Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar » Updated Posts
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax      Advertise Here      About     Exclusive Subscriber Content     Updated Posts    Contact Rich Miller
CapitolFax.com
To subscribe to Capitol Fax, click here.
Republican governors, bipartisan group of former governors file dueling amicus briefs in Illinois v. Trump (Updated)

Thursday, Oct 9, 2025 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Several Republican states have asked a federal court for leave to file an amicus brief supporting the federal government’s argument against Illinois’ lawsuit seeking to stop national guards from being deployed here. Iowa, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, South Dakota, Texas and West Virginia all joined in

Prohibiting the deployment of the National Guard to ensure ICE agents can fulfill their duties safely and effectively comes at an immense cost to the States. The undersigned States recognize the important roles and balance played in the National Guard system by both the states and federal government. But Plaintiffs fail to respect that balance here. […]

ARGUMENT

I. Violent Rioters in Chicago Are Harming Federal Officers and Property and Impacting the Federal Government’s Ability to Carry Out Federal Laws. […]

Given the prevalence of violence aimed at federal law enforcement, in Chicago and around the country, it is unsurprising that the President deployed National Guard resources to protect them from obstructions in their attempts to follow the law.

II. President Trump Certainly Has a “Colorable Basis” For Federalizing the National Guard to Protect Federal Agents and Property from Violent Rioters in Chicago. […]

There has been a continuous and growing threat outside of the ICE building in Chicago. Hundreds of protesters have gathered, assaulted ICE agents, and actively worked to block agents from accessing the building. See DHS supra, https://bit.ly/3IP2Rvi. And the President’s order to send approximately 300 National Guard members, contrasted with the thousands deployed in California in Newsom, shows that there is a measured response here. That is not to say that the President cannot federalized more members, but this response certainly shows that it was a reasoned decision based on the facts as known at the time. The President’s response here was certainly “within a ‘range of honest judgment.’”

III. The Harms Incurred If Violent and Destructive Protests and Riots Are Allowed to Continue in Chicago are Borne by All States.

The President’s decision to federalize the national guard to protect federal officers and property in Chicago has effects beyond the borders of Illinois; states and cities across the U.S. are benefited by this decision. […]

States are at risk of even more costs if violent protests are implicitly endorsed in Illinois. Antifa-aligned groups seek to undermine the federal government as it works to redress this significant problem by causing damage to federal property, harming federal agents, and in some cases, damaging the city in which the riot is located—causing significant damage to the state and its citizens. […]

Accordingly, the President’s action of federalizing the National Guard furthers the public interest because it allows ICE agents to continue to perform their statutory duties of identifying, apprehending, and removing illegal aliens, which is the only way to protect the States from the harms caused by illegal immigration. And it protects states from the costs incurred by violent protests and riots. Further, allowing the federal government to quash this type of behavior at its outset sets a precedent discouraging similar behavior in other States.

*** UPDATE *** Oklahoma’s attorney general signed on to the brief, but the state’s governor opposes the deployment

Gov. Kevin Stitt of Oklahoma, a Republican and the chairman of the National Governors Association, on Thursday criticized the deployment of Texas National Guard troops to Illinois as a violation of his beliefs in federalism and “states’ rights.” […]

Mr. Stitt on Thursday said, “We believe in the federalist system — that’s states’ rights,” adding, “Oklahomans would lose their mind if Pritzker in Illinois sent troops down to Oklahoma during the Biden administration.”

Gov. Stitt appears to be taking the wise course of “be careful what you wish for.”

[ *** End Of Update *** ]

* Meanwhile, a bipartisan group of former governors, including Jerry Brown, Steve Bullock, Arne Carlson, Mark Dayton, Jim Doyle, Parris Glendening, Jennifer Granholm, Bill Graves, Christine Gregoire, Jay Inslee, Tony Knowles, Gary Locke, Terry McAuliffe, Janet Napolitano, Martin O’Malley, Deval Patrick, Marc Racicot, Bill Ritter Jr., Kathleen Sebelius, Steve Sisolak, Eliot Spitzer, Ted Strickland, Tom Vilsack, Bill Weld, Christine Todd Whitman and Tom Wolf have asked for leave to file their own amicus brief

Our constitutional order depends on the dispersion and careful balance of authority among the federal government and the states. The contours of that balance were established at the Founding and are embodied in the United States Constitution. “[T]he Framers rejected the concept of a central government that would act upon and through the States, and instead designed a system in which the State and Federal Governments would exercise concurrent authority over the people.” […]

Throughout our history, and notwithstanding our nation’s political, social, and geographic diversity, the federal government has rarely and only under the most extraordinary circumstances imposed military authority on the citizens of a state against the wishes of the state’s executive. The structure of our federalist system, and the language of the relevant statutory provisions at issue in this case, impose legal constraints on the president’s authority to take such extreme measures. Indeed, over the course of our nearly 250-year history, the president has attempted such military imposition only a handful of times, and only in times of significant exigency. […]

ARGUMENT

I. Federalism is enshrined in the Constitution and entrusts the states—not the federal government—with general police powers.

