Oregon sues Trump administration for deploying National Guard to Portland
The state of Oregon has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration for unlawfully deploying 200 National Guard troops to Portland. Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield and other state officials argue that the deployment was not due to any legitimate threat but was a politically motivated move under the pretense of law and order. The troops were sent following protests, some violent, targeting an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility.
The lawsuit claims that the deployment violates federal law, including the Constitution, which reserves police powers to the states and limits the president’s authority over state national Guard forces. It also cites precedents like the 1972 Supreme Court case *Laird v. Tatum* and laws such as the Posse Comitatus act, which restrict federal military involvement in civilian law enforcement.
Oregon officials emphasize that local authorities are capable of managing public safety without federal interference and reject the characterization of Portland as “war ravaged” or under siege. Governor Tina Kotek and Attorney General Rayfield describe the federal deployment as unnecessary and unlawful, infringing on Oregon’s sovereignty and constitutional rights. The lawsuit challenges the federalization of Oregon’s National Guard troops for purposes of domestic law enforcement, arguing that such use of the military is prohibited.
Oregon sues Trump administration for deploying National Guard to Portland
The state of Oregon has filed a lawsuit against President Donald Trump, claiming the president unlawfully deployed the National Guard in Portland, Oregon.
Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield said that sending 200 National Guard troops to his state was not due to any legitimate threat but was done so the president could exert his political strength “under the guise of law and order.”
President Donald Trump ordered the National Guard to Oregon after numerous protests targeting an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Portland, some of which have been reportedly violent. Trump ordered “all necessary troops” to Portland on Sunday.
“I am directing Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, to provide all necessary Troops to protect War ravaged Portland, and any of our ICE Facilities under siege from attack by Antifa, and other domestic terrorists,” Trump posted to his Truth Social on Saturday. “I am also authorizing Full Force, if necessary.”
PORTLAND MAYOR SAYS NUMBER OF NECESSARY TROOPS IN CITY IS ‘ZERO’ AFTER TRUMP ORDERS DEPLOYMENT
Rayfield, Oregon Solicitor General Benjamin Gutman, and other state officials filed the lawsuit. They cited that deploying such troops for law enforcement duties violated federal law.
“The ‘traditional and strong resistance of Americans to any military intrusion into civilian affairs’ has ‘deep roots in our history,’” read the lawsuit. “Our nation’s founders recognized that military rule — particularly by a remote authority indifferent to local needs — was incompatible with liberty and democracy. Foundational principles of American law therefore limit the President’s authority to involve the military in domestic affairs.”
The plaintiffs cited the 1972 court case Laird v. Tatum as evidence for their claim. They also claimed the Constitution prohibited the president from deploying such troops and that, typically, only Congress had the authority to do so.
“Those principles stem first from the U.S. Constitution, which reserves the general police power for the states while establishing civilian control over the military,” read the lawsuit. “It also affords Congress, not the President, the power ‘to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions.’”
“While Congress has delegated a portion of that power to the Executive, it carefully limited the President’s authority to exert control over a state’s National Guard—the modern term for the militia—to specific circumstances. And for over a century and a half, Congress has expressly forbidden federal military interference in civilian law enforcement,” noted the lawsuit.
“Oregon communities are stable, and our local officials have been clear: we have the capacity to manage public safety without federal interference,” said Rayfield. “Sending in 200 National Guard troops to guard a single building is not normal.”
Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek (D-OR) shared Rayfield’s sentiments. She also accused the president of violating federal and constitutional law, including the 10th Amendment to the Constitution and the Posse Comitatus Act, among other things.
“This is not necessary. And it is unlawful,” said Kotek. “There is no insurrection or threat to public safety that necessitates military intervention in Portland or any other city in our state.”
“Defendants have trampled on these principles by federalizing members of the Oregon National Guard for deployment in Portland, Oregon, to participate in civilian law enforcement,” read the lawsuit. “On September 28, 2025, the Secretary of Defense (now referred to as the Secretary of War) issued a memorandum calling into federal service 200 members of the Oregon National Guard.”
TRUMP ORDERS HEGSETH TO DEPLOY TROOPS TO PORTLAND
“Citing nothing more than baseless, wildly hyperbolic pretext — the President says Portland is a ‘War ravaged’ city ‘under siege’ from ‘domestic terrorists’ — Defendants have thus infringed on Oregon’s sovereign power to manage its own law enforcement activity and National Guard resource,” claimed the plaintiffs.
“The facts cannot justify this overreach,” the plaintiffs claimed in the lawsuit.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
