A federal judge in Oregon has again sided against the Trump administration’s efforts to federalize and deploy the National Guard in Portland, signaling that a final ruling could strike down the president’s authority to do so altogether.
U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut, a Trump appointee, issued a sharply worded order Sunday that extended a temporary block on the federalization of Oregon’s National Guard. She wrote that even giving the president “a great level of deference” did not excuse what she called a lack of credible evidence that the protests outside Portland’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility had reached a level requiring military intervention.
“Applying a great level of deference to the President’s determination,” Immergut wrote, “this Court nonetheless concludes that the President’s invocation of Section 12406 was likely not made in the face of an emergency.” The statute, 10 U.S. Code § 12406, allows a president to call up the Guard when regular forces are unable to enforce federal law. But Immergut said the record showed the opposite: that the situation in Portland was relatively calm by the time Trump issued the order.
The judge noted that violence around the ICE facility had peaked in early June and quickly subsided. “The protests between June 15 and September 27, 2025, were generally uneventful,” she wrote, describing only “occasional interference” with federal property. She added that senior officials with the Federal Protective Service (FPS) were “surprised to learn” of Trump’s order and testified that no such deployment had been requested.
Immergut’s tone suggested growing skepticism toward the administration’s claims. She pointed out that trial testimony showed “no credible evidence” of damage to federal property or obstruction of ICE operations, undercutting Trump’s public portrayal of Portland as “war ravaged” and “under siege.”
That contrast between rhetoric and fact appeared central to the court’s thinking. Immergut said that while sporadic vandalism and scuffles with officers did occur, “sporadic violence against federal officers and property damage to an ICE facility amid protests” did not constitute a “rebellion against the authority of the government” or an “attempt to overthrow the government as a whole.”
The Department of Justice has already walked back several claims it made during the case, admitting it had “incorrectly represented” that nearly one-quarter of FPS officers nationwide were redeployed to Portland.
Immergut’s order extends her preliminary injunction until Friday, when she expects to issue a final decision on the merits. But the language of her ruling left little doubt where she’s headed.
“This Court finds,” she wrote, “that Defendants’ federalization and deployment of the National Guard in response to protests outside a single federal building in Portland, Oregon, extended beyond delegated statutory authority and violated the Tenth Amendment.”
