Appeals Court Gives Trump Control Over Oregon National Guard, Pauses Deployment
The judges wrote that “granting an administrative stay will best preserve the status quo.”
A three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit restored President Donald Trump’s control of the Oregon National Guard, but paused his ability to deploy them.
The move lifts U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut’s temporary restraining order against Trump’s federalization of the Oregon National Guard and the deployment of its members.
The administration appealed and requested an administrative stay from the 9th Circuit.
The judges wrote that “granting an administrative stay will best preserve the status quo.”
They noted that before Immergut’s temporary restraining order, the government federalized the Oregon National Guard, but hadn’t deployed them:
The Memorandum authorized federalization of the Oregon National Guard members. An administrative stay of the October 4 temporary restraining order will maintain the federalization of Oregon National Guard members, because that order prohibits implementation of the Memorandum. Additionally, the second temporary restraining order has not been challenged or appealed, and it prohibits the deployment of National Guard members in Oregon. Thus, the effect of granting an administrative stay preserves the status quo in which National Guard members have been federalized but not deployed.
The DOJ claimed that Immergut’s TRO “improperly impinges on the Commander in Chiefs supervision of military operations, countermands a military directive to officers in the field and endangers federal personnel and property.”
Oregon and Portland officials insisted the federalization and deployment “infringe on Oregon’s sovereign power to manage its own law enforcement activity and its own National Guard and cause economic and other harms to the city of Portland.”
[Featured image via YouTube]
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
“A three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit restored President Donald Trump’s control of the Oregon National Guard, but paused his ability to deploy them.”
In actuality, The 9th Circuit has given itself control of the Oregon National Guard!
When is Trump gonna man up and start ignoring these jedges?
Democrats are living for that day genius 🙄
It would indeed be an iteresting day. I personally want to see it
Short-term ignoring the rulings against him might look like a win, but this way (obeying and appealing these silly court orders) is getting Trump Supreme Court precedents cementing his powers – what is it, 20 or 21 straight wins there?
This is the way.
What is it about anarchy and chaos that the Democrats and those (including some Republicans as trial judge may nominally be) find so attractive?
The Republican trial judge might be afraid for his own family’s security.
Time for Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act. Presidents have used the Act numerous times throughout history. Eisenhower, JFK and LBJ used it to integrate public schools and universities. Surely enforcing immigration law, and protecting federal personnel and property exceeds the importance of school integration. As I have written before, Trump is actually timid. He only seems aggressive when compared to his poltroonish Republican predecessors. Should the Democrats have to face an actual aggressive adversary, one not afraid to wield his authority, they will really panic.
Lets start arresting mayors, governors, and rogue judges. Lincoln paved the way.
I don’t think Trump wants to go there yet – until the insurrection becomes much more serious. Invoking the IA is a double edged sword. He doesn’t want to go there until some Dem city goes into full blown rebellion, and not just localized unrest. Don’t worry, we will get there. It just takes patience. Chicago might be first, because Pritzker isn’t just a Dem politician – he is also a big Dem oligarch who controls NGOs.
The Insurrection Act would not allow him to arrest mayors, governors, or judges, since so far none of them have broken any laws. If any ever do break a law, the Insurrection Act would be unnecessary to arrest them.
The purpose of invoking the Insurrection Act would simply be to send troops where they’re needed. As Tom Cotton advocated in 2000. Had Trump acted then we might have seen a different result in that year’s election.
You don’t consider aiding and abetting people attacking federal law enforcement officers breaking the law? I’m pretty sure it is. And Pritzker, among other governors, seems proud of doing it. His, and others’ public statements are admissible as evidence.
Pretty sure they have broken the law, advocating violence against federal authorities. How many times do they have to do that before someone notices?
Sounds law-breaky to me. https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/10/watch-chicago-mayor-brandon-johnson-declares-rebellion-against/
In the end school integration did little to help blacks, destroyed city school systems, and over time our cities. I was there, most black students were not interested in learning. That is still the case today.
A state does have control of its law enforcement — so long as it does not interfere with federal law enforcement, violate the rights of the people, or fails to protect the rights of the people.
Oregon is interfering with federal law enforcement and failing to protect the rights of the people in the vicinity of federal buildings.
A state has no obligation to protect anyone.
True statement, as has been litigated at SCOTUS.
But if the gloves ever come off, and ICE agents start defending themselves, there are going to be dead violent protesters. What are the cops going to do then? Try to arrest the ICE agents? Good luck with that.
Over at INSTAPUNDIT now they have an Oregon National Guard Brigadier General saying that if Federalized his duty to protect Oregon demonstrators outweighs his Federal orders.
https://instapundit.com/749531/#disqus_thread
It is feeling downright Fort Sumter-ish out. Must be the Left wind blowing.
Subotai Bahadur
I guess another general is begging to be fired.
As a state officer, as far as I know only the governor can fire him.
No. When the guard is federalized and activated they fall under Federal UCMJ in the same way regular active duty troops do and the same system of punishment will be used. If the President federalizes and activates the Oregon National Guard and that idiot General decides to make a political stand he can be prosecuted. I’d say a Courts Martial starting with Article 296, Refusal To Perform Military Service, Article 341, Incitement to Disregard Military Orders and Article 329 which deals with officers breach of liability to perform military service for a start with many more in the wings.
In non wartime or when a state of emergency is not declared I believe the maximum penalty that could be imposed would be 3 years confinement unless he is charged with Article 347 which the court can increase confinement to 5 years, reduction in rank to the last rank held when good conduct was demonstrated and dishonorable discharge with forfeiture of all pay and allowances. The death penalty is also on the table but since this is not a time of war it would not be applied.
