Daily Herald opinion: The question of mission: Trump’s insistence on sending Guard here is plagued by lack of a plan

Unless one has a relative or friend in the Illinois National Guard, the only direct contact most of us have had with Guardsmen and women was getting the COVID-19 vaccine in early 2021. At large venues, organized by the Illinois Department of Public Health, hundreds of young military and medical personnel politely shepherded us through getting our first vaccines, and then signed us up for our second shots 60 days later. The men and women were friendly, well-trained and efficient, and left the newly-vaccinated feeling that the operation was extraordinarily well-managed.

Alas, should these same troops be deployed onto the streets of Chicago as part of a federalized force to “fight crime” in the coming days, at best they will not be welcomed heartily. At worst, a lack of clear mission and training could result in things going horribly wrong. These would be the same Guardsmen and women we felt so grateful for 4½ years ago — and still do — but this would be something else entirely.

On Tuesday, a federal judge in northern California expressed some of those risks when he ruled that the Trump administration's use of federal troops in Los Angeles to conduct law enforcement operations is unlawful. U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer said the federal use of 4,000 members of the California National Guard and 700 U.S. Marines violated the Posse Comitatus Act, and that with the Trump administration threatening to deploy the National Guard to Chicago and other cities, his order was necessary to prevent the creation of a “national police force with the President as its chief.”

As it undoubtedly pursues an appeal of Breyer’s ruling, we urge the Trump administration to use this setback to scale back on its bombastic rhetoric and use the time to rethink its approach to Chicago. As we said last week, there may well be a method of reducing urban crime to be had, even one that might conceivably use outside resources like the National Guard. But to achieve it would have to involve all the various stakeholders, and take money, cooperation and planning.

Even if you agree that local law enforcement alone hasn’t gotten the job done in Chicago — and the tragedy of at least eight people killed and 52 wounded over the holiday weekend would only strengthen that belief — the idea of combining National Guard troops and Chicago police officers overnight into a cohesive force is a dangerous one.

National Guard troops are not trained in crime fighting. So where is the meticulously planned joint training, designed to keep both civilians and law enforcement itself safe? Is there a mission statement that clearly delineates between peaceful protests and an insurrection?

David Harris, former Illinois National Guard adjutant general and currently director of the Illinois Department of Revenue, told our Marni Pyke that when troops are deployed, the essential question is, “What is the mission of that military force?”

“If it’s crime prevention, you have to have interaction between the military force and the police force,” the former Republican state legislator from Arlington Heights added. “Who’s in charge? Is it going to be Chicago Police Supt. Larry Snelling or the military commander? Can they talk to each other? The radios may not even sync up with each other. Who makes the determination about who goes where?”

Harris said most guard units carry M4 carbine or M16 rifles. “Those are assault weapons. If you fire, you can hit somebody three blocks away,” he said. Chicago police, meanwhile, mostly carry pistols and jacketed hollow point 9 mm ammunition, which (unlike assault rifles) minimizes the risk of collateral damage.

A president can legally deploy Guardsmen for active military duty in combat zones, like the Iraq War, or domestic emergencies such as rebellions, or to protect federal property and enforce federal law. More typically, a state’s governor commands the force but troops are federally funded and regulated. Gov. JB Pritzker called up the National Guard to provide COVID-19 vaccinations in 2021 and at then-Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot’s request in 2020 to act as adjunct law enforcement to prevent violence at demonstrations over George Floyd’s death.

This is not the case here, and Pritzker has vowed to fight the president’s plan in court.

Not surprisingly, Trump responded to his court loss on Tuesday by assuring the nation that the Chicago operation is on, although he couldn’t/wouldn’t say when. True, we’ve learned during his presidency to prioritize what he does, instead of what he says. But by using Breyer’s ruling as an excuse to rethink the federal government’s approach, everybody buys time. For that moment, anyway, that’s a win-win.