Two federal courtrooms—one in Portland, Oregon, and another in Washington, D.C.—became the latest battlegrounds over former President Donald Trump’s controversial decision to send National Guard troops into American cities, testing the limits of presidential power on domestic soil.
In Portland, Justice Department attorneys pressed Judge Karin Immergut to roll back her ban on Trump’s troop deployment to the city. A federal appeals panel recently signaled the president may have that authority, yet Immergut’s earlier orders still hold the line—keeping all Guard units, from Oregon or any other state, out of Portland. She promised a ruling by Monday.
Across the country in Washington, D.C., Judge Jia Cobb heard the capital’s own fight against Trump’s decision to station roughly 2,500 National Guard troops on city streets. D.C. officials claim the deployment transforms the Guard into an unlawful “federally run police force,” undermining the Home Rule Act that grants the city limited autonomy.
Neither court has moved yet. In the meantime, the status quo holds: Portland’s streets remain free of troops, while in D.C., the National Guard still patrols under federal orders.
Trump’s broader plan targets cities run by Democratic leaders—Los Angeles, Chicago, Portland, and Washington—arguing the deployments are necessary to protect federal operations and combat crime. Local leaders counter that the former president’s portrayal of “lawless chaos” is a political mirage meant to justify extraordinary military action.
Judge Immergut’s earlier rulings, issued in early October, barred Trump from seizing control of Oregon’s Guard and blocked attempts to fly in troops from other states. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals partially sided with the administration this week, pausing one of those orders, though Immergut’s broader ban still prevents any deployments until she rules otherwise.
The Justice Department insists the appellate court’s decision clears the way for Trump’s plan. State attorneys, however, say the move violates constitutional protections and federal statutes limiting military use in domestic affairs.
Meanwhile, in D.C., the legal fight circles around whether Trump overstepped the Home Rule Act. Federal lawyers dismiss the city’s lawsuit as political theater, while local officials say residents have grown uneasy seeing armed troops on street corners in what is supposed to be a self-governing city.
For now, two courtrooms—one on each coast—stand as twin arenas defining the reach of presidential power at home, with every ruling inching closer to deciding just how far a president can go in using soldiers on American streets.