Interestingly, a retired officer still falls under USMJ. He/She can be reactivated and subjected to Military Courts.
You are wrong. The Adjutant General is NOT a federal officer. He is a state officer, responsible only to the governor. When the Guard is federalized it is not under his command. Which is exactly what he told the legislature. If the Guard is federalized he will not be doing anything at all, because he will not be in charge.
From what I read, Brigadier General Gronewold, the Adjutant General of Oregon, was commissioned in the U.S. armed forces following his graduation from West Point in 1996. Consequently, it appears that he would be subject to the UCMJ and thus subject to federal court martial should such grounds arise.
That said, it’s possible that there is something I’m missing from all of this.
Fired
When, and by whom? I’m not seeing anything about that anywhere. As far as I know only the governor could fire him, and she has no reason to.
The President or Secretary of Defense. Any superior to him could remove him from duty.
No, they could not. They are not superior to him. The only person superior to him is the one who appointed him, the governor.
You are wrong, Milhouse. If the guard is activated by the Federal Government all troops fall under Federal UCMJ like any other active duty troops. Sorry you don’t like it but that is correct.
Do Brigadier Generals in the National Guard operate under the uniform code of military justice? We might be finding out.
They do. If federalized, they absolutely do.
They absolutely do as you say. Milhouse doesn’t like it but that is the way it is.
No, he didn’t say that.
He said if federalized the troops would no longer be under his command, so his orders would be irrelevant.
And he said they would follow lawful orders. On Sep-29 he wrote to the troops: “I know some of you may have strong feelings about this mission. That’s Okay. You are citizens first, but you’re also service members who took an oath to support and defend the Constitution and follow the orders of the President and the Governor. That oath doesn’t come with an asterisk that says, ‘Only when I agree with the mission.’”
He also said that by serving this mission they would be protecting protesters as well as everyone else. Which is obviously true, in the sense that those protesters are Oregonians, and are thus protected by putting down insurrections, even if they are themselves participating in those insurrections.
This is where is gets interesting. The troops would be activated and placed under an active duty chain of command but that General could also be activated and placed in charge of them. In any regards, anything he says or does could be subject to federal jurisdiction.
A politician with a star has made his voice heard.
Under the current administration any service member whether active duty, national guard or reserves is playing with fire if they decide to grandstand.
While the judicial stuff plays out, maybe the Guard can conduct some ‘training exercises’ right next to the Federal Buildings.
The orchestrated Antifa unrest is going to get more serious. Right now it is a sideshow since the big action is the Dem filibuster of the CR that shut down the government. Once the government reopens (could be a long time), expect them to amp it up to 11. Expect Antifa to hit ICE with biological weapons designed to start a new pandemic. Remember, they have the universities, and plenty of virology grad students must be with Antifa.
What’s enraging about this is that both Oregon and Portland could prevent the deployment of the NG by using their own police forces to provide meaningful protection to the federal facilities and officers. This situation is entirely the product of their willful effort to interfere with federal LE operations. The from of resistance to the federal government’s obligation to uphold the law may be passive, but it’s no less willful and no less interference for being so.
“No, no.. Mr Trump you are definitely and one hundred percent in charge of the National Guard, but you can’t use them.”
Did I understand that correctly?
Pretty much. Judge Karen denied he even had the right to take charge of the National Guard and the 9th circuit told her to shut up and go sit in the corner but upheld the pause on his ability to deploy troops.
Of course they did.
It’s like they put the National Guard in an HOA — or better yet, on the National Register.
“You own it, but you can only do what we say you can with it.”
This result makes sense – it maintains the status quo ante. But the original lower court decision did not. The judge stated that deference is required to the President’s Article II powers, but essentially that the President’s actions were essentially arbitrary and capricious, because there were no facts on the record to support it, and indeed, there was no danger to or impedance of ICE. Which is patently absurd, since there had not, at that point (for a PI), not been any formal fact finding that gave both parties a chance to introduce their own evidence and challenge the evidence of te opposing party.
Moreover, by action, both courts gave deference to the courts, not the President, in these finding. That is, the President has to prove the validity of the use of his powers, rather than the other way around.
There were two separate TRO’s by the district court, issued a couple days apart.
DOJ only appealed one, and got a win on it.
The other TRO remains in force because it wasn’t apoealed. Hopefully, the word “YET” is the key here.
Exactly. “Additionally, the second temporary restraining order has not been challenged or appealed, and it prohibits the deployment of National Guard members in Oregon. Thus, the effect of granting an administrative stay preserves the status quo in which National Guard members have been federalized but not deployed.”
I think that the DOJ didn’t think a court would rule that the NG could be activated but not used. That makes no sense and a civilian court has no say on how federal active duty troops are used. This will be thrown out.
The Court is trying to split the baby with this one and hopes a higher court will step in. What they are saying is that the Federal Government has the right to activate the Guard but since they had not been deployed yet they can’t take the next step which is absurd. I assume by their logic that if the troops had already been sent to Portland then the court would have affirmed the Administrations right to do it.
A civilian court, any civilian court, has no say in how military troops are deployed. This falls squarely under Executive Branch authority and The Commander In Chief. The Legislative Branch can, I think, determine if they can be deployed, what constitutes War etc but it gets pretty dicey. Congress has given the President great latitude in deploying troops but reserved the right to review that deployment if combat is waged without a formal declaration of war.