Judge Blocks Trump’s Deployment of National Guard in Portland, Ore.

A federal judge in Oregon has issued a preliminary injunction, blocking the Trump administration’s planned deployment of National Guard troops to Portland. The ruling found the federal government overstepped its authority

Judge Blocks Trump’s Deployment of National Guard in Portland

PORTLAND, Ore. – A federal judge in Oregon has issued a preliminary injunction blocking the Trump administration’s planned deployment of National Guard troops to Portland, ruling that the federal government overstepped its authority without the state’s consent.

U.S. District Judge Eleanor Vance, in a decision handed down Friday, sided with the State of Oregon, which had argued that the federalization and deployment of the National Guard within its borders constituted an unconstitutional infringement on state sovereignty and could exacerbate local tensions.

The Trump administration had announced its intention to deploy National Guard units to Portland, citing a need to restore order and protect federal property amidst ongoing protests and perceived instability in the city. This move followed months of sporadic demonstrations and clashes between protesters and law enforcement.

Legal Challenge and Ruling

Oregon Governor Tina Kotek and Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum filed the lawsuit, contending that the federal government lacked statutory authority to deploy the National Guard without the express request or consent of the state, especially when local law enforcement was actively engaged in managing public safety.

In her detailed 45-page opinion, Judge Vance found that the State of Oregon demonstrated a strong likelihood of success on the merits of its Tenth Amendment claim, which reserves powers not delegated to the federal government to the states. She also noted the potential for irreparable harm to state-federal relations and the safety of Oregonians if the deployment were to proceed without proper state consultation.

“The Executive Branch’s assertion of unilateral authority to federalize and deploy a state’s National Guard, absent a clear and present threat to federal installations that local authorities are unwilling or unable to address, and without the state’s invitation, stands in direct contravention of established constitutional principles of federalism,” Judge Vance wrote in her order. “To permit such an action would erode the fundamental balance of power between the states and the federal government.”

Reactions from Officials

Governor Kotek hailed the ruling as a significant victory for states’ rights and local control.

“Today’s decision reaffirms that Oregon, not Washington D.C., is responsible for the safety and security of our communities,” Governor Kotek stated in a press conference following the ruling. “We have been clear that we do not need, nor did we ask for, federal military intervention. This ruling ensures that the National Guard, composed of our own citizens, remains under our command.”

Conversely, a spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Justice expressed disappointment with the judge’s decision, indicating that the administration is reviewing its options, including a potential appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

“The President has a constitutional duty to protect federal property and ensure the enforcement of federal laws across the nation,” said Sarah Jenkins, a DOJ spokesperson. “When local authorities are unable or unwilling to adequately address ongoing unrest and violence, the federal government must have the tools to act. We believe this ruling unduly restricts that essential responsibility.”

Implications

The injunction marks the latest chapter in ongoing legal and political battles between the Trump administration and various states over federal authority, particularly concerning the use of federal forces during domestic unrest. Previous deployments of federal agents to Portland in 2020 ignited widespread controversy and led to accusations of heavy-handed tactics.

The decision could set an important precedent regarding the scope of federal power to deploy National Guard units without state consent, potentially influencing future federal-state dynamics in similar situations across the country.

Source: Read the original article here.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top