Trump Blindsided as Cities Unleash Unexpected Pushback

Summary

Legal AF by MeidasTouch: "Trump Blindsided as Cities Unleash Unexpected Pushback"
Date: September 12, 2025
Host: Michael Popok (for MeidasTouch Network)

---

Episode Overview

In this episode of Legal AF, Michael Popok delivers an urgent analysis of the legal and political clash as blue cities and states face unprecedented incursions by federal forces under former President Donald Trump. The episode's main focus is on how mayors and governors, particularly in Boston, Chicago, and California, are mounting legal resistance to Trump’s deployment of federal and state National Guard troops in Democratic-leaning cities, examining the complex intersection of federalism, the Supremacy Clause, and the Tenth Amendment.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Federal Incursion into Blue Cities

• Trump is sending a federal police force made up of ICE, Border Patrol, and out-of-state National Guardsmen into Democratic-run cities (e.g., Boston, Chicago, New York).
• Cities' and states’ resistance is largely happening in the courts, rather than through physical confrontation.

“They will be invaded this week by Donald Trump's federal police force troops, his illegal shock troops made up of ICE and Border Patrol and armed National Guardsmen from other states as they invade Chicago and Boston, potentially New York…”
—Michael Popok [00:28]

• The reasoning: Trump’s efforts are politically motivated and target blue cities despite falling crime rates in these locations.

2. The Legal Battle: Sanctuary Policies and the U.S. Constitution

• Trump’s DOJ is filing numerous lawsuits (14 recently by Pam Bondi) against sanctuary cities, claiming local non-cooperation with immigration enforcement violates the Supremacy Clause.
• Popok explains these arguments are constitutionally flawed; the 10th Amendment prevents the federal government from forcing local law enforcement to help enforce federal law.

“The concept that states are required, required and, and can be compelled by the federal government to enforce federal law. No, they can’t interfere, but they are not required to cooperate because that would be a violation of the 10th Amendment of the Constitution…”
—Michael Popok [02:44]

• Reference is made to past legal victories against similar lawsuits, particularly Judge Jenkins’ dismissal of these types of challenges in Illinois.

3. Dissecting the Boston Lawsuit Against Mayor Michelle Wu

• Boston’s status as a “sanctuary city” under its Trust Act is challenged by the DOJ.
• DOJ complaint argues that not assisting is equivalent to obstructing federal law, a point Popok strongly refutes.

“Obstructing is obviously a federal officer tries to grab somebody, an immigrant, put them in the back of a van. Boston PD steps in the middle and stops them from doing that. That's obstruction. Federal officer grabs somebody, calls to the police department on the corner… that's not obstruction. When he refuses, that is just not cooperating.”
—Michael Popok [05:57]

• Popok is confident the lawsuit will be dismissed under the same reasoning as prior failed attempts.

4. Local Leaders Respond: Voices of Resistance

• Popok features Boston Mayor Michelle Wu’s defiant public statement against the federal government’s ultimatum.

“This has always been a city of revolution, of innovation, of standing up for the public good and never bowing down to tyranny.”
—Michelle Wu [10:40]

5. Escalating Tactics: Texas National Guard Deployed

• Insider reports suggest Texas has sent National Guard troops to Illinois, amounting to what Popok calls an “invasion.”
• Popok questions the wisdom and legality of this interstate deployment and warns Texas that a precedent is being set for future administrations.

“So now we've got Texas invading Illinois. Where are we? Is this a sequel to Civil Action the movie or Civil War the movie? What are we watching? Texas versus Illinois?”
—Michael Popok [11:06]

6. Road Ahead: Legal Strategies for Cities and States

• Popok notes that direct confrontation with federal officers won’t work due to the Supremacy Clause.
• The answer is litigation: seeking injunctions and fighting in federal court, as California and D.C. have done successfully.
• Trump’s tactics are evolving, now using red-state Guards instead of trying to federalize local ones, requiring new litigation strategies.

“It's not impossible, but it's very hard for the states to block and or arrest federal officers executing duties that even appear and are unconstitutional. Self help is not the way… at the end of the day, it's going to be in the courts.”
—Michael Popok [12:46]

• Reassures audience: no physical clashes, rather “pitched battles” in the courtroom.

