🔗 Share this article

The ninth circuit court has upheld a prohibition on deploying national guard in the Oregon city, following a recent legal decision.

Appeals Court Concurs to Rehear Legal Matter

The ninth circuit court of appeals ruled on this week that it would reexamine the case concerning the executive power with an larger group of 11 judges. The judicial body also vacated a earlier decision from a smaller judicial group that had sided with the federal government.

Legal Saga Over Troop Deployment

This legal directive represents the most recent turn in a protracted court case over whether the administration has the legal right and valid reason to send national guard forces in Portland. Approximately 200 federalized guard members have been in uncertainty since the end of September when the deployment effort was started in due to months of protests.

Conflicting Arguments

The administration has argued that federal officials at the ICE facility in south Portland were under attack, while local authorities maintain that municipal police have command of the circumstances.

In defiance of characterizations of the city as “war ravaged”, residents have been posting footage of lush hiking trails and a thriving food scene, and organizing events such as an Emergency Naked Bike Ride against the increased military presence.

Court Proceedings

The Tuesday ruling came after a US district judge in Portland issued two temporary restraining orders this month – one blocking the federal control of the Oregon national guard, and another prohibiting the use of any national guard troops in Oregon, after efforts to evade the first order by mobilizing out-of-state forces.

On the previous day, the ninth circuit panel had put the first ruling on hold – allowing command of state troops – but the second ruling remained in place, blocking the actual deployment of the troops.

En Banc Review

The latest ruling means the matter will be heard “en banc” – with both rulings under consideration together – by a panel of 11 judges.

“This ruling shows that the truth matters and that the judicial system are striving to hold this administration accountable. The constitution limits the president’s power, and local populations cannot be treated as a testing site for expansive government power,” stated the state attorney general in a statement.

“The judicial body is sending a clear message: the president cannot send the armed forces into US cities without cause. We will continue defending state legislation, values, and sovereignty as this case moves forward and our fight continues in the judicial system.”