Trump Stunned by Appeals Court Ruling on His Chicago Troop Plan

Summary

Legal AF Podcast Summary

Episode Title: Trump Stunned by Appeals Court Ruling on His Chicago Troop Plan
Air Date: October 16, 2025
Hosts: Michael Popok (MidasTouch Network), Ben Meiselas
Special Guest: Karen Friedman Agnifilo (not present in this episode but typically featured)

---

Episode Overview

This episode centers on breaking legal news: the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals' decision to deny the Trump administration's request to immediately deploy the National Guard in Illinois (specifically Chicago) following an order from Judge April Perry. The hosts provide detailed analysis of the ruling, its legal rationale, and broader implications for executive power and states' rights in the context of immigration enforcement protests.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Court's Decision on National Guard Deployment

• [00:00] Michael Popok breaks down the 7th Circuit’s panel decision:
  • The Trump administration sought to overturn Judge Perry’s block preventing the National Guard from being deployed in Illinois in response to protests at immigration detention centers.
  • The 7th Circuit, comprised of two Republican and one Democratic appointees, decided not to allow deployment—though mobilization (staging the Guard in their barracks) is permitted.

2. The Facts Undercutting the Administration’s Case

• The Court found no basis for Trump’s assertions that National Guard deployment was necessary.
  • Federal authorities’ own press releases hailed "Operation Midway Blitz," an immigration enforcement operation, as a success despite ongoing protests.
  • The protests cited as justification were not substantial enough: “About 100 to 150 protesters that were outside of a detention center in Illinois and ... about 50" on average ([01:25] Popok).
  • The Department of Homeland Security reported over 1,000 immigration arrests since the operation began, undercutting any claim of impeded federal law enforcement.

3. Legal Reasoning and Deference to Presidential Authority

• [07:30] The panel affirmed that courts have oversight over presidential uses of 10 USC §12406 (authority to federalize the Guard), despite strong presidential deference.
  • "We as a judicial body have oversight over a president's decision making… Great deference is given… But it doesn't mean it's not judicially reviewable." – Michael Popok [07:35]
• The ruling quotes from the court:

  “The spirited, sustained and occasionally violent actions of demonstrators in protest … without more does not give rise to a danger of rebellion against the government's authority.” ([08:38] Popok reading decision)

  • No evidence of “rebellion or danger of rebellion” was found.
  • The mere existence of protest—even if occasionally violent—doesn't rise to the extraordinary justification required for deploying the Guard.

4. Status and Impact of the Ruling

• For now, National Guard troops in Illinois remain federalized but cannot be deployed—"stay in your barracks."
  • “It's like he's got toys, but they're wrapped until Christmas and he may not be able to play with them.” — Michael Popok [09:55]
• The order maintains the status quo pending a full appeal, which could take months, and is expected to eventually reach the Supreme Court.

5. Similar Legal Battles Nationwide

• The hosts also preview a similar case in Oregon, with the Ninth Circuit reviewing Judge Immergut's order halting Guard deployment in Portland due to elevated violence there.
• The episode foreshadows further appellate court rulings and a possible Supreme Court showdown.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On conflicting claims of enforcement impediment:

  “You said Operation Midway, your attempt to round up immigrants and migrants, was a success. How can you say it was a success and that you don't have an ability to properly execute federal law all at the same time? If that's the basis under this statute...” — Michael Popok [01:03]

• On judicial oversight:

  “It doesn't mean there's no role for the federal courts, which is what Donald Trump says... Not so. We have the right to review it while giving great deference.” — Michael Popok [07:43]

• On protest actions:

  “The spirited, sustained and occasionally violent actions of demonstrators... without more does not give rise to a danger of rebellion against the government's authority.” — Michael Popok (quoting court decision) [08:38]

• On the practical outcome:

  “We're not gonna make him un-federalize or commandeer the National Guard but we're not gonna let him use ‘em either. It's like he's got toys, but they're wrapped until Christmas.” — Michael Popok [09:55]

