Federal Judge Bars Trump's Troop Deployment in Portland, Oregon for Now
A federal judge in Oregon has dealt another blow to President Donald Trump's administration by blocking the deployment of National Guard troops to Portland until at least Friday. The decision comes after a three-day trial in which both sides argued over whether protests at the city's U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement building met the conditions for using the military domestically under federal law.
The ruling from U.S. District Court Judge Karin Immergut, who was appointed by Trump, found no credible evidence that the protests grew out of control before the president federalized the troops earlier this fall. In a 16-page filing late Sunday, Immergut said she would issue a final order on Friday due to the voluminous evidence presented at trial.
According to Immergut's ruling, most violence appeared to be between protesters and counter-protesters, with no evidence of "significant damage" to the immigration facility. The judge also stated that she found no credible evidence of "rebellion" or "danger of rebellion," which are two conditions set by Congress for deploying troops.
The decision is the latest development in weeks of legal back-and-forth in Portland, Chicago, and other U.S. cities as Trump's administration has moved to federalize and deploy the National Guard in city streets to quell protests. The city and state had sued to block the deployment, which was aimed at protecting federal personnel and property.
The ruling from Immergut follows a complex case that has been weeks in the making. During the trial, witnesses including local police and federal officials were questioned about the law enforcement response to the nightly protests at the ICE building. The demonstrations peaked in June, when Portland police declared one a riot. However, according to prosecutors, city police have been able to respond to the protests without needing military assistance.
The Trump administration had claimed that it needed troops because of staffing shortages and requests for more personnel that had yet to be fulfilled. However, witnesses testified that protesters were not violent and that most incidents involved property damage rather than serious injuries to federal personnel.
The decision from Immergut is temporary, with the final order expected on Friday. A higher appellate court order remains in effect, which would have barred troops from being deployed anyway. The appeals court's initial order, which paused deployment but not federalization of the National Guard, remains in place until a larger panel rehears the case.
The ruling has implications for other cities that have been targeted by Trump for military involvement, including Chicago, which filed a separate lawsuit on the issue. Democratic cities argue that the president's actions violate states' sovereignty and push back against what they see as an overreach of federal authority.
A federal judge in Oregon has dealt another blow to President Donald Trump's administration by blocking the deployment of National Guard troops to Portland until at least Friday. The decision comes after a three-day trial in which both sides argued over whether protests at the city's U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement building met the conditions for using the military domestically under federal law.
The ruling from U.S. District Court Judge Karin Immergut, who was appointed by Trump, found no credible evidence that the protests grew out of control before the president federalized the troops earlier this fall. In a 16-page filing late Sunday, Immergut said she would issue a final order on Friday due to the voluminous evidence presented at trial.
According to Immergut's ruling, most violence appeared to be between protesters and counter-protesters, with no evidence of "significant damage" to the immigration facility. The judge also stated that she found no credible evidence of "rebellion" or "danger of rebellion," which are two conditions set by Congress for deploying troops.
The decision is the latest development in weeks of legal back-and-forth in Portland, Chicago, and other U.S. cities as Trump's administration has moved to federalize and deploy the National Guard in city streets to quell protests. The city and state had sued to block the deployment, which was aimed at protecting federal personnel and property.
The ruling from Immergut follows a complex case that has been weeks in the making. During the trial, witnesses including local police and federal officials were questioned about the law enforcement response to the nightly protests at the ICE building. The demonstrations peaked in June, when Portland police declared one a riot. However, according to prosecutors, city police have been able to respond to the protests without needing military assistance.
The Trump administration had claimed that it needed troops because of staffing shortages and requests for more personnel that had yet to be fulfilled. However, witnesses testified that protesters were not violent and that most incidents involved property damage rather than serious injuries to federal personnel.
The decision from Immergut is temporary, with the final order expected on Friday. A higher appellate court order remains in effect, which would have barred troops from being deployed anyway. The appeals court's initial order, which paused deployment but not federalization of the National Guard, remains in place until a larger panel rehears the case.
The ruling has implications for other cities that have been targeted by Trump for military involvement, including Chicago, which filed a separate lawsuit on the issue. Democratic cities argue that the president's actions violate states' sovereignty and push back against what they see as an overreach of federal authority.
I'm like totally worried about the implications of this ruling 
. Deploying National Guard troops in cities without a real emergency can lead to some serious issues, you know? It's all about finding ways to manage stress and tension without resorting to military force 
. The fact that most violence was between protesters and counter-protesters, with no evidence of "significant damage" or "danger of rebellion," is pretty telling 
. I hope the city and state can find a way to resolve their issues without involving the military 
. Maybe we need to focus on building community and promoting healthy dialogue instead of relying on force 
?
so I gotta say, this judge is like totally getting it right! Like, Trump's trying to use the military to quell protests because he can't handle the fact that people are speaking out against his policies 
. Newsflash, dude: if you're not willing to listen to opposing views and have a respectful conversation about them, then maybe you shouldn't be in office.
. It's like, cities are trying to protect their own sovereignty and push back against the overreach of federal authority, but Trump's all like "Nope, I'm gonna use the military to do my bidding!" 
. Can't he just have a calm, rational conversation about these issues instead of resorting to authoritarian tactics? 
... i mean, i get where both sides are coming from but at the end of the day it's just people trying to make a point 
... the fact that we're even having to sue over something as basic as deploying national guard troops in city streets is wild 
... no credible evidence of chaos or harm done to people, just some property damage 
... can we all just try to calm down and find peaceful solutions instead of going toe-to-toe with the government 
?
. This is all just a big game of cat and mouse, folks. They're playing with fire, and we're just along for the ride...
The whole thing just feels so... complicated. Can someone pls explain it to me in a way that doesn't make my head spin? 
meanwhile all these protesters were just chillin outside the ICE building like "hey man dont wanna get arrested" and then they get maced or whatever i feel for them tbh. gotta wonder what's next though, like if cities start suing over every little thing 
especially when they're like karin immergut who just blocked trump's troops deployment 
. But at the same time, I get why the cities are fighting back - what happens when you just let the military do whatever? It's not like it's going to solve anything 
. What do you guys think? Should the President be more careful with how he uses the military or is this all just politics as usual 
it's just heartbreaking that we still live in a time where our government has to justify sending troops to quell protests. but i'm feeling so much hope right now that justice is being served... and let's keep supporting these cities as they stand up for what's right, even when it's hard 
. trump is just trying to protect his ppl & the facility in portland, and if that means deploying some troops, then so be it 
. maybe we need more security around those types of situations, but deploying troops? i don't think that's necessary 
. judge immergut seems pretty fair to me 
.
I guess that's a complex issue...
just another example of how out of touch the admin is with actual law enforcement, witnesses said city cops could handle the situation just fine... doesn't make sense to bring in troops when it's just property damage and no serious injuries to anyone 