US President Donald Trump’s decision to deploy National Guard troops in Democratic-led cities is facing critical legal challenges in two federal courts. Hearings are set for Thursday in Portland, Oregon, and Chicago, Illinois, where local leaders have sued the federal government, arguing that the president’s actions are unconstitutional.
In Portland, protests near an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) building have escalated over recent months. Local residents have described the area as resembling a “war zone.” After Trump ordered 200 Oregon National Guard members to the city in September, a federal judge temporarily blocked the deployment. When the administration later threatened to bring in National Guard troops from another state, the court expanded its injunction.
A three-judge panel on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals will now decide whether to lift the lower court’s block. The Trump administration maintains it has full authority to use the National Guard to restore “law and order.” White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson stated that the president “will not stand by while violent rioters attack federal law enforcement officers.”
In Chicago, U.S. District Judge April Perry will hear arguments over the administration’s plan to send Texas National Guard troops into Illinois. The city has become a flashpoint for Trump’s immigration enforcement efforts, with reports of federal agents using chemical irritants and helicopters during raids. One woman was reportedly shot by a federal agent during a protest.
Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson has condemned the move, calling it “illegal, unconstitutional, and dangerous.” Illinois officials argue the administration’s actions are an overreach meant to stir unrest rather than ensure safety.
Oregon Governor Tina Kotek echoed those concerns, saying, “There is no insurrection in Portland, no threat to national security.”
The court rulings in these two cases could have far-reaching implications for presidential power and state sovereignty in the United States.
