Judge shuts down Trump, rules he 'exceeded his authority’

 A federal judge recently ruled that President Donald Trump acted outside the limits of his authority when he federalized National Guard troops and deployed them to Portland during immigration-related protests.

Knewz.com has learned that the decision marked a significant legal rebuke of Trump’s attempt to use military force in a domestic law-enforcement context. It also made permanent an injunction issued in October.

Oregon and Portland had sued to stop federalization

President Trump issued the order in late September to federalize 200 members of the Oregon National Guard to protect federal property amid ongoing protests at a Portland ICE facility.

The state and the city quickly filed suit, arguing that the move violated constitutional limits on federal power.

Around the same time, Trump attempted to deploy Guard troops to Chicago, a plan that was similarly opposed by local officials and halted by the courts.

Trump ‘exceeded the president’s authority’

In a 106-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut, a Trump appointee, found that the former reality star “exceeded the president’s authority” when he ordered 200 Oregon National Guard members into Portland in September.

The court rejected the administration’s claim that protests outside a Portland ICE facility amounted to rebellion or imminent danger of “rebellion,” the threshold required for federalizing state-controlled Guard units.

Immergut wrote that “the evidence demonstrates that these deployments, which were objected to by Oregon’s governor and not requested by the federal officials in charge of protection of the ICE building, exceeded the president’s authority.”

Trump-appointed judge shuts down the president

Following a three-day trial, Judge Immergut ruled that the conditions cited by the Trump administration fell far short of the legal standard needed to justify a federal takeover of the National Guard.

“When considering these conditions that persisted for months before the president’s federalization of the National Guard, this court concludes that even giving great deference to the president’s determination, the president did not have a lawful basis to federalize the National Guard,” she wrote.

The ruling blocks Trump’s order permanently and affirms Oregon’s position that local authorities were managing the situation without requesting federal intervention.

Wider implications of the court’s ruling

Judge Immergut acknowledged the broader implications of her decision, as Trump had publicly threatened to send the National Guard into Democratic-led cities nationwide.

She wrote that the “precise standard” defining when a president may deploy federalized troops domestically “is ultimately a question for a higher court to decide,” signaling that the dispute could move to the appellate courts.

Legal experts noted that the ruling may shape how future presidents interpret their authority under the Insurrection Act and related statutes.