US Judge Rules Trump Unlawfully Ordered National Guard to Portland, Oregon
Federal judge blocks Trump's use of military force in American cities.
In a significant legal setback for the administration of US President Donald Trump, a federal judge has ruled that Trump unlawfully ordered National Guard troops to Portland, Oregon.
This ruling marks the first permanent block on Trump's attempts to deploy military forces to quell protests against immigration authorities, an action he is also pursuing in Democratic-led Los Angeles, Chicago, and Washington, D.C.US District Judge Karin Immergut made the ruling on Friday, making it the first to permanently block Trump's use of military force in this context.
Her interim order had previously prevented the deployment of National Guard troops to Portland.
Immergut, a Trump appointee, determined that the administration lacked legal grounds to claim rebellion or the inability to enforce federal law due to protests in Portland.The judge highlighted that while there was occasional interference with federal officers, it was minimal and did not significantly impede the enforcement of immigration laws.
This ruling is notable as it marks a sharp break with long-standing norms against deploying troops on US soil for domestic unrest.The case is expected to be appealed by the Trump administration, potentially reaching the Supreme Court.
The City of Portland and Oregon Attorney General's Office had sued in September, arguing that the Trump administration was exaggerating violence to justify sending in troops under a law intended for cases of rebellion or invasion.During the trial, differing narratives emerged: the Justice Department described scenes of violent turmoil overwhelming federal agents, while lawyers for Oregon and Portland portrayed isolated incidents of violence effectively managed by local police.
Immergut concluded that the reported violence was limited in scale, sporadic, disorganized, and had largely subsided before Trump's order to deploy National Guard troops in late September.The ruling adds to ongoing debates about the appropriate use of military powers in American cities.
Democrats argue that Trump is abusing these powers meant for emergencies such as invasion or armed rebellion.
The Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals is currently considering an appeal from the administration related to this issue.
This ruling marks the first permanent block on Trump's attempts to deploy military forces to quell protests against immigration authorities, an action he is also pursuing in Democratic-led Los Angeles, Chicago, and Washington, D.C.US District Judge Karin Immergut made the ruling on Friday, making it the first to permanently block Trump's use of military force in this context.
Her interim order had previously prevented the deployment of National Guard troops to Portland.
Immergut, a Trump appointee, determined that the administration lacked legal grounds to claim rebellion or the inability to enforce federal law due to protests in Portland.The judge highlighted that while there was occasional interference with federal officers, it was minimal and did not significantly impede the enforcement of immigration laws.
This ruling is notable as it marks a sharp break with long-standing norms against deploying troops on US soil for domestic unrest.The case is expected to be appealed by the Trump administration, potentially reaching the Supreme Court.
The City of Portland and Oregon Attorney General's Office had sued in September, arguing that the Trump administration was exaggerating violence to justify sending in troops under a law intended for cases of rebellion or invasion.During the trial, differing narratives emerged: the Justice Department described scenes of violent turmoil overwhelming federal agents, while lawyers for Oregon and Portland portrayed isolated incidents of violence effectively managed by local police.
Immergut concluded that the reported violence was limited in scale, sporadic, disorganized, and had largely subsided before Trump's order to deploy National Guard troops in late September.The ruling adds to ongoing debates about the appropriate use of military powers in American cities.
Democrats argue that Trump is abusing these powers meant for emergencies such as invasion or armed rebellion.
The Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals is currently considering an appeal from the administration related to this issue.