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• [00:00] Breaking News: Appeals Court rejects Trump’s bid to deploy the Guard in Illinois
• [01:25] Details on the protest size and administration’s claims
• [03:00] Reading from the appellate decision and operation statistics undermining Trump’s arguments
• [06:17] Host commentary/intermission (ad skipped)
• [07:30] Judicial review and the boundaries of presidential power
• [08:38] Ruling excerpt: No “danger of rebellion” in Illinois
• [09:55] Analogy: National Guard as “toys, but they’re wrapped until Christmas”
• [10:40] Similar cases in Oregon and expectations for future rulings
• [12:09] Non-content outro/ads reached

---

Tone and Style

The analysis is sharp, legally rigorous, and often laced with Popok’s wry humor and relatable metaphors (National Guard as "wrapped toys"). The episode is engaging, clear on facts, and good for listeners seeking to understand complex intersections of constitutional law, federal authority, and states’ rights.

---

Recap

The 7th Circuit's decision is a significant check on executive authority, reinforcing the importance of factual scrutiny, judicial oversight, and the primacy of state sovereignty and the Posse Comitatus Act in deploying military force domestically. The Legal AF team predicts further legal battles in other circuits and future Supreme Court review, but the key message is that courts have, and will continue to have, a critical role in reviewing presidential emergency actions.

---

For more documents, analysis, and court filings mentioned, listeners are encouraged to check the Legal AF Substack.

Transcript

[Michael Popak]

We got breaking news here on the Midas Touch Network. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals 30 has decided not to grant the Trump administration's request to block Judge Perry's order stopping the National Guard from being deployed in Illinois, including in Chicago. This is a second order now by the full three judge panel, not just an administrative order in which the three judges, two Republican appointees were, one by Reagan, one by Bush and then one by Clinton, all got together and said they are not going to allow Donald Trump to have his own version of the facts, and even his own version of the facts do not support mobilizing and deploying the National Guard in Illinois, at least not at this preliminary stage. So what they've done is they've now ruled 30 that they're going to allow for now, during the course of a normal appeal, which could take several months, the National Guard in Illinois to be federalized, commandeered, mobilized if you will, but not deployed, meaning stay in your barracks. They're not on the streets. And when I read the order, I was also struck by an observation from the record by the three judges, but basically saying you said Operation Midway, your attempt to round up immigrants and migrants was a success. How can you say it was a success and that you don't have an ability to properly execute federal law all at the same time? If that's the basis under this statute, I'm gonna talk a lot about on this hot take 124 06. If the basis of 12406 is I can't execute federal law, then how do you have statistics such a successful Operation Midway? You like apples? How's them apples? I'm Michael Popak, you're on the Midas Dutch network. I'm going to post this actual decision on Legal AF substack for you to read. But let me give you the highlights. We had a ruling by Judge April Perry just a few days ago in which she blocked both the mobilization, the takeover, the commandeering of the National Guard in Illinois off the heels of what was going on in Oregon and California. And in addition, she stopped them from being deployed in the streets of Chicago, for example, Trump took an appeal. And I'm going to read to you from a certain amazing passages in Judge Perry's decision, which are based on our founding fathers and framers and the Federalist Papers and the rest of the Trump takes an appeal to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals which sits over Illinois. We get an order from Anonymous. Now we know the three judges. The judges now are Judge Rovner, Judge HAMILTON, and Judge St. Eve, they issue an administrative stay granting Donald Trump a stay only of that portion of Judge Perry's order that blocked the mobilization. In other words, he can commandeer and kind of get them all staged. They got to stay in their barracks and off the streets, but would not let them be deployed because that would change the status quo. And then we're off on the appeal. Now we've got after full briefing and a whole bunch of briefs that came in from attorneys general on Democratic states and attorneys general from Republican states, all sorts of amicus briefs. We've now got the ruling. And here's the ruling. Let me read it to you. It's procuria, meaning it was. It reflects the decision of all three judges, Rovner, Hamilton and St. Eve. On October 4, 2025, President Donald Trump invoked his authority under 10 USC Section 12406 to federalize and deploy members of the National Guard within Illinois. Over the objection of the governor, he asserted that deploying the Guard in the state was necessary to quell violent assaults against federal immigration agents and property. The state of Illinois took their case and said it was a violation of the tenth Amendment sovereign, sovereign power of the state and the Posse Comitatus act, among other things. This is how they conclude their decision. We conclude that the district court, that's Judge Perry's factual findings at this preliminary stage were not clearly erroneous and that the facts do not justify the the president's actions in illinois under section 12406. Even if we give substantial deference to his assertions. We deny the administration's motion for a stay pending appeal, except to the extent we continue our stay of the portion of the order enjoining the federalization of the Guard, meaning you're federalized, but you can't be deployed. Get back to your barracks. And what they're basing this on is the fact that while there was at one time a group of people that were protesting, it numbered, according to them on page 18 of their of the decision. Sorry, page three of their decision. About 100 to 150 protesters that were outside of a detention center in Illinois and that the number of average protesters was about 50 and that this did not stop Operation Midway from being successful or Midway Blitz. This is what they say on page six. Despite President Trump's federalization of the Guard troops, saying that it's necessary to enforce federal immigration law, the Department of Homeland Security and ICE have have touted the success of Operation Midway Blitz. In an October 3rd press release, DHS stated that ICE and the and the Customs of Border Patrol have affected more than 1,000 immigration arrests since the start of the operation. In a Sept. 26 press release, the Department of Homeland Security declared the protest that not slowed ICE down and in fact had significantly increased their deportation arrest numbers year over year. So then why do you need to federalize and mobilize and deploy the National Guard? Very good question asked by the three judge panel to which they answered, you don't.

