Oregon v. Trump

Oregon AG sues to block the Trump administration's unlawful and unconstitutional deployment of the National Guard to engage in civilian law enforcement in Portland.

Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield sued Donald Trump and his administration on September 28, 2025, to prevent the president from usurping Oregon’s control over its national guard and illegally interfering with Oregon and Portland’s law enforcement efforts. President Trump posted on social media a message falsely asserting that Portland was “war ravaged” and calling on the Secretary of Defense (currently referred to as the Secretary of War) to deploy “troops” who would be authorized to use “Full Force” against American citizens. The Secretary complied by issuing a memorandum calling up 200 members of the Oregon National Guard into federal service. 

The purported justification for the unlawful troop deployment was in response to protests outside an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility in Portland — protests that typically involve fewer than 30 people and which have been so peaceful that no arrests have been made in more than three months. Such a patently pretextual justification does not meet the statutory requirements for federalizing National Guard troops without the consent of the state. Using military forces to engage in law enforcement violates the Posse Comitatus Act. In addition, the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution reserves police power to the states, not the federal government. Federalizing state National Guard troops would harm Oregon by instigating further protest, impeding business activity in Portland, and hampering normal functions of the National Guard such as responding to natural disasters. 

The district court granted an order preventing the federal government from federalizing and deploying the Oregon National Guard on October 4, 2025. In response, the Trump administration attempted to federalize California, and then Texas, National Guard troops into Oregon, which California joined Oregon in opposing. The judge expanded the order to prohibit the deployment of any National Guard troops, regardless of origin, asserting that conditions in Portland did not justify a federal military response.

Oregon communities are stable, and our local officials have been clear: we have the capacity to manage public safety without federal interference. Sending in 200 National Guard troops to guard a single building is not normal. If you had a concern about safety at your own home, you’d make a few calls and fill the gaps — not call in an army. What we’re seeing is not about public safety, it’s about the President flexing political muscle under the guise of law and order, chasing a media hit at the expense of our community. Attorney General Dan Rayfield

Case Details

AG Posture

Plaintiff

Plaintiffs

Defendants