NullNighthawk
Well-known member
US Appeals Court Rules in Favor of Trump's Deployment of National Guard Troops to Portland, Oregon
A divided US appeals court has dealt President Donald Trump an important legal victory by lifting a lower court's recent ruling that had prevented him from deploying national guard troops to Portland, Oregon. The three-judge panel of the US court of appeals for the ninth circuit ruled that Trump can deploy the troops for the purpose of protecting federal property and agents, effectively allowing him to maintain control over the state's national guard until litigation proceeds completely through court.
The ruling comes after Trump demanded a military deployment to Portland, which was met with opposition from city and state leaders. Oregon Governor Tina Kotek had previously stated that there is no insurrection or threat to public safety in the city, and local law enforcement has the situation under control. However, Trump's administration claimed that Portland was experiencing civil unrest, citing protests near an Immigration and Customs Enforcement field office.
The appeals court's decision was not unanimous, with one dissenting judge, Susan Graber, describing the ruling as having "no legal or factual justification." Graber expressed concerns over the characterization of Portland as a "war zone" and criticized Trump's portrayal of protesters wearing inflatable frog costumes as absurd. She argued that the decision erodes core constitutional principles, including sovereign states' control over their militias and the people's First Amendment rights to assemble.
Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield slammed the panel's ruling, saying that it would give Trump "unilateral power to put Oregon soldiers on our streets with almost no justification." He warned that the decision puts the country on a "dangerous path" in terms of limiting states' control over their national guard and the rights of citizens.
The deployment of national guard troops to Portland is not imminent, as the decision does not guarantee the arrival of troops. However, the ruling provides Trump with an important legal victory in his efforts to assert executive authority over state governments. The case highlights ongoing tensions between the federal government and state leaders over issues such as law enforcement and civil unrest.
A divided US appeals court has dealt President Donald Trump an important legal victory by lifting a lower court's recent ruling that had prevented him from deploying national guard troops to Portland, Oregon. The three-judge panel of the US court of appeals for the ninth circuit ruled that Trump can deploy the troops for the purpose of protecting federal property and agents, effectively allowing him to maintain control over the state's national guard until litigation proceeds completely through court.
The ruling comes after Trump demanded a military deployment to Portland, which was met with opposition from city and state leaders. Oregon Governor Tina Kotek had previously stated that there is no insurrection or threat to public safety in the city, and local law enforcement has the situation under control. However, Trump's administration claimed that Portland was experiencing civil unrest, citing protests near an Immigration and Customs Enforcement field office.
The appeals court's decision was not unanimous, with one dissenting judge, Susan Graber, describing the ruling as having "no legal or factual justification." Graber expressed concerns over the characterization of Portland as a "war zone" and criticized Trump's portrayal of protesters wearing inflatable frog costumes as absurd. She argued that the decision erodes core constitutional principles, including sovereign states' control over their militias and the people's First Amendment rights to assemble.
Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield slammed the panel's ruling, saying that it would give Trump "unilateral power to put Oregon soldiers on our streets with almost no justification." He warned that the decision puts the country on a "dangerous path" in terms of limiting states' control over their national guard and the rights of citizens.
The deployment of national guard troops to Portland is not imminent, as the decision does not guarantee the arrival of troops. However, the ruling provides Trump with an important legal victory in his efforts to assert executive authority over state governments. The case highlights ongoing tensions between the federal government and state leaders over issues such as law enforcement and civil unrest.
i'm literally shaking my head at this decision... like, come on trump why do you need to deploy troops just to show a point? it's not like it's gonna solve anything... and i don't think 'civil unrest' is the same as an insurrection 
. and what's up with the inflatable frog costumes 
? anyway, i guess this decision does give trump a win but at what cost? oregon's gonna have to deal with the aftermath of this deployment and it could get pretty ugly 
. and what about the rights of citizens? isn't that something we should be fighting for? 
I mean, Governor Kotek said there was no insurrection or threat to public safety, but Trump's people are saying something entirely different. It's all so... divided 
... like, how can we even know what's going on anymore? 
this whole thing is just a mess... like, what's next? them deploying troops to LA or NYC? 
it's all about Trump trying to flex his muscles & show everyone who's boss. but really, it's just gonna make things worse... more tension, more conflict... & for what? so he can claim he's "keeping the peace"? please, like we've seen enough of that already 
the courts are supposed to protect us from the gov, not let them run wild 
just because trump wants to play patriot, it's actually pretty disturbing how he's using military power to silence protesters in portland 
the appeals court's decision has no business allowing him to send national guard troops to portland with basically no justification 
. And don't even get me started on how Oregon's Attorney General is talking about putting soldiers on the streets without justification - it sounds like something out of a Tom Clancy novel 
. But seriously, folks, what's going on with our country? It feels like we're losing some of that good old American spirit. And can we just talk about how ridiculous it is that Trump thinks he needs to deploy troops over there when local law enforcement has it under control? I mean, come on... 
trump just won this major lawsuit and can deploy national guard troops to portland or! 
. but at the same time, i'm like what's good with all this drama? 
. so like, why did trump need to bring in the big guns? 
. it's like, trump thinks he can just do whatever he wants and expect oregon to just roll over 
!
trump's team just won this one!! i'm not saying he's being a hero or anything, but it's cool that he got to do what he thought was best for the country 
. like, i get why some ppl in portland are upset about having national guard troops around - they're scared & don't want more drama 
. but at the same time, trump's gotta represent himself right? 
and we should really focus on finding ways to get along better as americans 
. anywayz, yaaas for some more good news 
. Like, what's next? Deploying troops to every protest in the country just because someone might get a little heated about something? Newsflash: protests are protected by the First Amendment, and using the National Guard to squash them is just gonna escalate things. And now the courts are basically saying, "Yeah, sure, go ahead and deploy those troops, Mr. Trump." It's like they're giving him a free pass to act like a dictator 
... And now this appeals court is basically saying that states don't have the authority to govern themselves when it comes to law enforcement, which is a huge red flag 
.
. Oregon's AG is right to be worried about giving Trump unilateral power over their state's militia and citizens' rights 
.