Connect with us

Illinois

Supreme Court rejects Trump’s bid to deploy National Guard in Illinois

Published

on

Supreme Court rejects Trump’s bid to deploy National Guard in Illinois


WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday rebuffed the Trump administration over its plan to deploy National Guard troops in Illinois over the strenuous objections of local officials.

The court in an unsigned order turned away an emergency request made by the administration, which said the troops are needed to protect federal agents involved in immigration enforcement in the Chicago area.

Although the decision is a preliminary one involving only Chicago, it will likely bolster similar challenges made to National Guard deployments in other cities, with the opinion setting significant new limits on the president’s ability to do so.

The decision marked a rare defeat for President Donald Trump at the Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, after the administration secured a series of high-profile wins this year.

Advertisement

In doing so, the court at least provisionally rejected the Trump administration’s view that the situation on the ground is so chaotic that it justifies invoking a federal law that allows the president to call National Guard troops into federal service in extreme situations.

Those circumstances can include when “there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion” or “the president is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.”

The court ruled against the administration on a threshold question, finding that the law’s reference to the “regular forces” only allows for the National Guard to be called up if regular military forces are unable to restore order.

The court order said that Trump could only call up the military where they could “legally execute the laws” and that power is limited under another law called the Posse Comitatus Act.

“At this preliminary stage, the Government has failed to identify a source of authority that would allow the military to execute the laws in Illinois,” the court said.

Advertisement

As a result, the Trump administration has failed to show that the National Guard law “permits the President to federalize the Guard in the exercise of inherent authority to protect federal personnel and property in Illinois,” the court added.

The decision saw the court’s six conservative justices split, with three in the majority and three in dissent. The court’s three liberals were in the majority.

The dissenters were Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch.

“I have serious doubts about the correctness of the court’s views. And I strongly disagree with the manner in which the court has disposed of this application,” Alito wrote in a dissenting opinion.

“There is no basis for rejecting the President’s determination that he was unable to execute the federal immigration laws using the civilian law enforcement resources at his command,” he added.

Advertisement

Trump’s unusual move to deploy the National Guard, characteristic of his aggressive and unprecedented use of executive power, was based on his administration’s stated assessment that the Chicago area was descending into lawless chaos.

That view of protests against surging immigration enforcement actions in Chicago is rejected by local officials as well as judges who have ruled against the administration.

The deployment was challenged in court by the Democratic-led state of Illinois and the city of Chicago, with their lawyers saying Trump had an ulterior motive for the deployment: to punish his political opponents.

They argued in court papers that Trump’s invocation of the federal law was not justified and that his actions also violated the Constitution’s 10th Amendment, which places limits on federal power, as well as the Posse Comitatus Act, which generally bars the military from conducting law enforcement duties.

U.S. District Judge April Perry said she “found no credible evidence that there is a danger of rebellion” and issued a temporary restraining order in favor of the state.

Advertisement

The Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals largely reached the same conclusion, saying “the facts do not justify the president’s actions.”

The court did narrow Perry’s order, saying that Trump could federalize the troops, but could not deploy them.

The Supreme Court has frequently ruled in Trump’s favor in recent months as the administration has rushed to the justices when policies are blocked by lower courts.

Trump’s efforts to impose federal control over cities led by Democrats who vociferously oppose his presidency are not just limited to Chicago. He has also sought to deploy the National Guard in the District of Columbia, Los Angeles and Portland, Oregon.

Most recently, hundreds of National Guard troops deployed in Illinois and Oregon were set to return to their home states.

Advertisement

The deployment in the District of Columbia, which is a federal enclave with less local control, has been challenged in court, but there has been no ruling yet.

A federal appeals court allowed the Los Angeles deployment, and a different panel of judges on Oct. 20 ruled similarly in relation to Portland.



Source link

Illinois

New building owner addresses backlash over mural in downtown Springfield

Published

on

New building owner addresses backlash over mural in downtown Springfield


SPRINGFIELD, Mo. (KY3) – A long-standing mural honoring Robert E. Smith on the side of a building at Campbell and Walnut has been covered up, prompting community backlash against the building’s new owner.

David Pere, owner of FMTM LLC, purchased the building in downtown Springfield and said he intended it to reflect his business, which focuses on helping veterans with financial strategies and goals. Covering the mural was part of that plan.

Pere said he was out of town in Tennessee when painting began and learned about the community reaction through messages on his phone.

“I’m like, I was in Tennessee running an event. I didn’t even know he’d started painting until I got a bunch of really nasty messages on my phone,” Pere said. “And I go, oh, look, that’s our building getting painted. I guess he started.”

Advertisement

Pere said he did not anticipate the response. “You know, we didn’t. I didn’t know how much of an impact this was going to make,” he said.

Jesse Tyler, co-owner of SGFCO, said he wanted the mural to stay and expressed concern about the lack of safeguards for publicly recognized works of art.

“To paint over that is to say, like, could be interpreted as saying that his work is no longer relevant or that his story is no longer relevant. I don’t think that’s true,” Tyler said. “Robert’s artwork needs to be part of downtown for as long as we can maintain that memory and maintain that legacy.”

Tyler said the community had hoped protections would be in place for the mural. “Maybe we didn’t have those protections that we hope there would be, that maybe the sort of legacy and awareness of Robert’s work that we hope there would be wasn’t there,” he said.