---

Notable Quotes & Moments

• On the precedent and gravity of Trump’s actions:

  “…the first president since Abraham Lincoln who has sent federal troops to attack states. And for all the most wrong, depraved and unconstitutional reasons, that's what we're watching.”
  —Michael Popok [01:34]

• On the weakness of the DOJ lawsuits:

  “Compelled, conscripted, forced service to do the dirty work of the federal government is something quite different… I am quite confident that this lawsuit will go the way of… will dismiss this case as a violation of the 10th Amendment…”
  —Michael Popok [09:32]

• On the ongoing legal resistance:

  “We're not going to see pitched battles between state law enforcement and federal law enforcement on the streets… But we are going to see pitched battles inside the courtrooms and we're going to cover it right here in the Midas Touch Network and Legal AF.”
  —Michael Popok [14:07]

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [00:28] — Introduction & overview of Trump’s invasion of blue cities, the legal frontlines
• [02:44] — Explanation of the Supremacy Clause vs. 10th Amendment in sanctuary city litigation
• [05:57] — Discussion of the Boston Trust Act lawsuit and distinction between obstruction and non-cooperation
• [10:35] — Michelle Wu’s speech on Boston’s resistance to federal intervention
• [11:06] — Chicago and Texas National Guard “invasion” context and broader constitutional stakes
• [12:46] — How cities should (and shouldn’t) resist: the legal pathways
• [14:07] — Closing thoughts on the legal “battles” to come and Legal AF’s continuing coverage

---

Conclusion

This episode powerfully contextualizes the current constitutional crisis involving federal overreach and local resistance, blending sound legal analysis with urgent commentary from Michael Popok and voices like Michelle Wu. Listeners are given a clear roadmap of the law, the stakes, and the strategies likely to play out both in the courts and in public opinion.

Key Takeaways:

• The legal fight over sanctuary cities is reaching new heights as Trump escalates federal intervention.
• Existing precedent overwhelmingly supports local autonomy against federal conscription.
• Cities and states are turning to the courts as the prime battleground, with a high probability of victory based on the U.S. Constitution.
• Leaders like Michelle Wu are emerging as public faces of resistance, adding historical and moral weight to the legal battle.

---

For more insights and ongoing legal updates, Popok steers listeners to Legal AF’s YouTube channel and Substack.

Transcript

[T-Mobile Advertiser]

Introducing Family Freedom from T Mobile. We'll pay off four phones up to $3200 and give you four free phones, all on America's largest 5G network. Visit your local T Mobile location or learn more@t mobile.com FamilyFreedom up to $800 per line via virtual prepaid card typically takes 15 days. Free phones via 24 monthly bill credits with finance agreement eg Apple iPhone16128GB8229.99 Eligible trade in eg iPhone11 Pro for well qualified credits end and balance due if you pay off early or cancel contact.

[Michael Popak]

