In a recent court decision, a federal judge has once again halted the Trump administration’s attempt to federalize and deploy the National Guard in Portland, Oregon. This ruling, made after a concise trial, found that despite granting President Donald Trump considerable deference, there was compelling evidence suggesting a lack of legal justification for his actions.

U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut, appointed by Trump, stated on Sunday that there was a disconnect between the president’s assessment and the actual situation regarding the perceived threat from protests near Portland’s ICE facility. The judge noted that these protests didn’t present a significant danger to federal property or officers.

Judge Immergut expressed, “Even when applying significant deference to the President’s judgment that conditions warranted action, this Court still finds that the President’s use of Section 12406 was probably inappropriate, as it was neither in response to an immediate emergency nor directly linked to quelling disorder.” She pointed out that the peak of the unrest occurred back in June, months prior to the National Guard’s federalization. “Significantly, the credible evidence indicated that after a few intense days in June, the activities outside the ICE building in Portland from June 15 to September 27, 2025, were mostly peaceful, with only occasional disruptions to federal resources,” Immergut added.

Furthermore, Immergut highlighted that a senior Federal Protective Service (FPS) official, who was purportedly overwhelmed, testified that he was “surprised to learn” about the deployment and clarified that neither he nor the regional FPS director had requested it. This testimony led the judge to conclude that Trump likely lacked a “valid basis” for invoking 10 U.S. Code § 12406, which allows the president to call up the guard in situations where regular forces cannot enforce U.S. laws.

The trial produced no credible evidence of significant facility damage or any hindrance in ICE’s ability to enforce immigration laws. Although protesters often blocked the ICE building’s driveway, evidence demonstrated that federal officers were able to clear these blockades effectively, according to the judge.

The ruling came days after the DOJ told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit that it regretted “incorrect” representations that “nearly 25%” of FPS officers nationwide had to be redeployed in response to protests in Portland starting in June.

During early October oral arguments at the 9th Circuit, Oregon identified another basic inaccuracy, one expressed by Trump in a Truth Social post saying Portland was “war ravaged” or “under siege.”

Immergut did not use these words in her latest order, but she did find, as she did earlier in the case, that “sporadic violence against federal officers and property damage to” an ICE facility amid protests was not an organized “rebellion against the authority of the government” or an “attempt to overthrow the government as a whole.”

“This Court finds that Defendants’ federalization and deployment of the National Guard in response to protests outside a single federal building in Portland, Oregon, ‘extend[ed] beyond delegated statutory authority’ under 10 U.S.C. § 12406 and violated the Tenth Amendment,” the judge said, granting a preliminary injunction blocking Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth from federalizing and deploying Oregon’s National Guard until 5 p.m. on Friday, by which time she intends to issue a “final opinion on the merits.”