A federal appeals panel handed President Trump a clear legal win this week when the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily allowed his administration to federalize Oregon National Guard troops with an eye toward sending them into Portland, a move the White House says is necessary to protect federal facilities and personnel from violent protest activity. Conservatives should celebrate a court finally recognizing that the federal government has a duty to defend its institutions and workers when local leaders refuse to do so.
The ruling was a narrow 2–1 decision, joined by judges Ryan Nelson and Bridget Bade — both appointed by President Trump — while Judge Susan Graber dissented, warning the move could dangerously expand presidential power. That split shows how politicized the judiciary has become, but it also shows that sound legal reasoning about the need to secure federal property won out in this instance.
Don’t be fooled by liberal hand-wringing: the appeals court’s order stayed only one of two temporary restraining orders issued by U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut, meaning the case is far from over and a separate order still blocks any federalized Guard members from deploying in Oregon for now. This is the procedural reality — the fight moves forward in the courts, but the appeal decision clears the way for the president to exercise his authority if the remaining legal obstacles fall.
Portland’s political class and activist elites have for years allowed permissive policies to create lawless zones where federal property is vandalized and federal employees are harassed. Conservatives know that a city that tolerates chaos and sanctuary for criminals cannot expect the federal government to stand idly by; when local leaders abdicate their responsibilities, the president must protect the rule of law and ordinary Americans trying to run their lives and businesses.
Legally, the administration relied on longstanding federal statute authority to federalize state National Guard units when necessary to execute federal law — a power the appeals court concluded the president likely lawfully exercised at this preliminary stage. If left unchecked, the conflation of local softness with Constitutional supremacy would open the door to a cascade of lawless jurisdictions; the court’s willingness to defer to presidential judgment here is a welcome correction.
What happens next is straightforward: a non-jury trial is scheduled to begin on October 29, 2025, and the Justice Department has already asked the district court to dissolve the broader restraining order that still prevents any Guard deployment to Oregon. Expect the administration to press the case aggressively up the appellate ladder, and if necessary, to the U.S. Supreme Court — this is a fight over who gets to keep Americans safe, and Republicans should stand firm behind executive action that restores order.
This is about more than Portland; it’s about whether blue cities will be permitted to become experiments in disorder while hardworking Americans pay the price. Patriots should demand that the president use every lawful tool to safeguard citizens and federal employees, and conservatives must make clear that tolerating vandalism, attacks on law enforcement, and threats to federal facilities is unacceptable in a civilized nation. The appeals court gave the president the legal breathing room he needs — now it’s time to finish the job.