“It is incontestible that the Constitution established a system of ‘dual sovereignty,’” in which the states “retained ‘a residuary and inviolable sovereignty.’” Printz, 521 U.S. at 918–19 (quoting The Federalist No. 39, at 245 (James Madison) (Clinton Rossiter ed., 1961)). This division of authority is evidenced throughout the Constitution, which grants Congress only “discrete, enumerated” powers. Printz, 521 U.S. at 919. The Tenth Amendment makes that division explicit by reserving all other powers “to the States respectively, or to the people.” […]

Within this framework, states retain broad “police powers” to protect public health and safety—authority the federal government lacks. … Although the federal government may override this authority with a clear directive from Congress, the presumption remains that states—not the federal government—bear primary responsibility for maintaining civil order within their borders.

II. The National Guard plays a critical role in assisting governors in protecting the public. […]

In amici’s collective experience, incidents requiring a federal military response are nearly unprecedented—state and federal officials have worked together in good faith to avoid the use of federal forces in situations normally handled by state and local law enforcement. […]

III. Only in the most exceptional circumstances has the National Guard been federalized or active-duty forces deployed in a state absent consultation with state authorities. […]

Federalization without gubernatorial consent has occurred only in exceptional circumstances where, for example, governors openly defied federal law. For instance, in 1957, President Eisenhower federalized the Arkansas National Guard and deployed active-duty troops only after Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus openly refused to comply with a federal court order to integrate Little Rock Central High School. Similarly, in 1965, President Johnson federalized Alabama’s Guard, but only after Governor George Wallace refused to follow a court order requiring that state officials protect civil rights marchers in Selma. In neither instance, it should be noted, did the president rely on 10 U.S.C. § 12406 to federalize the state’s National Guard. In both instances, the president at the time had invoked the Insurrection Act, given governors’ refusals to either protect peaceful marchers from violence or students from riots. No such invocation has been made here with respect to federalization and deployment of troops in Chicago. […]

IV. The administration’s interpretation of 10 U.S.C. § 12406 conflicts with this history and tradition of federal-state coordination. […]

It is implausible that Congress intended to grant the president sweeping authority to federalize the Guard without geographic or temporal limits even when a state is maintaining order through civilian means. … Section 12406 provides conditional authority—triggered only by rebellion, invasion, or the inability to enforce federal law using regular forces—that limits federalization through a fact-based inquiry, and it instructs that federal authorities work with, rather than around, “the governors of the States.” […]

V. The administration’s interpretation of 10 U.S.C. § 12406 threatens public safety. […]

If federalization of the National Guard is unreviewable, a president motivated by ill will or competing policy priorities could divert Guard resources away from critical state needs, including natural disasters or public health crises. […]

VI. The courts play a critical role in protecting this balance of federal-state authority.

The president claims unreviewable authority under 10 U.S.C. § 12406 to federalize the National Guard. That assertion conflicts with the Constitution, the judiciary’s role in upholding our federalist structure, and long-standing principles of state sovereignty. Judicial review is especially critical where one sovereign encroaches on another’s authority to police domestic unrest.

“It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is,” Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137, 177 (1803), including “determining the limits of statutory grants of authority.” Stark v. Wickard, 321 U.S. 288, 310 (1944). […]

When Congress intends to grant the president (or others) unreviewable decision-making authority, it does so with unmistakable language. In Trump v. Hawaii, for example, the Court held that 8 U.S.C. § 1182(f) “exudes deference to the President in every clause” and “entrusts to the President the decisions whether and when” to exercise the authority granted by the statute. 585 U.S. 667, 684 (2018). […]

Section 12406 contains no such sweeping language. And unlike in the immigration or foreign policy context—where executive power is at its apex—the Constitution contemplates a shared structure of authority over state militias. […]

This Court need not define the outer limits of presidential authority to conclude that the action here—federalizing the National Guard without clear statutory justification or state consent—is subject to review and incompatible with federalist principles.

* Also, nine former military service secretaries and retired four-star admirals and generals filed an amicus brief in the case. Click here to read it.

Discuss.

  31 Comments      


Illinois Press Association CEO resigns after board orders him to withdraw from lawsuit filed to protect journalists (Updated)

Thursday, Oct 9, 2025 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Mary Randolph with the Northwestern University Medill Local News Initiative

The CEO of the Illinois Press Association, who had joined a lawsuit against the Trump administration for actions toward journalists outside a Chicago-area ICE facility, resigned this week following a dispute with the IPA’s board over the litigation.

