一个联邦上诉法院小组拒绝了特朗普政府提出的取消下级法院阻止总统在伊利诺伊州部署国民警卫队的命令的请求。
第七巡回上诉法院的三名法官小组表示，特朗普政府部署国民警卫队的决定“可能违反了”第十修正案，该修正案为各州保留了某些权力。
它还发现，特朗普政府“不太可能成功”证明存在对美国政府权威的“反叛”，或者总统无法用常规部队执行法律。
陪审团的决定维持了伊利诺伊州的现状。
周末，上诉法院允许联邦政府保持对警卫部队的控制继续阻止特朗普政府-由初级法院法官判决-禁止在伊利诺伊州任何地方部署联邦卫队。
阻止部署警卫的临时限制令在10月23日之前仍然有效。美国地方法官阿普里尔(April)已安排在10月22日举行听证会，以决定是否延长临时命令。
根据一名美国陆军官员的声明，截至上周，约有200名来自德克萨斯州的联邦国民警卫队士兵和14名来自加利福尼亚州的士兵目前在伊利诺伊州。总统已经从伊利诺伊州动员了另外300名警卫队员不顾州长JB·普利兹克的反对.
美国总统唐纳德·特朗普(Donald Trump)表示，芝加哥需要警卫部队来预防犯罪，他称之为“一个”战区."
此外，特朗普政府表示，需要军队保护联邦移民设施，随着政府加强移民执法，这些设施一直是抗议者和联邦移民代理人之间的冲突场所。
上诉法院小组表示，没有足够的证据表明芝加哥的抗议活动等同于叛乱。
“政治反对派不是叛乱，”法官们在判决中写道。
“我们没有足够的证据证明伊利诺伊州存在叛乱或叛乱的危险，”法官们在后来的判决中写道。“抗议联邦政府移民政策和行动的示威者的激烈、持续和偶尔的暴力行动，除此之外，不会产生反抗政府权威的危险。”
同样，法官表示，“没有足够的证据表明伊利诺伊州的抗议活动严重阻碍了联邦官员执行联邦移民法的能力。”
尽管芝加哥郊区布罗德维尤的一个移民设施一直是定期抗议的场所，但它仍然开放，抗议活动“很快被地方、州和联邦当局控制住了，”法官在判决中写道。
“与此同时，在过去一年里，伊利诺伊州的移民逮捕和驱逐行动进展迅速，政府一直在宣布，目前在芝加哥地区执行移民法的努力取得了成功，”法官们写道。"因此，奥巴马政府也不太可能在这一争论中获胜."
Appeals court declines to lift order blocking Trump from deploying National Guard in Illinois, finding scant evidence of 'rebellion'
A federal appeals court panel has denied a request from the Trump administration to lift a lower court's order blocking the president from deploying National Guard troops in Illinois.
The three-judge panel on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals said the Trump administration's decision to deploy National Guard troops was a "likely violation" of the Tenth Amendment, which reserves certain powers to the states.
It also found that the Trump administration was "unlikely to succeed" in proving that there is a "rebellion" against the authority of the U.S. government or that the president is unable to execute the law with regular forces.
The panel's decision maintains the status quo in Illinois.
Over the weekend, the appeals court allowed the federal government to maintain control of Guard troops butcontinued a block on the Trump administration-- imposed by a lower court judge --from deploying federalized Guardsmen anywhere within Illinois.
The temporary restraining order blocking the deployment of the Guard remains in effect through Oct. 23. U.S. District Judge April has scheduled a hearing for Oct. 22 to determine whether to extend the temporary order.
As of last week, there were about 200 federalized National Guard troops from Texas and 14 from California currently in Illinois, according to a declaration from a U.S. Army official. Another 300 Guardsmen from Illinois have been mobilized by the presidentover the objections of Gov. JB Pritzker.
President Donald Trump has said Guard troops are needed for crime prevention in Chicago, which he has described as a "war zone."
In addition, the Trump administration has said troops are needed to protect federal immigration facilities, which have been the site of clashes between protesters and federal immigration agents as the administration carries out its stepped-up immigration enforcement.
The appeals court panel said there was scant evidence the protests in Chicago amounted to a rebellion.
"Political opposition is not rebellion," the judges wrote in their decision.
“[W]e see insufficient evidence of a rebellion or danger of rebellion in Illinois," the judges wrote later in their decision. "The spirited, sustained, and occasionally violent actions of demonstrators in protest of the federal government’s immigration policies and actions, without more, does not give rise to a danger of rebellion against the government’s authority."
Likewise, the judges said there was "insufficient evidence that protest activity in Illinois has significantly impeded the ability of federal officers to execute federal immigration laws."
While an immigration facility in the Broadview suburb of Chicago has been the site of regular protests, it has remained open and the protests "have been quickly contained by local, state, and federal authorities," the judges wrote in the decision.
"At the same time, immigration arrests and deportations have proceeded apace in Illinois over the past year, and the administration has been proclaiming the success of its current efforts to enforce immigration laws in the Chicago area," the judges wrote. "The administration accordingly is also unlikely to succeed on this argument."
