Trump Management Appeals Ruling Blocking National Guard Deployment to Portland
The Trump administration has appealed a federal judge’s ruling that prevents the deployment of National Guard troops to Portland, Oregon. The appeal was filed Friday with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The case stems from a dispute between Oregon, the city of Portland, and the Trump administration regarding protests outside the city’s ICE facility. In September, President trump federalized 200 Oregon National Guard troops, intending to deploy them to portland, describing the city as “War ravaged.” Oregon and Portland later filed a lawsuit challenging this action.
Judge Immergut initially issued temporary restraining orders and a preliminary injunction preventing the troop deployment. On November 7th, she issued a permanent ruling maintaining the status quo – keeping the National Guard troops federalized but not deployed.
The administration argues the troops are necessary to protect federal property from “violent” protesters. However, Immergut found that “the facts on the ground” demonstrated that protests, even at their peak in June, did not impede federal agents from enforcing immigration laws.
White House spokesperson Adigail Jackson released a statement following the appeal: “The facts haven’t changed. Amidst ongoing violent riots and lawlessness, that local leaders have refused to step in to quell, President trump has exercised his lawful authority to protect federal officers and assets. President Trump will not turn a blind eye to the lawlessness plaguing American cities and we expect to be vindicated by a higher court.”
Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield responded to the appeal filing, stating, “The district court’s ruling made it clear that this administration must be accountable to the truth and to the rule of law.”
Lewis & Clark College law professor Tung Yin noted that reversing Immergut’s ruling would be challenging now that the trial has concluded.He explained that the administration would need to establish a legal precedent asserting the president’s determination is conclusive when claiming an inability to enforce federal law.
The 9th Circuit will hear the appeal before a panel of three judges. The losing party can then request a review by an 11-judge panel of the appeals court.
Adding to the complexity, the 9th Circuit previously paused a separate Trump administration effort to deploy troops to Oregon on October 28th, following Immergut’s initial temporary restraining order. While oregon and Portland lost their initial appeal before a three-judge panel, they were granted a hearing before the 11-judge panel. This separate appeal remains active, a situation Professor Yin found puzzling given the expiration of the original temporary restraining order, suggesting it should technically be dismissed as moot.
