A federal judge in Portland, Oregon, has denied a request from U.S. President Donald Trump to immediately lift a block on deploying federalized National Guard troops to the city. Judge Karin Immergut said she will decide by Monday whether to lift or modify her earlier order.
The ruling came after a hearing on Friday, marking another chapter in a growing legal clash over Trump’s push to send military forces into cities led by Democrats. Similar disputes are ongoing in Washington, D.C., and Chicago, where court orders have also halted troop deployment.
Judge Immergut had previously issued two restraining orders stopping federal troops from entering Portland. These came in response to protests outside an Immigration and Customs Enforcement office that Trump’s administration described as a “war-like rebellion.” In her first order, Immergut ruled that Trump exceeded his authority by federalizing the Oregon National Guard, calling his justification “untethered to the facts.”
When Trump later tried to send troops from California and threatened to bring in more from Texas, Immergut viewed it as an attempt to bypass her ruling. She then issued a second order, halting troop deployment from any state to Portland.
Earlier this week, a three-judge panel from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals lifted her first order, though one Portland-based judge dissented strongly. However, since the federal government did not appeal her second order, the restriction remains active until Immergut decides otherwise.
At Friday’s virtual hearing, Immergut explained why she would not lift the order immediately. She said the appeals court had not addressed her concern that the government had attempted to evade her initial order. She also noted that the Ninth Circuit is now considering whether to rehear the earlier case before a larger panel of 11 judges.
Later that day, the Ninth Circuit temporarily paused the lifting of Immergut’s first order until next Tuesday evening. The decision means Trump cannot send troops to Portland for at least four more days.
Meanwhile, in Washington, D.C., another legal battle unfolded. District Judge Jia Cobb heard arguments from the D.C. attorney general’s office seeking to remove more than 2,000 National Guard members from the city’s streets. Trump had declared a “crime emergency” in the capital in August, despite Justice Department data showing violent crime at a 30-year low.
Within weeks, more than 2,300 Guard troops from eight states and D.C. were patrolling under federal command. The D.C. attorney general’s team argued that these deployments violate constitutional norms, warning that “our democracy will never be the same if these occupations are permitted to stand.”
Federal lawyers countered that Congress gave the president the power to control the D.C. National Guard and called the lawsuit a political move. Although the official emergency ended in September, over 2,200 troops remain on duty. Several states have announced plans to recall their Guard units by the end of November unless extensions are granted.
West Virginia, one of the states that sent troops to Washington, now faces its own legal challenge. The West Virginia Citizen Action Group claims Governor Patrick Morrisey exceeded his authority by deploying up to 400 Guard members. Morrisey’s office insists the action was lawful and supported by federal law.
Judge Richard D. Lindsay in Kanawha County heard arguments Friday but delayed a decision until November 3 to allow more discussion about the governor’s powers.
In Chicago, District Judge April Perry has extended her block on Guard deployment until her court case concludes or the Supreme Court intervenes. Government lawyers said they would continue to seek emergency approval from the Supreme Court to send troops.
The wave of lawsuits highlights deep divisions between federal and local governments over security control. For now, Judge Immergut’s order ensures that federalized troops will stay out of Portland, at least until early next week, as courts across the country weigh the limits of presidential power.
