Post by : Rameen Ariff

California has joined Oregon in a lawsuit against the Trump administration over the deployment of National Guard troops to Portland, calling the move unlawful, unnecessary, and an abuse of presidential power. The legal challenge comes after President Donald Trump ordered California National Guard members, who had been federalized earlier this year, to be reassigned to Portland despite a court ruling blocking the use of Oregon’s own guard forces.

According to the Pentagon, around 200 members of the California National Guard, who had been stationed in Los Angeles, are now being sent to Portland. Oregon Governor Tina Kotek confirmed that about 100 had already arrived on Saturday, with another 100 expected by Sunday. California officials said as many as 300 guard members could eventually be deployed. Both Kotek and California Governor Gavin Newsom expressed outrage, saying they were not consulted about the move.

Governor Newsom described the deployment as “a breathtaking abuse of the law and power,” accusing Trump of using the U.S. military as a political weapon against American citizens. He stressed that California’s National Guard belongs to the state, not the president, and warned that Trump’s actions violate constitutional boundaries. Oregon officials echoed these concerns, noting that there is no rebellion or threat to national security in Portland that would legally justify such a deployment.

The lawsuit, filed jointly by Oregon, California, and the city of Portland, seeks an amended restraining order to block the use of federalized National Guard troops. Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield said the president’s actions represent a direct attempt to sidestep a federal judge’s ruling, comparing it to “a teenager working around rules he doesn’t like.” Rayfield added that Oregon would not allow the normalization of U.S. military forces being used against American cities.

The legal filing emphasized that under U.S. law, National Guard troops may only be deployed under specific conditions: repelling an invasion, suppressing a rebellion, or enforcing federal law. “There is no rebellion in Portland,” the complaint stated.

U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut, appointed by Trump during his first term, had already blocked the deployment of Oregon’s guard forces, ruling that the relatively small protests in Portland did not warrant federalized intervention. The protests, which have largely taken place outside the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) building in the city, have been described by Oregon leaders as limited in scope and far from the “war-ravaged” conditions Trump claimed.

Portland Mayor Keith Wilson accused federal agents of escalating tensions by using excessive force during the protests, including pepper spray and impact munitions against demonstrators. He said the city has alerted the Department of Justice’s civil rights division to investigate.

The deployment in Oregon is part of a broader strategy by Trump, who has repeatedly targeted Democratic-led cities, claiming they are plagued by crime and unrest. In addition to Portland, Trump has authorized the use of Illinois National Guard troops in Chicago, a move Illinois Governor JB Pritzker also opposed, arguing that there was no need for military involvement.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta condemned the president’s decision, saying Trump views the National Guard as his “own Royal Guard.” He stressed that these forces exist to protect the states, not to serve as a personal police force for the president.

The escalating legal and political battle underscores a wider conflict between Trump and Democratic-led states, raising serious constitutional questions about the limits of presidential authority over state-controlled military forces. As protests continue in Portland and legal proceedings move forward, the case could set a critical precedent for how far a president can go in deploying military forces within U.S. cities.

#world news #Global News