Appeals Court Temporarily Blocks Trump from Deploying Oregon National Guard Troops

Tue Oct 21 2025 09:43:35 GMT+0300 (Eastern European Summer Time)

In a split decision, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has put a temporary hold on a previous ruling preventing President Trump from taking control of Oregon National Guard troops intended for deployment, while keeping in place a restriction on their deployment.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that President Trump may have the authority to federalize Oregon National Guard troops but cannot deploy them yet. U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut had originally issued restraining orders to prevent Trump from calling up the troops amid legal disputes over his methodology and rationale for the deployment. Oregon's Attorney General plans to challenge the court's ruling as a warning against unilateral presidential power.

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — An appeals court on Monday temporarily barred President Donald Trump from deploying 200 Oregon National Guard troops, although it indicated he may yet have the authority to federalize them. The decision from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is significant as it represents the ongoing legal battles surrounding Trump's actions in Democratic-led cities.

The ruling comes on the heels of a lower court's injunction issued by U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut, which prohibited the President from both calling up troops and deploying them to Portland, amid concerns of misuse of military force for civilian affairs.

Despite the appeals court's ruling siding with Trump's administration on the first part of the injunction, it upheld Immergut's second restraining order that prevents immediate troop deployment.

The Justice Department is expected to seek the dissolution of the second order, arguing that it is beyond the courts to question a President's judgment on deploying troops based on law enforcement needs.

Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield vehemently criticized the ruling, claiming it could grant Trump unilateral power to position troops on Oregon streets without sufficient justification. In a statement, Rayfield warned of the potential dangers of this precedent for American democracy.

The Trump administration has faced extensive legal challenges regarding the deployment of National Guard units, with past cases revealing tensions around the Posse Comitatus Act, which curtails military usage for civilian law enforcement.

Although the administration defends the necessity of troops for protecting federal properties from protest-related risks, Immergut previously rejected those premises citing a lack of incidents warranting such action. Nonetheless, the appeals court's majority — both appointed by Trump — emphasized the need for deference to the President's decisions on these matters.

The court majority, while acknowledging Trump's exaggerated social media commentary about disturbances, indicated they aligned more with the national security arguments presented by the administration.

As protests around Portland have remained relatively small, with no significant disruptions reported recently, dissenting opinions, including that of Judge Susan Graber, have surfaced in the appeals court, emphasizing the questionable basis for military involvement.

This ruling has additional implications as the state's administration may respond to the court's decision by pushing for a broader judicial review in the coming days.