Oregon questions the deployment by the Trump administration of the California National Guard in Portland
The state of Oregon disputes the deployment by the Trump administration of the California National Guard in Portland after a judge has temporarily interrupted the plan to use the Oregon National Guard, the State Prosecutor General said on Sunday.
“What was illegal with the Oregon National Guard is illegal with the California National Guard,” said Prosecutor General Dan Rayfield at a press conference. “The judge’s order was not a minor procedural point so that the president bypassing like my 14 -year -old child when he does not like my answers.”
The State modified its initial complaint before the Federal District Court and filed a second temporary prohibition order to suspend the actions of the president.
The judge in the case ordered an accelerated audience at 10 p.m. HE on Sunday.
In response to the modified complaint, the White House spokesman Abigail Jackson, said in a statement: “The facts have not changed: President Trump exercised his legal power to protect federal assets and Portland after violent riots and attacks against the police.”
A hundred troops from the California National Guard have already arrived in Oregon and others are on their way, said Oregon Governor Tina Kotek, on Sunday.
“In the direction of the president, around 200 federal members of the National Guard of California are reassigned according to the Grand Los Angeles region in Portland, Oregon, to support American immigration and the application of customs and other federal functions, which exercises official tasks, including the application of federal law, and to protect federal goods,” said the spokesperson for Pentagon, Parnell, in a declaration.
The American district judge, Karin Immergut, granted a temporary prohibition order on Saturday preventing President Donald Trump from sending the Oregon National Guard to Portland, the largest city of the State, judging that the officials of the city and the State “succeed in order to succeed in their assertion according to which the president has exceeded his constitutional authority and violated the tenth amendment.”
Kotek said that the president’s decision to send California troops seemed to intentionally bypass the decision of Immergut, that the Trump administration said it would appeal.
“There is no need for military intervention in Oregon. There is no insurgency in Portland. No threat to national security. Oregon is our home, not a military target,” Kotek said in a statement on Sunday.
In recent weeks, Trump has ordered the deployment of federal troops in cities led by Democrats such as Chicago and Portland, arguing that military deployments are necessary to protect the staff and federal immigration goods in the midst of “violent protests” led by “internal terrorists”.
Anarchy described by the president is strongly disputed by the inhabitants who say that they do not want or do not need federal aid.
California Governor Gavin Newsom plans to continue the deployment of the troops of the National Guard of his State, he said in a statement.
“This is a breathtaking abuse of law and power,” he said.
The White House defended the President’s orders in a statement earlier on Sunday, saying that Trump “exercised his legitimate power to protect federal assets and staff in Portland after violent riots and attacks against law enforcement.”
“For once, Gavin Newscum is expected to stand up to citizens respectful of laws instead of violent criminals destroying Portland and cities across the country,” Jackson said in a previous email declaration in CNN, poorly spelled the name of the governor.
CNN contacted the California National Guard to comment.
Although the deployment of the California National Guard is technically not a violation of the decision of Immergut – because the order itself mentions that the Oregon National Guard – it is still illegal, according to Elizabeth Goitein, principal director of the Brennan Center Liberty and National Program program.
“The reasoning of the judge’s opinion is no doubt that Trump is doing now is illegal,” said Goitein. “No litigant acting in good faith would have thought that they were free to do something that so clearly violates the law under the court’s decision.”
The decision of Immergut – a person appointed by Trump – said that the president seemed to have federal the Oregon National Guard “the absent constitutional authority” and that the demonstrations in Portland “had not posed a” danger of rebellion “.” The judge said Oregon lawyers have shown “substantial evidence that protests in the installation of Portland ice were not considerably violent” leading to the president of the president.
While the judge noted that the recent incidents cited by the Trump administration of demonstrators competing with federal officers “are inexcusable”, it added “they are far from the type of incidents which cannot be managed by the regular forces of the application of laws”.
IMMERGUT has warned some of the arguments offered by the Trump administration “risks blurring the border between the civil and military federal power – to the detriment of this nation”.
Last month, a federal judge in California ruled that the Trump administration broke the law when it deployed thousands of federal national guard soldiers and hundreds of navies to remove the demonstrations against the actions of the ice in Los Angeles.
The decision prevented the troops from carrying out the application of the law in the state, but the White House appealed the decision.
IMMERGUT, in his opinion, said that the incidents in Portland are “categorically different” of the violence observed in Los Angeles when the federalized president the troops there.
“Neither outside the installation of Portland Ice nor elsewhere in the city of Portland, there was an illegal activity similar to what was going on in Los Angeles before June 7, 2025,” wrote the judge.
This story has been updated with additional information.
