A Trump-appointed federal judge just slammed the brakes on the 47th president’s plan to send National Guard troops into Portland, Oregon, over protests against federal immigration enforcement.
In a stunning turn of events, U.S. District Judge Karin J. Immergut has permanently blocked President Donald Trump’s attempt to deploy the National Guard to quell often-violent demonstrations outside an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility in Portland, ruling that the administration overstepped its legal authority.
These protests kicked off in early June, sparked by the administration’s tough stance on rounding up criminal unauthorized migrants.
Things got messy fast, with reports of unruly crowds, brawls, and clashes involving tear gas, rubber bullets, and pepper spray, especially when counter-demonstrators showed up to the scene.
By late September, President Trump called for 200 National Guard troops to restore order, but Oregon’s Democratic Governor Tina Kotek flat-out refused to activate them.
Not one to back down, the Trump administration moved to federalize Oregon’s National Guard soldiers, claiming the protests amounted to a rebellion and disrupted federal law enforcement.
Enter the States of Oregon and California, along with the City of Portland, which filed a lawsuit to stop this federal overreach in its tracks.
Last month, Judge Immergut, a 2018 Trump nominee, issued a preliminary injunction to halt the troop deployment, and after a three-day trial, she made her ruling permanent on a recent Friday.
In her hefty 106-page decision, the judge dismantled the administration’s arguments, finding no evidence of a rebellion or threat thereof, nor a credible inability to enforce federal laws without military intervention.
Immergut didn’t mince words, stating, “The evidence demonstrates that these deployments, which were objected to by Oregon’s governor and not requested by the federal officials in charge of protection of the ICE building, exceeded the president’s authority.”
Let’s unpack that— a judge picked by Trump himself is saying the president went too far, even when local leaders and federal officers on the ground didn’t ask for this kind of backup. If that’s not a wake-up call for conservatives worried about federal overreach, what is?
The judge also threw cold water on claims that Antifa operates as an organized group plotting against the government in Portland, further undermining the administration’s case.
Adding insult to injury, Immergut found testimony from ICE’s regional director about protest damage and disruptions to be less than convincing, weakening the narrative of chaos justifying military action.
Now, with federal lawyers vowing to appeal to the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, and an emergency appeal already filed with the Supreme Court on a similar Illinois case, the administration isn’t backing down. But let’s be real—going up against a judge who knows the law and isn’t swayed by political theater is no small hurdle.
For conservatives who champion law and order, this ruling stings, but it also raises a fair question: Should the federal government be muscling into state matters without an ironclad legal footing, even if the cause feels righteous? While the progressive agenda often fuels these protests, the principle of limited government—a cornerstone of conservative thought—might just side with the judge here, reminding us that power unchecked can cut both ways.