Don Craven, who had led the IPA since 2021, added the organization to the lawsuit Sunday alongside other Illinois news outlets and advocacy groups. The IPA board disagreed with the decision and told him “to do whatever necessary to dismiss the IPA as a Plaintiff in that litigation,” which Craven did before submitting his resignation, according to an email Craven wrote to an organization of other press associations Wednesday. […]

The IPA board did not respond to a request for comment. It released a statement to the association’s members Wednesday afternoon, which read that a six-person executive team will oversee operations as the board begins recruiting candidates. […]

The IPA is a part of the Newspaper Association Managers, a fraternal organization of press associations across the country which organizes discussions among members on relevant industry issues. Layne Bruce, the executive director of the Mississippi Press Association who serves as the volunteer clerk for NAM, said this news will “without a doubt” be on the agenda for NAM’s next meeting in December.

“As far as I’m aware, this is the most significant development in a press association in the current political climate,” he said.

* I was able to obtain Craven’s letter to the national Newspaper Association Managers group…

Yesterday, I submitted my resignation as President/CEO of the Illinois Press Association. I made a decision as President/CEO and counsel on Sunday to add the IPA to litigation seeking to preserve and protect the First Amendment rights of journalists covering the protests at the ICE facility in suburban Chicago. Journalists reported being singled out for detention, being shot by rubber bullets, and being exposed to gas pellets, all because they were doing their jobs. A minister, in clerical garb, was shot at and gassed, while praying in front of the facility.

The IPA Board obviously disagreed with my decision and felt strongly that I should have either polled the Board, or perhaps polled the entire membership, and instructed me to do whatever necessary to dismiss the IPA as a Plaintiff in that litigation. I made the decision on Sunday night, to allow for a Monday morning court filing.

I followed the Board’s instruction, telling the attorney for the Plaintiff group to dismiss the IPA from the litigation, and submitted my resignation to the Board.

[Redacted friendly personal stuff.]

The Board has not yet decided what to do with this vacancy, so moving forward please contact Ron Kline directly with any NAM issues involving Illinois.

I am returning to the practice of law with my son, and if you need me, please call my cell [redacted].

Cheers,

Don

The IPA is a newspaper publishers’ association. Craven has been the group’s lawyer since the early 1980s. He stepped in to run the day to day operation a few years ago.

I’m just saying, but the only way a guy like Craven gets pushed out is if some of the state’s biggest publishers demanded it.

He’s a good guy and I wish him nothing but the best.

* The plaintiffs prevailed, by the way

Judge To Grant Temporary Restraining Order Protecting Northern Illinois Journalists from Federal Agents

The Chicago Headline Club and other local media outlets and organizations hailed a victory from a federal judge for upholding the right for journalists to do their jobs without facing unprovoked attacks from federal agents. The club took legal action following multiple examples of federal agents assaulting journalists who were covering recent protests at an ICE facility at Broadview, Ill.

“The Chicago Headline Club stood up for the First Amendment, and the judge delivered a significant victory for press freedom,” the CHC board of directors said.

Judge Sara Ellis said she planned to issue a written temporary restraining order Thursday that will apply to the entire northern district of the Chicago area federal court and not limit the Temporary Restraining Order to Broadview only. Ellis said she needed more time to craft the wording in the written order that is as “clear and direct as possible.”

*** UPDATE *** The order has now been issued…


  15 Comments      


PREVIOUS POSTS »
* Isabel’s afternoon roundup
* Catching up with the congressionals
* MLB post-season open thread
* Republican governors, bipartisan group of former governors file dueling amicus briefs in Illinois v. Trump (Updated)
* LIS really needs to get its website's act together
* Illinois Press Association CEO resigns after board orders him to withdraw from lawsuit filed to protect journalists (Updated)
* Mendrick: 'These ICE raids are JB Pritzker's raids'
* Say No To Anti-Competitive Transmission Legislation
* Group revises its transit revenue forecast upward
* Vote YES to 340B Legislation That Protects Healthcare Services in Your Community
* Isabel’s morning briefing
* Open thread
* Selected press releases (Live updates)
* Live coverage
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Veto session update (Updated)
* Isabel’s afternoon roundup
* Yesterday's stories

Support CapitolFax.com
Visit our advertisers...

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............


Loading


Main Menu
Home
Illinois
YouTube
Pundit rankings
Obama
Subscriber Content
Durbin
Burris
Blagojevich Trial
Advertising
Updated Posts
Polls

Archives
October 2025
September 2025
August 2025
July 2025
June 2025
May 2025
April 2025
March 2025
February 2025
January 2025
December 2024
November 2024
October 2024
September 2024
August 2024
July 2024
June 2024
May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004

Blog*Spot Archives
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005

Syndication

RSS Feed 2.0
Comments RSS 2.0




Hosted by MCS SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax Advertise Here Mobile Version Contact Rich Miller