🔗 Share this article

The federal appeals court has upheld a ban on sending state troops in Portland, Oregon, following a recent court ruling.

Judicial Panel Concurs to Rehear Case

The federal appeals court decided on Tuesday that it would rehear the legal dispute concerning the president’s authority with an larger group of 11 judges. The judicial body also overturned a earlier ruling from a three-judge panel that had supported the administration.

Ongoing Dispute Over Troop Deployment

This order represents the most recent development in a protracted court case over whether the former president has the authority and justification to send national guard forces in the city. Approximately two hundred troops have been in limbo since late September when the deployment effort was started in response to ongoing demonstrations.

Conflicting Arguments

The federal government has argued that government employees at the ICE facility in south Portland were under attack, while city and state officials assert that municipal police have command of the circumstances.

Contrary to characterizations of Portland as a conflict zone, locals have been posting videos of scenic paths and a thriving food scene, and organizing events such as an Emergency Naked Bike Ride against the “militarization of our city”.

Court Proceedings

The appeals court decision came after a federal judge in Portland enacted two temporary restraining orders this period – one blocking the federalization of the Oregon national guard, and another stopping the use of any national guard troops in Oregon, after attempts to evade the initial injunction by mobilizing troops from California.

On Monday, the appeals court had put the first ruling on hold – permitting command of state troops – but the second ruling remained in place, blocking the physical sending of the troops.

Full Panel Consideration

The latest ruling means the matter will be heard “en banc” – with both rulings under review simultaneously – by a group of eleven justices.

“This decision shows that the truth matters and that the judicial system are striving to ensure government responsibility. The constitution restricts 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 judicial body is sending a definite signal: the president cannot dispatch the armed forces into American urban areas without cause. We will continue protecting state legislation, principles, and autonomy as this case progresses and our legal battle continues in the courts.”