(Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court signaled on Wednesday that it is actively debating how to interpret the wording of a law that limits when a president can use members of the National Guard in a challenge to President Donald Trump's bid to dispatch troops to the Chicago area.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday took the rare step of asking for additional briefing in a high-profile, emergency case challenging President Donald Trump’s deployment of the National Guard to Chicago,

The interpretation of “regular forces” could determine whether the Guard's federalization in Oregon, Illinois and California was legal.

All eyes are on the U.S. Supreme Court after the Trump administration agreed Wednesday that a lower court’s order blocking National Guard deployment within Illinois could remain in effect while the high court decides whether to intervene.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson and U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued over the meaning of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and its conditions regarding presidential authority in today’s Supreme Court hearing over President Trump’s tariffs.