On Monday, October 20, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued an order overturning a lower court’s temporary restraining order blocking the Trump administration from deploying National Guard troops in Portland, Oregon.
In late September, President Trump federalized 200 members of the Oregon National Guard in an attempt to protect an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility. Protestors have gathered at this facility since June. Although some of the protests have been peaceful, other protests involved threats to federal law enforcement officers and the building. The Portland Police Bureau made 25 arrests at these protests between June 11 and 19. The Department of Homeland Security “was forced to close the facility for more than three weeks, from June 13 to July 7.”
Oregon Governor Tina Kotek rejected the Trump administration’s request to deploy National Guard members to Portland. After Secretary of Defense Hegseth issued a mobilization memorandum federalizing 200 members of the Oregon National Guard, the State of Oregon, the City of Portland, and the Portland Police Bureau filed a lawsuit alleging that such action was “ultra vires, and violated the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, the Administrative Procedure Act, the Posse Comitatus Act, and separation of powers.” The district court hearing the case granted a temporary restraining order enjoining the federal government from federalizing and deploying Oregon National Guard members.
The Ninth Circuit noted that it was bound by Newsom v. Trump, 141 F.4th 1032 (9th Cir. 2025). “[W]e held that neither the political question doctrine nor the statutory text precludes judicial review of the President’s decision to invoke [10 U.S. Code] § 12406 to federalize the National Guard. . . Thus Plaintiff’s claims are justiciable and the President’s decision to federalize the National Guard is subject to judicial review.” In Newsom, the Ninth Circuit also “concluded that courts may review the President’s determination ‘to ensure that it reflects a colorable assessment of the facts and law within a ‘range of honest judgment.”” The Court also held in Newsom that minimal interference in executing the law, in and of itself, is not enough to justify invoking § 12406.
The Ninth Circuit ultimately ruled that the Trump administration is likely to succeed on the merits since “[t]he President’s authority to federalize the National Guard is statutory, not constitutional.” Further, considering the totality of the circumstances, the Court ruled that “the President’s assessment of the situation in Portland – specifically, the threat to federal personnel and property, and the resulting inability to execute federal laws – ‘reflect a colorable assessment of the facts and law within a ‘range of honest judgment.”” Finally, because the Tenth Amendment “reserves to the States all rights and powers ‘not delegated to the United States by the Constitution,’” the Trump administration is likely to succeed on the merits since “the President lawfully federalized the National Guard as Congress authorized in § 12406(3).”
In response to the ruling, Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield said, “Today’s ruling, if allowed to stand, would give the president unilateral power to put Oregon soldiers on our streets with almost no justification. . . We are on a dangerous path in America.”
Additional Reading
9th Circuit rules that National Guard can deploy to Portland, NPR (October 20, 2025)
Order in State of Oregon, et al. v. Trump, et al. No. 25-6268 (9th Cir. 2025)
Opinion and Order Granting Motion for Temporary Restraining Order in State of Oregon et al. v. Trump et al. No. 2:2025cv01756 (D. Or. 2025)
Photo Credit: Citizen Kepler / Shutterstock.com