In an unexpected turn inside Portland’s federal courthouse, U.S. District Judge Michael Simon has stepped away from the heated legal battle over President Donald Trump’s decision to send National Guard troops into Oregon. The move follows questions raised by the Trump administration about public comments from Simon’s wife, U.S. Representative Suzanne Bonamici, who had sharply condemned the deployment.
Simon—whose judicial tone has long been measured and cautious—said the case deserved “absolute focus on constitutional and statutory questions” rather than a sideshow over perceived bias. His decision effectively removes himself from the political storm now swirling around the courtroom.
Bonamici, a Democrat representing most of Portland, had earlier stood beside Governor Tina Kotek and called Trump’s move a “gross abuse of power,” insisting, “no military is welcome or needed here.” The Justice Department seized on those remarks, warning they could create an “appearance of partiality” that risked undermining the proceedings.
The case will now land in the hands of U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut, appointed by Trump during his first term. That detail alone ensures the courtroom drama will continue to draw national attention, as Oregon’s top lawyer, Attorney General Dan Rayfield, challenges the legality of Trump’s order.
Filed on September 28, the lawsuit argues that the federal government exaggerated the danger of immigration protests to justify an unconstitutional seizure of state-controlled National Guard forces. The state wants an immediate restraining order halting the deployment.
This clash is one chapter in a broader conflict. Similar lawsuits have already erupted in California and Washington, D.C., after Trump’s controversial decision to send troops into cities governed by Democrats. In Los Angeles, a federal judge declared the deployment illegal—but an appellate stay has left the final outcome hanging. The D.C. case, meanwhile, still awaits a ruling.
As Oregon’s legal challenge moves forward, the shift from an Obama-appointed judge to a Trump-appointed one adds a new layer of political tension to a case already charged with constitutional gravity.
