>https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2025/10/newsom-california-national-guard-on-their-way-there-now-to-oregon-on-trumps-orders.html
paywall but it's on wayback
Kotek: California National Guard arrives in Oregon, on Trump’s orders
Updated: Oct. 05, 2025, 2:11 p.m.|Published: Oct. 05, 2025, 11:04 a.m.
The Oregonian/OregonLive
California National Guard troops are arriving in Oregon after President Donald Trump deployed them to curb protests against federal immigration policy, Gov. Tina Kotek said on Sunday.
Kotek said in a statement Sunday morning that “101 federalized California National Guard members arrived in Oregon last night via plane, and it is our understanding that there are more on the way today.”
A federal judge on Saturday ordered the Trump administration to halt its attempt to deploy 200 Oregon’s National Guard members to control protests outside a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement building in South Portland.
Kotek accused the president of trying to circumvent the ruling by deploying California troops to Oregon just hours later. She said the federal government did not communicate with her about that decision.
“There is no need for military intervention in Oregon,” Kotek said. “There is no insurrection in Portland. No threat to national security. … Oregonians exercising their freedom of speech against unlawful actions by the Trump Administration should do so peacefully.”
California Gov. Gavin Newsom was the first to publicly acknowledge the troop movement on Sunday morning.
“They are on their way there now,” Newsom said in a post on the social media site X.
Newsom vowed to fight Trump’s deployment of California National Guard members.
“We are taking this fight back to court,” Newsom wrote on X. “The public cannot stay silent in the face of such reckless and authoritarian conduct by the President of the United States.”
Trump federalized the California National Guard in June and deployed them to manage protests in Los Angeles against increased immigration raids.
In Oregon, protests outside the Portland ICE facility picked up steam in early June, following the arrest of an asylum-seeker in U.S. Immigration Court. They were sometimes sleepy, but saw periodic flare-ups. Most protests had involved no more than several dozen people in the weeks before Trump announced in late September that he was sending “all necessary Troops to protect War ravaged Portland.”
Oregon’s attorney general quickly filed a motion to block the president’s deployment of Oregon National Guard troops.
U.S. District Judge Karin J. Immergut ruled on that motion Saturday. She rejected the federal government’s assertion that Portland faces a “danger of rebellion” and found that lawyers for the U.S. government failed to show that federal officers need backup to protect the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement building or themselves.
Immergut, who was appointed by Trump, found the president had illegally seized control of Oregon’s National Guard and directed him to return them to the command of Gov. Tina Kotek under a temporary order that expires at 11:59 p.m. on Oct. 18.
Later Saturday, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a notice to appeal the ruling to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
“President Trump exercised his lawful authority to protect federal assets and personnel in Portland following violent riots and attacks on law enforcement — we expect to be vindicated by a higher court," White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said a statement.
Trump’s move to send California National Guard troops to Oregon may not technically violate the letter of Immergut’s temporary restraining order, said Tung Yin, a Lewis & Clark Law School professor.
“As with so much happening these days,” he said “it’s uncharted territory.”
Newsom would have standing in federal court in California to challenge the cross-state mobilization. A California federal judge’s injunction in early September, which found the mobilization of that state’s National Guard troops into federal service unlawful, is on appeal before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Both Oregon and California could challenge the cross-state mobilization, Yin said, citing a violation of the 10th Amendment which authorizes Congress, not the President, to determine “when (and how) the militia can be called into actual service of the United States,” as Immergut wrote in her Saturday ruling.
Oregon could again raise a 10th Amendment violation, Yin said, but would have to go back to court again, because Immergut’s current ruling applies only to the federalization of Oregon National Guard troops. It likely would be considered a related case and be heard by Immergut, Yin said.
Yin also said Newsom could raise the same 10th Amendment argument, saying that the removal of California Guard members out of state infringes on his state’s sovereignty.
Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Liberty and National Security Program at New York University School of Law’s Brennan Center, said what Trump is doing is “clearly unlawful” under Immergut’s opinion.
But since Immergut’s order solely relates to the Oregon National Guard, the Trump administration is exploiting a “loophole” to send Guard troops to Portland from out of state.
“This is a flagrant attempt to circumvent the judge’s order,” she said. “It is one of the more brazen instances of contempt for the judicial branch that we’ve seen in this administration.”
Oregon could request that Immergut clarify her temporary restraining order or issue a new one to make perfectly clear that the federal code, called Title 10, Section 12406, “cannot be invoked” at all by the federal government to have state National Guards protect Portland’s ICE facility, Goitein said.