Federal Judge Blocks Trump Administration’s National Guard Call-Up

On Saturday, a federal judge halted President Donald Trump’s effort to call up 200 Oregon National Guard troops for duty in Portland, saying the administration’s account of the ongoing disturbances was inaccurate.

U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut, a Trump appointee, issued the ruling, writing, “This is a nation of Constitutional law, not martial law.” She concluded that the decision to enlist Oregon’s Guard members rested on inaccurate assertions about nightly protests aimed at federal immigration authorities and facilities in the city. While the president described Portland as “war-ravaged,” local police reported that immigration-related demonstrations in the days before the announcement were small, manageable, and largely peaceful. “These incidents are inexcusable, but they are nowhere near the type of incidents that cannot be handled by regular law enforcement forces,” Immergut wrote.

Disagreeing with the court’s decision, the White House said President Trump lawfully moved to protect federal sites and officers in Portland after violent riots and assaults on police. Spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said the administration is confident a higher court will side with them. DHS offered no immediate comment.

Immergut’s order comes as the administration expands troop deployments over objections from local officials. On the same day, Trump directed National Guard units to Chicago despite opposition from Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, and he has sent troops to Los Angeles and Washington, D.C., where local authorities have filed lawsuits to stop the deployments.

Under federal law, the military generally may not perform domestic law-enforcement duties, but the president can deploy forces to protect federal property and personnel if civil unrest approaches rebellion or obstructs federal law enforcement. The administration appealed Immergut’s ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which previously restored the president’s authority to call up the Guard in Los Angeles after a federal judge in San Francisco ordered a halt. Immergut distinguished Portland’s circumstances, finding the protests far less severe and below the threshold required to federalize a state’s Guard.

She further warned that the administration had “made a range of arguments that, if accepted, risk blurring the line between civil and military federal power – to the detriment of this nation.” In assessing conditions on the ground, Immergut noted that protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement swelled in June but largely subsided after June 25; by late September, typical gatherings involved about twenty or fewer people. Even when larger, she said, events were effectively managed by local police coordinating with other agencies.

During a Friday hearing, Justice Department attorney Eric Hamilton argued that bouts of violence in September satisfied the legal standard for invoking presidential authority and that calling up a relatively small contingent — compared with thousands deployed in Los Angeles — imposed only a minimal burden on Oregon. Immergut acknowledged that presidential judgments are owed substantial deference but concluded that, even under that standard, the decision lacked good faith. The judge noted that “even ‘a great level of deference’ does not permit ignoring what’s happening on the ground.”