T Mobile phone Blue cities and blue states are under attack. They will be invaded this week by Donald Trump's federal police force troops, his illegal shock troops made up of ICE and Border Patrol and armed National Guardsmen from other states as they invade Chicago and Boston, potentially New York, as Donald Trump tries to have blue cities and blue states buckle under his thumb. The problem is the resistance is being televised. The resistance is front lines are in the courts and that's where the mayors and governors are going to defeat Donald Trump, especially with our help. I'm going to focus on a new lawsuit filed against Michelle Wu, the mayor of Boston, the safest big city in America, who is resisting Donald Trump and has been brought into court as a result. I'll talk about the new lawsuit that's been filed by the Department of Justice and its chances of success. Let me not bury the lead. They are not going to win against Boston and then talk about what's happening in Illinois and Chicago. Ultimately in New York, the blueprint for the resistance is Gavin News of the governor of California, Rob Bonta, the attorney general of California, and the success they have had resisting and opposing Donald Trump's advances in California, along with Brian Schwalberry, the attorney general for the District of Columbia, in his successful efforts to expel Donald Trump's shock forces from the District of Columbia. Make no mistake about it. We're going to talk in this hot take about federalism. We're going to talk in this hot take about the Supremacy clause. But what we're really talking about at bottom is the first president since Abraham Lincoln who has sent federal troops to attack states. And for all the most wrong, depraved and unconstitutional reasons, that's what we're watching. A federal judge in San Francisco just put it succinctly last Tuesday when he found that Donald Trump has violated and will violate the Posse Combatantis act unless stopped by by using the US Military and armed guards turning them on Americans and others here in, in pursuit of or in in for civil law enforcement purposes. That is illegal, that is unconstitutional. And I'll talk more about the violations of the Supremacy Clause and the rest here on this hot take of the Midas Touch Network. We knew this was coming. Donald Trump has been threatening blue cities and blue states, ignoring the soaring crime rates in red cities and red states. Some of the highest are in red cities and red states. But he's going after for political purposes and to try to try to break the Democratic brand and Democratic Party over his knee. He's going after these cities. Chicago has and its violent crime is down 35% year over year this year alone. DC similarly, Boston is the safest city, big city in America. Philadelphia's crime rate way down. So these mayors and governors are fighting it in the streets, they're fighting it in the courts. And let me break down the new lawsuit that was filed against the city of Boston and Michelle Wu. There is about 14 of these lawsuits that have been filed by Pam Bondi in the last 60 days. She's already lost one and it has not been reversed on appeal in Illinois. Judge Jenkins a couple of months ago, I did a full report on it after Pam Bondi sued, claiming that these sanctuary cities and sanctuary states are unconstitutional because local law enforcement is refusing to cooperate with the federal government in detaining and retaining immigrants and aliens and others as part of the federal immigration law. Trump's Department of Justice is arguing that that violates the Supremacy Clause, which because they premise it on something that itself is unconstitutional. The concept that states are required, required and, and can be compelled by the federal government to enforce federal law. No, they can't interfere, but they are not required to cooperate because that would be a violation of the 10th Amendment of the Constitution, which reserves the power in the states, all power that has not been given to the federal government. That is our system of federalism and states rights and states power. They can choose to cooperate. Cities and states around America that are red or otherwise that want to cooperate with Donald Trump, they can, but they are not required to. In fact, to require them to do so would be to violate the 10th Amendment of the Constitution. And Judge Jenkins laid it out in a good 60 page order. Yet Pam Bondi continues to bring these unconstitutional lawsuits against cities. Let me just show you the internally inconsistent arguments within the complaint. This complaint against Michelle Wu, the mayor of Boston and Boston. I will post on Legal AF substack for you to read as well later this afternoon. Cities this is what they say in paragraph four. Cities cannot obstruct the federal government from enforcing immigration laws. When that occurs, the city breaks the law. Okay, well, Boston, through its Boston Trust act, which says that local law enforcement, except for public safety reasons, cannot assist the federal government in immigration, hence sanctuary city. It doesn't say that they're going to obstruct the federal government. Not assisting is not the same thing as obstructing. Obstructing is obviously a federal officer tries to grab somebody, an immigrant, put them in the back of a van. Boston PD steps in the middle and stops them from doing that. That's obstruction. Federal government. Federal officer grabs somebody, calls to the police department on the corner, the police officer on the corner to assist. Unloading the person or detaining the person, that's not obstruction. When he refuses, that is just not cooperating. And there's no obligation, in fact, quite the opposite under the Constitution, that a city cooperate with the federal government and its federal officers. You do you, in other words, you want to use and you want to implement your cruel and depraved immigration policy, Trump, you do it with your officers. You can't conscript state officials and state officers to do that dirty work with you or for you. That's the point. So they they rightly this is why their own complaint leads to its dismissal. It says in paragraph five, the Boston Trust act is the city's ordinance that directs the Boston Police Department not to cooperate with federal employees. Immigration enforcement, right? Correct. Not cooperating is not obstructing.

[Legal AF Host]

You know, as much time as I spend prepping, reading and recording for Legal af, I didn't realize how much sitting all day was dragging me down physically and mentally.

[Michael Popak]

By the end of the day, I.

[Legal AF Host]

Felt stiff, foggy and worn out. That's why I started using this episode sponsor Uplift Desk Total game changer. It's not just about safety standing. It's about moving more, improving posture, and keeping my energy up throughout the day. I'm sharper, more focused, and honestly happier at my desk. Uplift Desk builds premium ergonomic furniture designed to keep you moving, feeling good, and doing your best work. You can customize your setup with over 200,000 desk combinations to fit your style and workflow. My personal favorite, their wire management system. No more tangled cords, just clean, focused space. Your workday doesn't have to leave you feeling worn out. Go to upliftdesk.com legalaf and use our.

[Michael Popak]

Code legal af to get 4 free.

[Legal AF Host]

Accessories free same day shipping free returns in an industry leading 15 year warranty that covers your entire desk plus an extra discount off your entire order that's upliftd e s k.com legalaf for this exclusive offer only available through our link.

[Michael Popak]

In paragraph seven they say according to the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement ice, the criminal charges on the detainer requests issued by the Boston field office include violent and serious crimes. Okay. But even the Boston Trust act says that if there's a public safety issue then the Boston police can kill can intervene if for public safety. Even in their paragraph 28 of their own complaint it says Congress has preserved states and localities ability to cooperate with the secretary of Department of Homeland Security. Right. The ability to cooperate is one thing. Compelled, conscripted, forced service to do the dirty work of the federal government is something quite. Again, I am quite confident that this lawsuit will go the way of and the Boston federal judge who will, who has been assigned to this case will, applying the same rulings as Judge Jenkins will dismiss this case as a violation of the 10th Amendment and other unconstitutional paragraph moments to get rid of this lawsuit. Let me show you a clip by Michelle Wu because she is one of the leaders of the the major resistance against the Trump administration. The anti Trump resistance is being led by people like Michelle Wu, the mayor of Boston. And I want to, I want you to see her in action in a.

