🔗 Share this article

The ninth circuit court has upheld a ban on sending national guard in Portland, Oregon, following a recent legal decision.

Appeals Court Agrees to Rehear Case

The federal appeals court ruled on this week that it would reexamine the legal dispute concerning the president’s authority with an larger group of eleven justices. The judicial body also vacated a previous ruling from a smaller judicial group that had sided with the administration.

Legal Saga Over Troop Deployment

This order represents the latest development in a protracted legal battle over whether the administration has the authority and justification to deploy national guard forces in Portland. Approximately two hundred troops have been in limbo since late September when the deployment effort was initiated in due to ongoing demonstrations.

Differing Viewpoints

The administration has argued that federal officials at the immigration center in south Portland were facing threats, while local authorities assert that municipal police have control of the situation.

In defiance of descriptions of Portland as a conflict zone, residents have been sharing footage of lush hiking trails and a thriving food scene, and planning activities such as an protest bicycle event against the increased military presence.

Recent Legal Actions

The appeals court decision came after a US district judge in Portland issued two temporary restraining orders this month – one blocking the federal control of the state troops, and another prohibiting the use of any national guard troops in Oregon, after attempts to evade the first order by mobilizing out-of-state forces.

On the previous day, the appeals court had put the first ruling on hold – allowing command of 200 Oregon national guard – but the second ruling remained in place, blocking the physical sending of the forces.

En Banc Review

The latest ruling means the matter will be heard “en banc” – with all decisions under consideration simultaneously – by a panel of 11 judges.

“This ruling demonstrates that the truth matters and that the judicial system are working to ensure government responsibility. The constitution limits the president’s power, and local populations cannot be treated as a testing site for expansive government power,” stated the legal representative in a statement.

“The judicial body is sending a definite signal: the executive leader cannot dispatch the armed forces into US cities without cause. We will continue defending state legislation, principles, and autonomy as this legal proceeding moves forward and our legal battle continues in the judicial system.”