🔗 Share this article

The ninth circuit court has upheld a ban on deploying national guard in the Oregon city, following a recent court ruling.

Appeals Court Agrees to Rehear Case

The ninth circuit court of appeals decided on Tuesday that it would rehear the case concerning the president’s authority with an expanded group of 11 judges. The judicial body also vacated a earlier ruling from a smaller judicial group that had sided with the federal government.

Ongoing Dispute Over Troop Deployment

This order represents the most recent turn in a long-running court case over whether the administration has the authority and valid reason to deploy national guard forces in the city. Approximately 200 federalized guard members have been in uncertainty since the end of September when the mobilization attempt was initiated in due to months of protests.

Conflicting Arguments

The federal government has argued that federal officials at the ICE facility in south Portland were under attack, while local authorities maintain that local officers have control of the circumstances.

Contrary to characterizations of Portland as a conflict zone, residents have been sharing videos of lush hiking trails and a thriving food scene, and organizing activities such as an protest bicycle event against the increased military presence.

Court Proceedings

The Tuesday ruling came after a federal judge in Portland enacted two legal injunctions this period – one preventing the federalization of the state troops, and another stopping the deployment of any military personnel in Oregon, after attempts to evade the first order by calling up troops from California.

On Monday, the appeals court had temporarily suspended the initial decision – allowing command of 200 Oregon national guard – but the second ruling remained in place, preventing the actual deployment of the troops.

Full Panel Consideration

The Tuesday decision means the issue will be heard “en banc” – with all decisions under review simultaneously – by a group of 11 judges.

“This ruling demonstrates that facts are important and that the courts are striving to ensure government responsibility. The founding document limits the president’s power, and local populations cannot be treated as a training ground for expansive government power,” said the state attorney general in a statement.

“The court is sending a definite signal: the president cannot dispatch the armed forces into US cities without cause. We will continue protecting Oregon’s laws, principles, and sovereignty as this legal proceeding moves forward and our fight continues in the judicial system.”