[Ben Meisellis]

Hey everybody, Ben Meisellis here from the Midas Touch Network. I wanted to let you know about my podcast partner Michael Popox new law firm. It's called the Popak Firm. Michael Popox pursuing his dream of starting his own law firm. Really based on the popular demand by all the Midas mighty and legal a effers who are approaching Michael Popak with their cases and saying can you help us? And at that time, Popak was not able to. So he went out on his own. He started the Popoc firm where he is now handling catastrophic injury cases like car accident cases, trucking cases, malpractice cases, big negligence cases, wrongful death cases. So if you or someone you know have a case like this, the consultation with Popo's firm is free. Give him a call. See if you have a case. It's thepopoc firm.com thepopoc firm.com or you can call 877-popak-af-p o p o k a f so 1-877-p-o p o k a f give Michael Popak a call and I'm really proud of you. Popak. Thanks for all the hard work you're putting in.

[Michael Popak]

They also said, look, about this deference thing, two, two major observations. One, this panel ruled for the 7th Circuit that we as a judicial body have oversight over a president's decision making in and around section 124 06, whether there's a rebellion, whether there is domestic violence, whether he can't execute the laws. Great deference is given to a president named Trump or something else in that area. But it doesn't mean it's not judicially reviewable. It doesn't mean there's no role for the federal courts, which is what Donald Trump says, which you can't even make a decision. Complete plenary power is given to the president. Not so we have the right to review it while giving great deference. And they basically use the framework that the ninth Circuit in California used about the California National Guard case as well. But they said even when we give great deference, the facts don't support on the Ground. The reality on the ground does not support the extraordinary step of, of deploying the National Guard on the streets of, of Illinois at all. They went through. Here's how they work, here's how they put it best on page 14. Applying our understanding of rebellion to the district court's factual findings. Because remember Judge Perry did, did an entire factual analysis. She had hearings, she had witnesses, she has documents and evidence and videos and they're not going to disturb her her findings at this point they don't find that they were clearly erroneous which is the standard to disturb a trial court's decision. Here's what they say the three judge panel says on page 14. Applying our tentative understanding of rebellion to the district courts factual findings and even after affording great deference to the President's evaluation of the circumstances, we see insufficient evidence of a rebellion or danger of rebellion in Illinois. The spirited, sustained and occasionally violent actions of demonstrators in protest the federal government's immigration policies and actions without more does not give rise to a danger of rebellion against the government's authority. The administration thus has not demonstrated that it is likely to succeed on the merits. It also goes over the the other prong of section 12406, the third prong, which is that the President can deploy federalized National Guard when he's unable with regular forces to execute the laws of the United States. In other words, they have to be significantly impeded. That's what unable means. And he can't do it with federal officers. But he says looking at the record so far, including the bragging that the Trump administration was doing, they clearly can continue to execute laws and to capture and arrest people pursuant to their operation Midway Blitz. So their final ruling for now, subject to the appeal, this is the last word, at least for the 7th Circuit, is stay in your barracks. We're not