🔗 Share this article

The ninth circuit court has maintained a prohibition on sending national guard in Portland, Oregon, after a recent legal decision.

Appeals Court Concurs to Rehear Case

The ninth circuit court of appeals decided on this week that it would reexamine the case concerning the executive power with an expanded panel of 11 judges. The court also overturned a previous ruling from a smaller judicial group that had sided with the federal government.

Ongoing Dispute Over Troop Deployment

This order represents the latest development in a long-running legal battle over whether the administration has the authority and justification to send state military units in Portland. Approximately two hundred troops have been in limbo since the end of September when the mobilization attempt was started in due to months of protests.

Differing Viewpoints

The federal government has claimed that federal officials at the ICE facility in south Portland were under attack, while city and state officials assert that local officers have command of the circumstances.

In defiance of descriptions of the city as a conflict zone, locals have been posting videos of scenic paths and a thriving food scene, and organizing activities such as an Emergency Naked Bike Ride against the increased military presence.

Recent Legal Actions

The appeals court decision came after a US district judge in the city issued two temporary restraining orders this period – one blocking the federal control of the state troops, and another prohibiting the use of any military personnel in the state, after efforts to evade the first order by calling up out-of-state forces.

On the previous day, the appeals court had put the first ruling on hold – allowing control of state troops – but the subsequent injunction remained in place, preventing the physical sending of the troops.

En Banc Review

The Tuesday decision means the matter will be heard by the full court – with all decisions under review simultaneously – by a group of eleven justices.

“This ruling shows that facts are important and that the courts are striving to ensure government responsibility. The founding document restricts the executive authority, and local populations cannot be treated as a testing site for unchecked federal authority,” stated the state attorney general in a statement.

“The judicial body is sending a clear message: the executive leader cannot dispatch the military into US cities without cause. We will continue defending state legislation, principles, and sovereignty as this legal proceeding progresses and our fight continues in the courts.”