US judge temporarily blocks Trump administration from deploying national guard in Portland

A federal judge in Oregon on Saturday issued a temporary order blocking President Trump’s attempt to send 200 National Guard troops from Oregon to Portland while a legal challenge proceeds. 

The decision—handed down by U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut, whom Trump himself appointed—represents a stinging rebuke to the administration’s strategy of deploying military forces to cities governed by Democrats. 

Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield filed suit on September 28 seeking to block the deployment, arguing that Trump was overstating protest threats as a pretext to federalize the state’s Guard units. The state contended that recent demonstrations in Portland were small, non-violent, and well within the capacity of local law enforcement. 

At an emergency hearing, federal attorneys argued that radicals had besieged an ICE building, justifying the troop deployment. But counsel for Portland countered that there had been no violent confrontations with federal agents for months, and that Trump’s portrayal of the city as chaotic was detached from reality. 

Immergut questioned whether presidential social media posts should carry legal weight in deciding whether a military deployment is warranted. She pushed back on treating those posts as authoritative determinations. In her written order, she emphasized that although the president must receive deference in some circumstances, that deference cannot excuse ignoring facts on the ground.

The judge’s order, which runs at least through October 18, will stop the Oregon Guard’s deployment while the court evaluates whether the administration’s move is lawful. Oregon and Portland must argue by October 17 whether to extend the order further. 

In her opinion, Immergut warned that sending troops could escalate tension unnecessarily and found that the protests in Portland did not amount to rebellion or upheaval warranting military action. She also noted that Trump’s claim of a “war-ravaged” city lacked grounding in the present conditions. 

The judge’s ruling echoes broader legal challenges to Trump’s deployments of military forces to other Democratic-led cities—such as Los Angeles and Washington—where critics argue the moves infringe on states’ rights and violate prohibitions on domestic military involvement in law enforcement.

Source: REUTERS