Federal Judge Rules Trump Unlawfully Seized Oregon Guard Control
UPDATE: A federal judge in Oregon has just ruled that former President Donald Trump unlawfully seized control of the state’s National Guard units to manage protests in Portland. This urgent decision, issued on July 14, 2023, sharply limits the White House’s claimed authority to deploy National Guard troops against a state’s wishes.
In a detailed 106-page opinion, U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut stated that the deployment of approximately 200 Oregon National Guard members was unlawful. The ruling followed a three-day bench trial examining Trump’s actions, which included federalizing Guard troops from California and Texas for intervention at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility in Portland. Judge Immergut emphasized that the federal government failed to demonstrate any “rebellion or danger of rebellion” that justified such actions.
The judge concluded that local and state law enforcement were already “sufficient” to maintain order at the ICE facility, which had seen only temporary unrest. “The evidence demonstrates that these deployments exceeded the president’s authority,” Judge Immergut declared, reinforcing that the National Guard remains under state control unless legally federalized.
The case was brought forth by the State of Oregon and the City of Portland, later joined by California, challenging Trump’s unilateral decisions. Governor Tina Kotek criticized the federal actions as a “gross abuse of power,” and today’s ruling is seen as a validation of her stance.
Judge Immergut rejected Trump’s portrayal of Portland as “war-ravaged,” noting that most protests were peaceful and that the violence reported was minimal and did not obstruct ICE operations. The court’s findings discredited claims of an organized insurrection involving groups like “Antifa,” characterizing them as unsupported by evidence.
This landmark decision comes amid ongoing legal challenges regarding Trump’s deployment of National Guard troops, impacting how federal and state powers interact. Legal experts suggest that this ruling could set a significant precedent for the future of state and federal authority.
As this story develops, observers are keenly watching for potential appeals from the former president’s administration and further reactions from state officials. The ruling not only affects the political landscape in Oregon but also raises broader questions about federal powers in domestic affairs.
Stay tuned for more updates on this breaking news story as it unfolds.
