Court to reconsider ruling that allowed Trump to send troops to Portland

"The ninth circuit court of appeals agreed on Tuesday that it would rehear a case over the president's authority with a broader court of 11 judges. The appeals court also vacated a ruling from a three-judge panel last week that sided with the Trump administration. The order is the latest development in a long legal saga over whether Donald Trump has the authority and justification to deploy national guard forces in Portland."

"The appeals court decision on Tuesday came after US district judge Karin Immergut, a Trump appointee in Portland, issued two temporary restraining orders this month one that blocked the president from federalizing the Oregon national guard, and another stopping him from deploying any national guard troops in Oregon, after Trump tried to evade the first order by calling up troops from California."

"The federal government has argued that federal officials working at the ICE facility in south Portland were under attack, while city and state officials argue that local officers have control of the situation. In defiance of Trump's characterization of Portland as war ravaged, locals have been sharing videos of the city's lush hiking trails and thriving food scene, and drawing up plans for Emergency Naked Bike Ride against the militarization of our city."

The ninth circuit court of appeals ordered an en banc rehearing by a panel of 11 judges and vacated a recent three-judge panel ruling that had favored the administration. About 200 federalized Oregon National Guard members have been in limbo since late September after presidential efforts to mobilize troops in response to months of Portland protests. The federal government argued ICE facility personnel were under attack, while city and state officials maintained local officers controlled the situation. US District Judge Karin Immergut issued two temporary restraining orders blocking federalization and deployment after an attempted call-up from California. The en banc rehearing will consider both rulings together.

Read at www.theguardian.com