Get Tough on Criminals to Avoid Needing the Guard

By Betsy McCaughey

Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson went to court Monday to stop President Donald Trump from sending National Guard troops to the Windy City, calling mob violence against immigration officials a "flimsy pretext."

Follow this closely, New Yorkers and residents of crime-ridden blue cities everywhere. This isn't just about Chicago. It's about your city too.

For months Trump has vowed to "make our cities very, very safe." The Illinois lawsuit claims that Trump is sending the Guard to Chicago to "fight crime," not just protect federal buildings and personnel.

Horrors! What's wrong with fighting crime?

The lawsuit claims "neither the Constitution nor any Act of Congress permits" the president to deploy the National Guard for "routine law enforcement, such as protest management or the suppression of violent crime or property damage."

Sorry, JB, but that's false. Check out the Insurrection Act, which Trump cited on Monday.

Elizabeth Goitein, of the Brennan Center for Justice, says "it's really up to the president to decide when to use the armed forces as a domestic police force." The Insurrection Act can be used "in practically any situation where the president thinks it needs to be used," adds Jack Goldsmith, a Harvard law professor.

Of course, they and the New York City Bar Association want to reduce that authority now that Trump's the president.

Democrats in Congress, such as Sens. Richard Blumenthal, Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff, are trying to push through a law to reduce a president's power to use troops domestically under the Insurrection Act, including when the rights of some or all citizens are in danger.

That means now. The constitutional right to come and go freely is destroyed if you fear being shot leaving home. That's a daily concern in some Chicago neighborhoods.

The property rights of bodega owners and other retailers are eviscerated when shoplifters aren't prosecuted. Zohran Mamdani, running for Gotham mayor, opposes enforcing laws against shoplifting less than $1,000 worth of goods.

In January a new Illinois law went into effect requiring that convicted criminals no longer be called "offenders." Instead they're to be called "justice-impacted individuals."
Hard to know whether to laugh or cry.

When cities controlled by left-wing pols cater to the criminals, something needs to be done. Rights need to be secured.

That's where the Insurrection Act comes in.

It has a noble past. It was used by Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy to protect the constitutional rights of African Americans during school segregation in the South.

Ignoble describes another law -- the Posse Comitatus Act -- which Pritzker's lawsuit cites to challenge Trump. Posse Comitatus was enacted in 1878 to limit the president's ability to use federal troops to protect newly freed slaves from terror and abuse in the South. Shame on Pritzker's team.

Pritzker and Johnson's lawsuit also ignores the very real threat to federal immigration officials. It is not a flimsy pretext.

Last week, Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents were surrounded and menaced by angry mobs, and local police were told to stand down rather than rescue them.

Pritzker calls the National Guard deployment "an invasion." But these men and women are our neighbors, reminded Alexander Hamilton in Federalist No. 29. Pritzker would never use the "i-word" to describe foreigners, including gang members, coming across the southern border.

Federal district court Judge April Perry, a Biden appointee, refused to halt Trump's deployment Monday and scheduled a hearing Thursday on Illinois' request for a temporary restraining order against the president.

Perry should keep in mind that the Supreme Court has barred courts from second-guessing the president's use of troops domestically. In Martin v. Mott (1827), Justice Joseph Story wrote, "We are all of the opinion that the authority ... belongs exclusively to the President." If Perry decides that Trump erred in sending troops, she will be overturned on appeal.

In The New York Times on Tuesday, Georgetown law professor Stephen Vladeck omits mentioning Martin v. Mott, suggesting that that the rules that apply to all other presidents don't apply to Trump. Ridiculous.

It's unlikely Perry will even say much about Pritzker's argument that Trump is really coming to Chicago to fight crime. But it is time for the nation consider that option, or start electing urban leaders who tackle crime rather than pander to criminals.

New York City is fortunate to have Jessica Tisch at the helm of the New York City Police Department. And she has made it clear the Guard are not needed here. Shootings are at an all-time low, and robberies, burglaries and felony assaults are all trending down.

But Mamdani is currently leading in the mayoral race. If Mamdani wins and unleashes criminal bedlam, law-abiding New Yorkers will be seeking any protection they can get.