Brace yourself for a showdown between federal authority and local resistance as the battle over National Guard deployments in Democrat-led cities heats up.

President Donald Trump’s initiative to send National Guard troops into cities like Chicago, Portland, Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., and Memphis has ignited a firestorm of lawsuits and court orders, with a federal judge in Chicago now extending a block on troop deployment indefinitely until higher courts weigh in, as the Associated Press reports.

This saga started gaining steam in June when a district court in Los Angeles ruled that the administration’s deployment of troops following protests over immigration policies violated federal law.

Legal roadblocks mount

Judge Charles Breyer in California ordered control of the state’s Guard back to Gov. Gavin Newsom on June 13, though an appeals court temporarily put that on hold, keeping federal control intact for now.

Fast forward to September, and Breyer doubled down, ruling that Trump’s use of the military for domestic law enforcement breached the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 -- a decision now under appeal before a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel in Pasadena.

Meanwhile, in Washington, D.C., over 300 Guard members have been stationed since late August to support Trump’s plans, with more than 2,200 still lingering despite the emergency period ending in September.

Chicago’s courtroom standoff intensifies

In Chicago, U.S. District Judge April Perry first issued a two-week temporary restraining order blocking Guard deployment, and on Wednesday, she extended it indefinitely until her court or the Supreme Court rules on the matter.

Federal attorneys, while agreeing to the extension, are racing to the Supreme Court for an emergency order to green-light the deployment, showing the administration’s urgency to push forward.

“Every day this improper TRO remains in effect imposes grievous and irreparable harm on the Executive,” argued Solicitor General D. John Sauer in a Supreme Court filing on Tuesday.

Portland, Memphis face similar battles

Let’s not sugarcoat it—Sauer’s plea drips with frustration, but one has to wonder if these judicial roadblocks are less about law and more about progressive resistance to federal authority in cities allergic to anything resembling order over chaos.

Over in Portland, Oregon, an appeals court ruled Monday that Trump can command 200 state Guard troops, yet a separate order from U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut -- a Trump appointee, no less -- still halts their deployment, with a hearing set for Friday.

In Memphis, since October 10, Guard troops have patrolled downtown near the iconic Pyramid, decked out in fatigues and labeled as “military police,” though they lack arrest powers -- a detail that hasn’t stopped local Democratic officials from suing Gov. Bill Lee for deploying them without state lawmakers’ approval, citing a violation of Tennessee’s constitution.

State vs. federal power struggle continues

Back in D.C., the stakes are sky-high with a federal court hearing looming over a request from Attorney General Brian Scwalb for an injunction to stop deploying over 2,000 guardsmen, while 45 states have picked sides in the legal fray -- 23 backing the administration, 22 supporting the lawsuit.

Even as some states plan to pull their units by Nov. 30 unless extensions are granted, a separate state court hearing in Charleston, West Virginia, on Friday will tackle a lawsuit aiming to block West Virginia Guard deployment to the capital.

At the end of the day, this isn’t just about troops on the ground -- it’s a fundamental clash over who calls the shots when urban unrest meets federal resolve, and whether state and local leaders can keep thumbing their noses at policies meant to restore stability.