🔗 Share this article Court to Reexamine Ruling That Permitted Former President to Send Troops to Oregon City The ninth circuit court has upheld a prohibition on deploying state troops in Portland, Oregon, following a latest court ruling. Judicial Panel Concurs to Reconsider Case The federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday that it would reexamine the case concerning the executive power with an larger group of eleven justices. The judicial body also vacated a previous ruling from a smaller judicial group that had supported the federal government. Ongoing Dispute Over Military Presence This order represents the most recent turn in a long-running court case over whether the former president has the legal right and justification to deploy state military units in the city. Approximately two hundred troops have been in uncertainty since late September when the deployment effort was initiated in due to ongoing demonstrations. Conflicting Arguments The administration has argued that government employees at the immigration center in south Portland were under attack, while local authorities maintain that municipal police have control of the situation. Contrary to characterizations of the city as “war ravaged”, residents have been sharing footage of scenic paths and a vibrant culinary culture, and planning activities such as an Emergency Naked Bike Ride against the “militarization of our city”. Court Proceedings The appeals court decision came after a US district judge in the city enacted two legal injunctions this month – one preventing the federalization of the Oregon national guard, and another prohibiting the deployment of any national guard troops in Oregon, after efforts to circumvent the first order by calling up out-of-state forces. On the previous day, the ninth circuit panel had temporarily suspended the initial decision – permitting command of 200 Oregon national guard – but the subsequent injunction stayed effective, blocking the actual deployment of the troops. En Banc Review The Tuesday decision means the issue will be heard “en banc” – with both rulings under consideration simultaneously – by a panel of 11 judges. “This decision shows that facts are important and that the courts are working to hold this administration accountable. The constitution limits the president’s power, and local populations cannot be treated as a testing site for expansive government power,” said the state attorney general in a statement. “The court is sending a clear message: the president cannot dispatch the armed forces into American urban areas without cause. We will continue protecting state legislation, principles, and sovereignty as this legal proceeding moves forward and our legal battle continues in the judicial system.”