A divided federal appeals court ruled on Monday that President Trump has the authority to send members of the National Guard to Portland, Oregon. In the majority opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit stated, “After considering the record at this preliminary stage, we conclude that it is likely that the President lawfully exercised his statutory authority.” This ruling raises questions about its immediate impact on the ground in Portland.
The Ninth Circuit’s decision only pertains to one of the two temporary restraining orders issued earlier this month by U.S. District Court Judge Karin Immergut. These orders were meant to block deployments from both Oregon and other states. Judges Ryan Nelson and Bridget Bade, who wrote the majority opinion, noted that both of Immergut’s restraining orders “rise or fall together” since they are based on the same legal rationale.
In a dissenting opinion, Judge Susan Graber expressed her disagreement, indicating that the Trump administration did not challenge the second restraining order, which remains in effect. “The government will remain barred from deploying the National Guard,” Graber emphasized.
Following the appeals court's decision, the U.S. Department of Justice urged Judge Immergut to allow for the deployment of the National Guard by requesting that she “dissolve” her second restraining order. The appeals court is also contemplating whether a larger panel of judges should reexamine the case, a move that city and state officials are advocating for.
Shortly after the ruling, a spokesperson for the United States Northern Command, which oversees federalized guard soldiers, confirmed awareness of the court's ruling but stated that soldiers in Portland “are not conducting any operational activities at this time.” Oregon Governor Tina Kotek reiterated that, “until the district court acts on the second TRO, National Guard members from Oregon or other states cannot be deployed.”
Despite the ongoing uncertainty, officials at the White House praised the appeals court’s decision, arguing that it affirms the lower court’s ruling was “unlawful and incorrect.” Abigail Jackson, a White House spokesperson, stated, “As we have always maintained, President Trump is exercising his lawful authority to protect federal assets and personnel following violent riots that local leaders have refused to address.”
This ruling follows a series of authorizations by President Trump to deploy National Guard troops to various American cities, including Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., and Chicago. Trump has justified these deployments as necessary for protecting the work of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents and for reducing crime.
Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield expressed serious concerns about the ruling, stating, “Today’s ruling, if allowed to stand, would give the president unilateral power to put Oregon soldiers on our streets with almost no justification. We are on a dangerous path in America.”
On October 16, a separate federal appeals court upheld an earlier district court ruling in Illinois, which temporarily blocked the federalization and deployment of the National Guard there, prompting the Trump administration to seek intervention from the Supreme Court.
The Trump administration federalized 200 members of the Oregon National Guard on September 28, following the president's characterization of Portland as “war ravaged” and “under siege from attack by Antifa and other domestic terrorists.” This portrayal has been disputed by local officials, residents, and journalists who describe Portland as thriving.
Oregon Governor Tina Kotek countered Trump’s narrative, stating, “We had thousands of people on the streets of Portland for the Portland Marathon. The city is beautiful. The city is thriving.”
In court documents, the federal government argued that the National Guard is necessary to protect an ICE facility in Portland, which has been the site of protests since June. They claimed that protesters had assaulted federal officers with various projectiles and incendiary devices, resulting in injuries.
Conversely, attorneys representing the city of Portland and the state of Oregon countered that protests have remained small and largely peaceful for months. Assistant Chief Craig Dobson of the Portland Police Bureau stated that the protests have never been so severe that local law enforcement could not manage them. He noted that “the nightlife in Portland’s entertainment district has warranted greater PPB resources than the small, nightly protests in front of the ICE facility.”
The legal battle intensified on October 4, when Judge Immergut granted a temporary restraining order that prevented the federal government from deploying the National Guard to Portland. She stated that the Trump administration lacked a legitimate basis for federalizing the National Guard, as the protests had been “generally peaceful” and did not impede federal law enforcement’s duties.
Immergut pointed out that the administration cited only a few incidents of clashes with protesters before the National Guard was federalized, describing them as insufficient justification for such a significant measure. Following her ruling, President Trump sent 200 federalized California National Guard members to Oregon and authorized additional deployments from Texas.
In its appeal to the 9th Circuit, the Trump administration argued that Judge Immergut had “impermissibly second-guessed the Commander in Chief’s military judgments.” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt criticized the judge’s opinion, suggesting it was disconnected from reality and the law, reaffirming that the president was exercising his authority as Commander in Chief.
This is a developing story, and further updates will be provided as new information emerges.
