety, and it certainly was not about immigration. This was about a show of authoritarianism. A forceful display of tyranny. They send a clear message to all Chicagoans. They said we do not respect your rights.” He called for a “full investigation into this incident, as well as all of the brutality that we have seen over the past week,” and added, “And now we stand at a moment that is testing our very humanity, and the city of Chicago will stand the test of time.”
The state of Illinois and the city of Chicago responded by filing a lawsuit to block what they described as a federal takeover. The lawsuit asserted, “The American people, regardless of where they reside, should not live under the threat of occupation by the United States military, particularly not simply because their city or state leadership has fallen out of a president’s favor.”
Illinois Governor JB Pritzker was quick to condemn the federal action, calling it “Trump’s Invasion.” In a statement on X (formerly Twitter), Pritzker said, “We must now start calling this what it is: Trump’s Invasion. It started with federal agents, it will soon include deploying federalized members of the Illinois National Guard against our wishes, and it will now involve sending in another state’s military troops.” He further criticized the lack of coordination, noting, “No officials from the federal government called me directly to discuss or coordinate.” Pritzker called on Texas Governor Greg Abbott to “immediately withdraw any support for this decision and refuse to coordinate,” insisting, “There is no reason a President should send military troops into a sovereign state without their knowledge, consent, or cooperation.”
Governor Abbott, however, stood firm. He responded on X, “You can either fully enforce protection for federal employees or get out of the way and let Texas Guard do it.” Abbott praised the Texas National Guard, stating they “defend our country with pride.”
The deployment was formalized by War Secretary Pete Hegseth, who signed a memo authorizing up to 400 Texas National Guard members to be sent to Chicago and Portland for up to 60 days. The federal government framed the move as a necessary step to protect federal employees and restore order amid what it described as escalating unrest in cities like Chicago and Portland.
But the backlash was not limited to Illinois. In Oregon, where protests have also gripped the streets, a late-night court hearing on Sunday, October 5, resulted in U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut issuing a second temporary restraining order blocking the Trump administration from deploying National Guard troops from any state to Oregon. Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield, announcing a joint legal challenge with California, argued, “The judge’s order was not some minor procedural point for the president to work around, like my 14-year-old does when he doesn’t like my answers. Oregon will absolutely not be a party to the president’s attempt to normalize the use of the United States military in our American cities.”
California Governor Gavin Newsom also condemned the federal deployment, calling it “a breathtaking abuse of the law and power” and warning, “The commander-in-chief is using the U.S. military as a political weapon against American citizens.” Newsom noted that about 200 federalized members of the California National Guard, previously on duty around Los Angeles, were being reassigned to Portland. He criticized the move as an attempt to circumvent Saturday’s court ruling that had blocked deployment of Oregon’s own guard members.
Oregon Governor Tina Kotek echoed concerns about federal overreach, stating, “There’s no need for military intervention in Oregon. There’s no insurrection in Portland, there’s no threat to national security.” Kotek emphasized that the protests in Portland were relatively small and localized, not warranting a military response.
Amid the legal wrangling, the Chicago U.S. Attorney’s Office weighed in on the violence against federal officers, calling the situation “serious” and pledging, “This Department of Justice does not tolerate assaults and obstruction of our brave men and women in federal law enforcement. We will investigate and prosecute all those who assault or obstruct federal law enforcement, including public officials, and we will hold them accountable to the full extent of the law.”
The deployment of National Guard troops to U.S. cities—especially those led by Democratic governors—has become a flashpoint in the nation’s ongoing debate over federal authority, states’ rights, and the use of military force on American soil. President Trump, addressing military generals on October 5, made his position clear, saying he expects the U.S. military to help respond to the “enemy from within … before it gets out of control.”
With lawsuits, executive orders, and court rulings flying fast and furious, the showdown between states and the federal government shows no sign of abating. The coming days will test not only the limits of presidential power but also the resilience of American democracy in the face of unprecedented internal conflict.
