An appeals court ruled Wednesday that the Oregon National Guard could remain under federal control — but stopped the troops from being mobilized into Portland until the panel was able to hear oral arguments later this week.
“Thus, the effect of granting an administrative stay preserves the status quo in which National Guard members have been federalized but not deployed,” the panel wrote in its decision.
The three-judge panel placed a temporary stay on the case until it could hear arguments on whether to grant a full hold, or stay, based on the merits of the case.
The appellate panel is set to hear arguments Thursday at 9 a.m. PT on the federal government’s motion to pause a federal judge’s temporary restraining order issued Sunday.
Trending
The legal saga began Saturday when the federal district judge Karin Immergut issued a temporary restraining order blocking Trump’s deployment of Oregon National Guard troops into Portland for 14 days.
In her 31-page ruling, Immergut found that the Trump administration lacked legal justification to federalize National Guard troops, noting the lack of verifiable threats to Portland.
“Defendants have made a range of arguments that, if accepted, risk blurring the line between civil and military federal power — to the detriment of this nation,” the ruling reads.
Immergut filed a second injunction Monday after Trump attempted to deploy California National Guard troops to Portland. In her second ruling, Immergut said she was concerned by the move, saying it was carried out “in direct contravention” of her earlier decision.
The White House then appealed the ruling to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, asking the panel to place a hold on Immergut’s stay on an “emergency timeframe.” The Trump administration argued that the judge had “impermissibly second-guessed the Commander in Chief’s military judgments.”
California Attorney General Rob Bonta also sent a letter to the appeals court, The Oregonian reported, asking it to lift its hold on a September injunction barring the use of federalized California National Guard troops in Los Angeles.
“Although defendants appear to have changed their plans and kept some number of troops in California, their actions show they no longer have any basis for suggesting irreparable harm here,” Bonta wrote. “Defendants plainly have no pressing need for the troops in Los Angeles if they are willing to send all or most of them to Portland.”
Bonta went on to write that the Trump administration’s transfer of California National Guard troops to Portland was a clear effort to evade Immergut’s first restraining order that barred the deployment of Oregon National Guard troops into Portland.
Bonta called Trump’s maneuver “a remarkable and unprecedented effort to circumvent a judicial order and undermine the rule of law.”
Author
