Illinois Leaders Reject Trump’s Plan to Militarize Chicago

Illinois leaders are rejecting President Donald Trump’s threat to deploy National Guard troops to Chicago, framing it as an unnecessary militarization of policing and a violation of democratic norms. Governor JB Pritzker declared, “There is no emergency in Chicago that calls for armed military intervention. There is no insurrection.” He warned that Trump “wants to use the military to occupy a U.S. city, punish his dissidents and score political points. If this were happening in any other country, we would have no trouble calling it what it is — a dangerous power grab.”

The governor highlighted falling crime rates, noting homicides dropped by 32% while vehicle thefts and burglaries fell by more than 20%. He stressed that deploying troops would be “unconstitutional because the federal government is barred from deploying military troops to an American city for crime-fighting purposes.” Pritzker vowed, “The first thing we’re going to do is take him to court.”

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson echoed the rejection: “The guard is not needed. This is not the role of our military. The brave men and women who signed up to serve our country did not sign up to occupy American cities.”

Attorney General Kwame Raoul signaled readiness for legal action, while Senators Dick Durbin and Tammy Duckworth condemned Trump’s rhetoric. Durbin dismissed the threat as “purely political theater” and “a power grab,” urging investment in bipartisan solutions instead of soldiers on city streets. Duckworth, a combat veteran, called the plan “deeply disturbing” and “un-American,” warning it was “straight out of the authoritarian’s playbook.”

Critics argue Trump’s push mirrors his earlier use of the Guard in Los Angeles against immigration protests, reflecting a pattern of turning domestic dissent into grounds for military occupation. As Pritzker put it, “We only read about it in The Washington Post,” pointing out the administration’s lack of communication and its disregard for constitutional limits.

At its core, opponents say the deployment represents overpolicing at the highest level — using armed troops not to keep people safe, but to project power.

Link: NBCNews