[Michelle Wu]

Freedom and a home for everyone.

Tonight, the response given to an ultimatum from the federal government.

This has always been a city of revolution, of innovation, of standing up for the public good and never bowing down to tyranny.

[Michael Popak]

Now that's not the only city that's been threatened with these kind of suits or with the actions of an invading force led by Donald Trump. Chicago next. I mean The Chicago Governor J.B. pritzker, along with its mayor has already revealed that they've gotten insider information from within the federal government that they are massing troops at a naval base near Chicago. That many of the armed and potentially masked invading forces occupying forces by Donald Trump are coming from the Texas National Guard. So now we've got Texas invading Illinois. Where are we? I mean I was this. Is this a second a sequel to Civil Action the movie or Civil War the movie. What are we watching? Texas versus Illinois and they should be and the Texas people should throw their elected officials out for participating in this depraved and unconstitutional scheme to violate states rights. I mean warning to Texas. Is that what you want when a Democrat gets into power? You want Texas invaded by federal troops? Remember the Alamo? So they gotten the word they're ready, they're going, they're not going to, they're not going to obstruct the federal government, but they're not going to assist either. Again, cities where crime is way down under Joe Biden and Donald Trump wants to make political theater and political points at the expense of occupying a Democratic city and state. Now let's talk about what the cities and states can do in response. It's not impossible, but it's very hard for the states to block and or arrest federal officers executing eve duties that even appear and are unconstitutional. Self help is not the way. So we get excited when we see snowplows blocking state buildings and other things to try to resist. But at the end of the day, it's going to be in the courts. Cities like Boston, states, Massachusetts and Illinois, Chicago and all that have to file lawsuits, get before federal judges just like California did, just like Los Angeles participated and get an injunction to stop the occupying forces and throw them out and argue that they. Donald Trump has violated the statute related to commandeering the National Guard. You see, he's bringing National Guard from outside the state now. He's adopting and adapting his strategies. He's bringing in Texas National Guard. He's not trying to nationalize and federalize the state Guard of that state like he did in California, because ultimately he got blocked by orders of Judge Breyer there. So now he's adapting. He's bringing in seven or eight other state red states that are willing to embarrass blue states and send in the troops now. And so it's going to be in the courts to get rid of these occupying forces because arresting them is not going to work. They can try, but the Supremacy Clause works both ways of the Constitution, which says federal government and federal law in the area in which Congress has allowed it to operate reign supreme. I saw some sort of report that said in every case, federal law blocks state law. That's not true. It has to occupy a certain sphere that has been given to it by Congress. But if you have an argument that they are coloring outside the lines when it comes to the Constitution, then you have to go to a federal judge as opposed to using self help. So we're not going to see pitched battles between state law enforcement and federal law enforcement on the streets of Chicago and Boston and Philadelphia and New York. But we are going to see pitched battles inside the courtrooms and we're going to cover it right here in the Midas Touch Network and Legal AF. Slide over to Legal AF, the YouTube channel. Hit the free subscribe button there. We're going to hit 800,000 subscribers likely before our one year anniversary or one year birthday on the 17th of September. We just crossed 250 million views of our work. That's all a testament to our audience and its devotion and fervent support of what we do on Legal AF. Brand new Legal AF sub stack up and running. We've already got 80,000 subscribers there, 4 million views a month because we're putting out content that people want to watch and building a community you want to be a part of. I'm glad you're here. I'm honored to be in front of you every day, almost every hour on Legal AF, the YouTube substack. We're here on the Midas Dutch network, so until my next report, I'm Michael Popak.

[Legal AF Substack Promoter]

Can't get your fill of Legal af?

[Michael Popak]

Me neither.

[Legal AF Substack Promoter]

That's why we formed the Legal AF sub stack. Every time we mention something a hot take, whether it's a court filing or a oral argument, come over to the substack. You'll find the court filing and the oral argument there, including a daily roundup that I do called Wait for it Morning af. What else? All the other contributors from Legal A are there as well. We got some new reporting, we got interviews, we got ad free versions of the podcast and hot takes where Legal AF on substack. Come over now to free subscribe.

[American Giant Advertiser]

Everything from clothing to household items are getting more expensive each day. The world of fast fashion has complicated clothing production by shipping cheap parts around the world to whoever can sew them the cheapest. And now you, the consumer, are paying the price. With rising costs, American Giant is about keeping things simple and close to home. They aren't affected by tariffs because their products never leave the us. Skip the tariff and snag yourself. American made clothing with American Giant. Get 20% off your first order when you use promo code [e-mail] that's 20% off when you use code [e-mail].