In a legal clash that tested the power of the presidency, a U.S. District Court judge blocked the Trump administration’s attempt to deploy the National Guard to Portland, Oregon, last year. Judge Karin Immergut ruled that the administration lacked a lawful basis to federalize troops, concluding that the city’s protests did not justify a military response.
A Courtroom Showdown Over Executive Power
The conflict began when President Donald Trump announced via Truth Social that he intended to federalize and deploy the Oregon National Guard to the city. Administration figures described southern border crossings as an “invasion.” Pointing to an infrequently utilized federal statute, Justice Department lawyers argued that the president had the legal backing to send National Guard units into Portland to address a foreign invasion, put down a rebellion, or enforce federal laws, concluding he possessed “undisputed authority” for the deployment.
City and state officials, however, pushed back against the deployment. Senior Deputy City Attorney Caroline Turco told OPB that the administration’s legal position was ultimately frightening, noting that they were not war-ravaged. The resulting three-day trial oversaw a test of federal power.
ICE facilities are federal property conducting a federal mission of immigration enforcement that protects the lives and livelihoods of 300 million American citizens.The President has undisputed authority under both statute and the Constitution to deploy troops, stationed in any…
If things had gone the other way, and the judge had said ‘It’s OK to bring the military in, it’s OK to federalize the National Guard’ — I think things would have looked very different. And that almost happened. — Juliet Stumpf, law professor at Lewis and Clark. Juliet Stumpf
The Human Cost of Immigration Enforcement
The tension on the streets was fueled by the administration’s immigration policies during the president’s second term. With the president ramping up border controls and rolling back longstanding legal protections that had previously allowed immigrants to stay in the nation, the consequences trickled down to everyday people like Jackie Merlos. A Portland resident with a pending U visa application — a humanitarian visa given to people who were victims of crimes — Merlos and her four children, who are all U.S. citizens, were detained by Customs and Border Protection officials last summer.
While the children were eventually freed, Merlos spent roughly four months at the Northwest ICE Processing Center in Tacoma, Washington, while her husband was quickly detained and deported to Honduras. Her experience became a focal point while stories like hers fueled the anti-deportation protests across the country. These demonstrations outside the Portland ICE facility saw property damage and violence spike during the first “No Kings” rally in June, though protest numbers dwindled in August and September. Judge Immergut wrote in her 106-page opinion that the protests had been predominantly peaceful, with only isolated and sporadic instances of relatively low-level violence, and that the protests could be effectively managed by the Portland Police Bureau.
The Ongoing Legal Fallout
Although the court checked the president’s authority, the legal challenges continue. Merlos is a lead plaintiff in a class action lawsuit accusing the Trump administration of unlawfully disregarding U visas, and she is exploring filing a personal injury lawsuit related to her detention. Litigation on multiple fronts included one challenge filed by demonstrators and another initiated by individuals living in an apartment building situated opposite the Portland ICE installation, both contending that the federal government’s handling of the demonstrations infringed upon their constitutional rights.
The case serves as a test of federal power. By ruling against the deployment, the court addressed the administration’s successful deployment of National Guard forces to Los Angeles, Memphis and Washington, D.C., along with threats to send troops to cities like Portland and Chicago. For now, the legal challenges continue in the federal court system.
