The US Court of Appeals says Trump can take command of the Oregon National Guard, although their deployment is currently prohibited

✨ Check out this awesome post from PBS NewsHour – Politics 📖

📂 Category: Donald Trump news,National Guard,orgeon

✅ Main takeaway:

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — An appeals court on Monday blocked a lower court ruling barring President Donald Trump from taking command of 200 Oregon National Guard troops. However, Trump remains prohibited from actually deploying those forces, at least for now.

He watches: Oregon governor calls Trump’s actions an ‘abuse of power and a threat to our democracy’

U.S. District Judge Karen Emmergut, a Trump appointee, issued two temporary restraining orders earlier this month — one barring Trump from recalling troops until he can send them to Portland, and another barring him from sending any National Guard members to Oregon at all, after the president tried to evade the first order by deploying California troops instead.

The Justice Department appealed the first order, and in a 2-1 ruling Monday, a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the administration. The majority said the president was likely to succeed in his claim that he had the authority to federalize the forces based on a determination that he was unable to enforce the laws without them.

However, Immergut’s second order remains in effect, so no troops may be deployed immediately.

The Department said that because the legal reasoning underlying both temporary restraining orders was the same, the second order was also invalid, and the majority opinion also said that the two temporary restraining orders “rise or fall together.”

Shortly after Monday’s ruling, the Justice Department asked Immergut to immediately dissolve its second order, which would allow Trump to deploy troops in Portland. The Justice Department said it was not the role of the courts to question the president’s decision on when to deploy troops.

“The Ninth Circuit’s decision to stay the first TRO is a significant change in the law that clearly warrants dissolution of this court’s second TRO,” the administration’s lawyers wrote.

Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield, a Democrat, said he would request a broader appeals panel to reconsider the decision.

“Today’s ruling, if allowed to stand, will give the president unilateral authority to place Oregonian troopers on our streets with almost no justification,” Rayfield said. “We are on a dangerous path in America.”

The Justice Department did not respond to an email requesting comment.

Trump’s efforts to deploy National Guard troops in Democratic-led cities have faced legal challenges. A California judge ruled that his deployment of thousands of National Guard troops to Los Angeles violated the Posse Comitatus Act, a long-standing law that generally prohibits the use of the military in civilian policing, and the administration on Friday asked the US Supreme Court to allow the deployment of National Guard troops to the Chicago area.

Small, mostly nightly protests confined to one building have been taking place since June outside the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement building in Portland. Larger crowds, including counter-protesters and live broadcasts, appeared at times, and federal agents used tear gas to disperse protesters.

The administration said the troops are needed to protect federal property from protesters, and that having to send additional agents from the Department of Homeland Security to help guard the property means they are not enforcing immigration laws elsewhere.

Immergut previously rejected the administration’s arguments, saying the president’s claims about Portland being war-torn were “simply not connected to the facts.” But the appeals court majority — Ryan Nelson and Bridget Budd, both Trump appointees — said the president’s decision deserved more respect.

Bade wrote that the facts appear to support Trump’s decision “even if the president may be exaggerating the extent of the problem on social media.”

Judge Susan Graber, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, dissented. She urged her colleagues on the Ninth Circuit to “vacate the majority’s order before the illegal deployment of troops under false pretenses occurs.”

“In the two weeks leading up to the President’s September 27 social media post, there was not a single incident in which protesters disrupted enforcement of the laws,” Graber wrote. “It is difficult to understand how a small protest that causes no disturbances could meet the standard of a president being unable to enforce laws.”

Johnson reported from Seattle.

A free press is the cornerstone of a healthy democracy.

Support trustworthy journalism and civil dialogue.


💬 What do you think?

#️⃣ #Court #Appeals #Trump #command #Oregon #National #Guard #deployment #prohibited

By

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *