Trump wins court approval to send federal troops to Portland
Donald Trump, President of the US (photo: Getty Images)
The US Court of Appeals has ruled that President Donald Trump may deploy National Guard troops to Portland, Oregon, despite objections from city and state officials, according to Reuters.
A three-judge panel of the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals granted the Justice Department’s request to suspend a lower court ruling that had blocked the deployment while the legality of Trump’s actions is still under review.
The court stated that deploying the National Guard is an appropriate response to the actions of protesters who damaged a federal building and threatened employees of the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Most of the judges who joined the anonymous majority included panel judges Bridget Bade and Ryan Nelson, both appointed by Trump during his first presidential term.
Judge Nelson also wrote a concurring opinion arguing that courts have no authority to review the president’s decisions regarding the deployment of troops.
Panel judge Susan Graber, appointed by Democrat Bill Clinton, issued a dissenting opinion. She said that authorizing troop deployment in response to merely inconvenient protests is not only absurd but dangerous, and urged the full 9th Circuit Court to overturn the decision before Trump has the chance to send in troops.
Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield likewise called on the 9th Circuit to reconsider the ruling, saying it puts America on a dangerous path.
“Today's ruling, if allowed to stand, would give the president unilateral power to put Oregon soldiers on our streets with almost no justification,” Rayfield said.
Meanwhile, White House Press Secretary Abigail Jackson welcomed the ruling, saying Trump exercised his lawful authority to protect federal property and personnel from violent protesters.
The Appeals Court’s decision marks a significant legal victory for the Republican president as he continues deploying federal forces to a growing number of cities governed by Democratic officials.
Deployment of troops to Portland
On September 27, Trump ordered the deployment of 200 National Guard soldiers to Portland to suppress protests and strengthen domestic immigration enforcement. He described the city as war-torn and authorized the use of full force if necessary.
The National Guard serves as a state militia under the authority of state governors, except in cases when the president calls it into federal service.
In his orders to send troops to California, Oregon, and Illinois, Trump cited Section 12406 of Title 10 of the US Code. This provision allows the president to federalize a state’s National Guard to repel an invasion, suppress an insurrection, or enforce federal law.
However, city and state officials filed a lawsuit against the administration to block the troop deployment, arguing that Trump’s actions violated several federal laws governing military use and infringed upon state rights under the 10th Amendment to the US Constitution.
The lawsuit accused Trump of exaggerating the scale of protests against his immigration policies to justify unlawfully seizing control of the state’s National Guard units.
According to state police reports, protests in Portland were small and peaceful, resulting in only 25 arrests in mid-June and none in the 3.5 months following June 19.
Judges’ opinions are divided
On October 4, Portland-based US District Judge Karin Immergut, appointed by Trump, also ruled that the president had likely acted unlawfully in his decision to deploy troops to Portland.
She prohibited Trump from sending the National Guard to Portland at least until the end of October and scheduled a hearing for October 29 to determine whether to impose a long-term injunction.
Immergut is one of three federal district judges who have ruled against Trump’s use of the National Guard, and so far, no district court judge has sided with him in such cases.
Meanwhile, when reviewing Trump’s September order that claimed protests made it “impossible” to enforce federal law in Portland, judges of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals were divided over what evidence should be considered.
The majority cited evidence from June, when intensified protests forced ICE headquarters in Portland to close for three weeks, along with separate incidents, including a shooting at an ICE facility in Dallas.
Judge Susan Graber argued that no emergency existed in the city, noting that for several weeks before the troop deployment, protests had remained peaceful and were mostly attended by people in chicken suits or inflatable frog costumes, not dangerous rioters as described by Trump administration officials.
Immergut issued rulings against the administration on both October 4 and 5, first declaring that Trump could not seize control of Oregon’s National Guard and later that he could not circumvent that ruling by deploying Guard troops from other states.
She emphasized that there was no evidence recent protests in Portland amounted to an insurrection or seriously obstructed law enforcement, and described Trump’s characterization of the city as war-torn as simply inconsistent with the facts.
Despite the court’s ruling, the Pentagon, acting on Trump’s orders, still deployed around 200 federal National Guard personnel from California to Portland.
