Illinois Sues Trump Over Blatantly Unconstitutional Troop Deployment

The state of Illinois and the city of Chicago sued the Trump administration on Monday over its decision to send hundreds of National Guardsmen into the streets of Chicago.

“The American people, regardless of where they reside, should not live under the threat of occupation by the United States military, particularly not simply because their city or state leadership has fallen out of a president’s favor. To guard against this, foundational principles of American law limit the president’s authority to involve the military in domestic affairs. Those bedrock principles are in peril,” the suit reads.

The lawsuit—filed against President Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Homeland Security Secretary Kritsi Noem—comes just two days after Trump announced he authorized 300 members of the Illinois National Guard to deploy to Chicago, a move Illinois Governor JB Pritzker likened to an “invasion.” An Oregon judge on Sunday blocked Trump’s National Guard deployment to Portland.

The Illinois lawsuit will be overseen by Judge April Perry, a Biden appointee.

“Trump and Noem have sent a surge of SWAT-tactic trained federal agents to Illinois to use unprecedented, brute force tactics for civil immigration enforcement; federal agents have repeatedly shot chemical munitions at groups that included media and legal observers outside the Broadview facility; and dozens of masked, armed federal agents have paraded through downtown Chicago in a show of force and control,” the suit reads. “There is no legal or factual justification for Defendants’ Federalization Order.”

Trump himself has promised to use American cities as “training grounds” for the military. These legal challenges from governors may be the strongest anti-authoritarian tactic Democrats have right now, as both California and Oregon have put forth similar lawsuits.

This story has been updated.

Maryland Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen called out political commentator Van Jones for his grotesque “dead Gaza baby” joke on Real Time with Bill Maher.

“This is not about critical race theory on college campuses, this is about Iran,” Jones said while claiming that information about Israel’s genocide of Palestinians is all just Iranian propaganda. “Iran and Qatar have come up with a disinformation campaign that they are running through TikTok and Instagram that is massive. If you are a young person, you open up your phone and all you see is ‘dead Gaza baby, dead Gaza baby, dead Gaza baby—Diddy—dead Gaza baby, dead Gaza baby.... That’s not DEI, that is a geopolitical adversary that is deliberately trying to divide the West against itself.”

The crowd erupted in laughter and applause.

Jones was widely rebuked, perhaps most pointedly by Van Hollen.

“I’m glad Van Jones apologized for his sick joking about dead kids in Gaza. But the problem goes deeper: he spread Netanyahu propaganda that the mass killings of civilians in Gaza—including 20K+ kids—is Iranian fake news,” he wrote on X. “It’s not the students and young people who are fooled. It’s Van Jones.”

Calling Palestinians using social media to broadcast their own genocide a disinformation campaign is stupid and disgusting, especially given how hard it is to share that information in the first place. Jones later offered a half-hearted apology, but the damage was done.

“I’ve watched hundreds of hours of Gaza videos in the last 2 years, including content filmed by our brave teams inside the strip, and can confirm that the ‘dead Gaza baby’ images are quite real, not the product of a ‘disinformation campaign’ and that there is nothing funny about them,” NBC News’s Hala Gorani said.

“Turning ‘dead Gaza baby’ into a punchline is such an evil choice that I’m struggling to even engage with the outrageous lie that we only care about Gazan deaths because of an Iranian social media campaign,” Briahna Joy Gray chimed in. ​​

Others pointed to Jones’s history of leftist performance—making a 2003 pro-Palestinian rap album, starting a Maoist, Marxist-Leninist collective in San Francisco in the 90s—to show how spineless his current rhetoric is.

As for Van Hollen, his condemnation of Jones is unfortunately one of very few instances of U.S. leadership on either side showing any ounce of courage in speaking up against Israel’s genocide. And while words won’t make Israel’s bombs stop dropping on Gaza, Van Hollen shows that the bright line on fealty to Israel is deteriorating.

President Donald Trump lashed out at Democrats during a wildly political speech that made the U.S. Navy’s 250th anniversary all about him.

Speaking to a massive crowd at the Norfolk Naval base Sunday, Trump seemed to forget he wasn’t on the campaign trail anymore and veered off into attacks against his opposition.

Trump warned that, “We have to take care of this little gnat that’s on our shoulder called the Democrats.”

“They want to give all of our money to illegal aliens that pour into the country. And you know, I have a bigger heart than they do, but the problem is when you do that, they come in by the millions. Everybody wants that, so you can’t do it,” Trump said, before bragging about how much money he’d poured into the armed forces.

It almost goes without saying, but Trump’s highly political comments are out of step with the U.S. military’s tradition of nonpartisanship. And for the second time in a week, the president seemed intent on turning his armed forces against half of the country.

Last week, when speaking to a gathering of top U.S. military brass, Trump delivered a diatribe against the Democrats, which was met mostly by silence. He ranted that the United States was “under invasion from within.”

Now, calling the Democrats a “gnat” to be swatted away is just the latest in a long line of dehumanizing rhetoric from the president. He’s also called his opponents “vermin,” and “the enemy within,” and recently referred to Democrats as “The Party Of Hate, Evil, And Satan.” All while blaming the rhetoric of the left for a spate of political violence.

The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear an appeal from Ghislaine Maxwell, who was hoping the court would reverse her convictions for her role in helping the late sex criminal Jeffrey Epstein abuse young girls.

Maxwell’s convictions and 20-year criminal sentence remain in place, after the Supreme Court declined certiorari, meaning fewer than four of the nine justices voted for the Supreme Court to review her case. The decision came with no dissent or explanation.

Maxwell and her legal team had argued that she should have been protected from federal prosecution because a 2007 non-prosecution agreement between Epstein and federal prosecutors in Florida shielded his “potential co-conspirators” from charges.

“We’re, of course, deeply disappointed that the Supreme Court declined to hear Ghislaine Maxwell’s case,” said Maxwell’s attorney David Oscar Markus. “But this fight isn’t over. Serious legal and factual issues remain, and we will continue to pursue every avenue available to ensure that justice is done.”

In July, Markus requested that Maxwell receive clemency from President Donald Trump.

This story has been updated.