🔗 Share this article

The federal appeals court has maintained a ban on sending state troops in Portland, Oregon, following a recent legal decision.

Judicial Panel Agrees to Rehear Case

The ninth circuit court of appeals decided on this week that it would rehear the case concerning the executive power with an expanded panel of 11 judges. The court also overturned a previous ruling from a smaller judicial group that had sided with the federal government.

Ongoing Dispute Over Troop Deployment

This order represents the most recent turn in a long-running court case over whether the administration has the authority and justification to send state military units in the city. Approximately two hundred troops have been in uncertainty since late September when the deployment effort was started in due to months of protests.

Differing Viewpoints

The federal government has argued that government employees at the ICE facility in south Portland were facing threats, while city and state officials maintain that local officers have command of the circumstances.

Contrary to characterizations of the city as “war ravaged”, residents have been posting videos of scenic paths and a thriving food scene, and planning activities such as an protest bicycle event against the “militarization of our city”.

Recent Legal Actions

The appeals court decision came after a US district judge in Portland issued two legal injunctions this period – one preventing the federal control of the Oregon national guard, and another stopping the use of any military personnel in Oregon, after attempts to circumvent the initial injunction by calling up out-of-state forces.

On Monday, the appeals court had temporarily suspended the initial decision – permitting control of 200 Oregon national guard – but the subsequent injunction remained in place, blocking the actual deployment of the troops.

Full Panel Consideration

The Tuesday decision means the matter will be heard “en banc” – with both rulings under consideration together – by a panel of 11 judges.

“This decision shows that the truth matters and that the courts are striving to ensure government responsibility. The founding document restricts the executive authority, and local populations cannot be treated as a training ground for unchecked federal authority,” stated the legal representative in a statement.

“The court is sending a definite signal: the executive leader cannot dispatch the military into American urban areas unnecessarily. We will continue protecting state legislation, principles, and autonomy as this case moves forward and our fight continues in the courts.”