gonna make him un federalize or commandeer the National Guard but we're not gonna let him use em either. It's like he's got toys, but they're wrapped until Christmas and he may not be able to play with them. I guess that's the right way to put it. I'll continue to follow this on a breaking news cycle. Just to give you a quick update, we've got a new ruling coming out of the ninth Circuit, sorry, Judge Immergut in Oregon up to the ninth Circuit in which she has extended her her order stopping the deployment on the streets of Portland. Same thing as the seventh Circuit, waiting on the ninth Circuit to rule. So we got two big wheels spinning in appellate world, the ninth Circuit sitting over Oregon and California. We're waiting on a final ruling from them, a three judge panel there about Judge Immergut's order and whether the mobilization of the federal of the National Guard was appropriate under the unique circumstances of Oregon. My gut is they're going to allow it in. Oregon was a little, it was a little, a little deadlier there, if you know what I mean. But, but we'll see what, we'll see what happens with the ruling. On the other hand, we're waiting now for the 7th Circuit to get full briefing and get into their mode. Probably these, these two orders of the 9th and the 7th will be several months apart and then it ultimately ends up at the United States Supreme Court. I'm glad you're here with me. I'm Midas touch. Take a moment, hit the free subscribe button and while you're at it come over to Legal AF YouTube channel and do the exact same thing. Till my next report, I'm Michael Popak.

[Legal AF Substack Host]

Can't get your fill of Legal af?

[Michael Popak]

Me neither.

[Legal AF Substack Host]

That's why we formed the Legal AF substack. Every time we mention something in a hot take, whether it's a court filing or a oral argument, come over to the substack. You'll find the court filing in the oral argument there, including a daily roundup that I do called wait for it morning afraid.

[Michael Popak]

What else?

[Legal AF Substack Host]

All the other contributors from Legal AO.

[Michael Popak]

Are there as well.

[Legal AF Substack Host]

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.

[Zoe]

Morning, Zoe. Got donuts.

[Jeff Bridges]

Jeff Bridges, why are you still living above our garage?

[Zoe]

Well, I dig the mattress and I. I want to be in a T mobile commercial like you teach me. So Dana.

[Jeff Bridges]

Oh no, I'm not really prepared. I couldn't possibly at T Mobile get the new iPhone 17 Pro on them. It's designed to be the most powerful iPhone yet and has the ultimate pro camera system.

[Zoe]

Wow, impressive. Let me try. T mobile is the best place to get iPhone 17 Pro because they've got the best network.

[Jeff Bridges]

Nice, Jeffrey, you heard them too.

[Zoe]

T mobile is the best place to.

[Michael Popak]

Get the new iPhone 17 Pro on us with eligible traded in any condition.

[Zoe]

So what are we having for launch?

[Jeff Bridges]

Dude, my work here is done.

[T-Mobile Announcer]

The 24 month bill credits on experience beyond for well qualified customers + tax and 35 device connection charge credit sending balance due to payout earlier Cancel Finance agreement. IPhone 17 Pro 256 gigs 1099.99 A new line minimum 100 plus a month plan without a pay plus taxes and fees required. Best mobile network in the US based on analysis by Oklahoma Speed Test Intelligence data 18 20K.

[SOFI Announcer]

Visit t mobile.com today we'll attempt a feat once thought impossible overcoming high interest credit card debt. It requires merely one thing a SOFI personal loan. With it, you could save big on interest charges by consolidating into one low fixed rate monthly payment. Defy high interest debt with a SOFI personal loan. Visit sofi.com stunt to learn more. Loans originated by Sofi Bank NA member FDIC terms and conditions apply. NMLS 696891.