The City of Springfield posted online, acknowledging the artwork held deep meaning for many residents. Because the building is privately owned, however, Pere is within his rights to make changes to its exterior.

Advertisement

Pere said he hopes to help relocate the mural to a more permanent location. “We want to help migrate that mural to a wall where it could be more permanent,” he said. “I’d love to help them find a space for it. I’d love to help. I’d love to see the city get involved to the point where that space could be a permanent space where it’s actually maintained because it is obvious now that it is very important to the city of Springfield.”

Pere is already working with an artist on a new mural for the side of the building, intended to represent veterans. That mural is expected to begin going up at the end of the month.

To report a correction or typo, please email digitalnews@ky3.com. Please include the article info in the subject line of the email.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Illinois

Missed the lunar eclipse? See when the next one will be over Illinois

Published

on

Missed the lunar eclipse? See when the next one will be over Illinois


play

Millions across the United States who woke up early Tuesday were treated to a “blood moon,” the only total lunar eclipse occurring in North America in 2026, according to NASA.

Advertisement

Illinois residents who missed it will be waiting some time for the next total lunar eclipse to shine above the U.S. — several years, in fact. But a partial lunar eclipse is coming sooner.

When is the next total lunar eclipse in Illinois?

After March 3, Illinois’ next visible total lunar eclipse won’t happen again until June 2029, writes Time and Date. There is a partial lunar eclipse coming sooner, however.

Others are reading: Free Full Moon Queso at Qdoba. How to get in Illinois

When is the next lunar eclipse?

A partial lunar eclipse will be visible in Illinois on Aug. 27-28, shining over the Americas, Europe, Africa and parts of Asia, according to NASA.

Provided you’re willing to stay up late to see it, the partial lunar eclipse will be at its maximum around 11:12 p.m., Thursday, Aug. 27, in Illinois.

Advertisement

Until then, here’s what people in parts of the U.S. were seeing Tuesday morning.

See photos of the March 3 total lunar eclipse

Calendar of upcoming eclipses

When is the next solar eclipse?

The next solar eclipse will be visible to roughly 980 million people on Aug. 12, 2026, writes Time and Date.

A total solar eclipse will occur over Greenland, Iceland, Spain, Russia and a small area of Portugal, while a partial eclipse will be visible in Europe, Africa, North America, the Atlantic Ocean, Arctic Ocean and Pacific Ocean, NASA reports.

Advertisement

Need help finding stars, planets and constellations? Try these free astronomy apps

The following free astronomy apps can help you locate stars, planets, and constellations.



Source link

Continue Reading

Illinois

Illinois lawmakers consider tightening DUI law to 0.05 BAC

Published

on

Illinois lawmakers consider tightening DUI law to 0.05 BAC


COLLINSVILLE, Ill. (First Alert 4) – Right now, in Illinois, Missouri and most of the country, drivers must be at or over 0.08 to get a DUI. A proposal in the Illinois Statehouse would lower that threshold.

“Make it as safe as you possibly can out there,” said John Sapolis.

Collinsville resident John Sapolis said while lowering Illinois’ DUI threshold would not affect him, as he rarely drinks, he likes the idea of getting drinkers off the road.

“It’s bad enough out there driving around with people who are not drinking,” said Sapolis.

Advertisement

If a bill passes in the Illinois House of Representatives, the blood alcohol limit would be lowered, meaning fewer drinks could put somebody over the line for a DUI.

Two Chicago-area lawmakers propose lowering the threshold from 0.08 to 0.05.

“Your body still is not in a proper state to really be behind the wheel,” said Erin Doherty, Regional Executive Director for Mothers Against Drunk Driving.

Doherty said even at 0.05, drivers are less coordinated and cannot track moving objects as well as when they are sober.

Utah is the only state in the country to have the 0.05 limit, and Doherty said one in five drivers there changed their behavior.

Advertisement

“There are so many other options before getting behind the wheel,” said Doherty.

Sara Floyd used to live in Utah and now calls Collinsville home.

“The Midwest people like to have a few beers while they watch their Little League games

“In Utah, you can barely get alcohol at a gas station,” said Floyd.

She said the culture in Utah is very different and thinks there should be some wiggle room for drivers.

Advertisement

“If one person had a beer within an hour period and then drove, they shouldn’t get a DUI for one drink,” said Floyd.

Doherty said they do not recommend driving even after a single drink.

“You really should not get behind the wheel when you’re any kind of impaired, one drink, five drinks, whatever that looks like, just don’t drive,” said Doherty.

While each body processes alcohol differently, according to the National Library of Medicine, in a two-hour period it takes a 170-pound man three to four drinks to reach 0.05, and it takes a 137-pound woman two to three drinks to reach the same state.

April Sage said she does not think this law would work, saying instead it would help more if the state added more public transit.

Advertisement

“I could have three beers and get a ride home safely,” said Sage.

First Alert 4 reached out to a spokesman for the Illinois Department of Transportation to see if they had any comments on this bill. The spokesperson said they are not going to comment because it is pending legislation.

According to the Illinois Department of Public Health, fatal crashes involving one driver who had been drinking increased 4% from 2019 to 2022, despite multiple studies showing fewer Americans are drinking.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending