Federal appeals court temporarily bars Portland troop deployment

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: Oregon Public Broadcasting/NPR

Oct. 24, 2025 8:02 p.m. Updated: Oct. 24, 2025 9:22 p.m.


An appeals court’s ruling that Oregon National Guard troops can be sent into Portland is now on hold, as judges take a closer look at the matter. On Friday afternoon, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stayed the order issued Monday by a panel of three judges within the circuit. The stay expires at 5 p.m. on Tuesday, Oct. 28. According to the newly issued order, it is necessary to allow a broader swathe of appeals judges to decide whether to rehear the matter.

The order is the latest in a flurry of legal action in the fight over whether President Donald Trump can deploy hundreds of National Guard troops to protect a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Portland that has been the focus of protests. It likely puts off any such deployment until next week, at the earliest.

The ruling comes the same day a lower court took up a separate but related matter. U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut held a hearing Friday morning on whether to dissolve a temporary restraining order barring troops from being sent to Portland. The Trump administration had argued the restraining order was legally impermissible, following Monday’s ruling that the president was within his rights to deploy Oregon National Guard troops in Portland.

Immergut said she planned to rule on the matter by Monday — potentially opening the door to a troop deployment. The new 9th Circuit order alters that timeline. The Oregon Department of Justice confirmed Friday that the new appeals court order would block any deployment of troops until it expires next week.

Read more: https://www.opb.org/article/2025/10/24/portland-oregon-ice-building-donald-trump-national-guard-troops-protest/

---

Link to ORDER (PDF viewer) - https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/26197093-9thcircuit/

Link to ORDER (PDF) - https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/26197093/9thcircuit.pdf

(this is an Administrative stay)

[travelingthrulife]

1. This should be an easy decision to bar these troops since there is no fucking protest.

We have the worst legal system in this country. Only for rich people.

[Fiendish Thingy]

2. The New Golden Rule is proved once again

Trump is not omnipotent, and the states and the people are not powerless

[onenote]

3. 29 judges total. 8 Biden, 5 Obama, 3 Clinton

If they all participate, there's a good chance that there would be 16 votes to reverse the 3-judge decision.
But its close. The other 13 judges are 10 Trumpers and 3 GWBush appointees.

The decision for which en banc review is being sought was 2-1, with two Trumpers in the majority and a senior judge appointed by Clinton in dissent. The senior judge doesn't participate in the en banc review, I believe.

[BumRushDaShow]

4. I saw another article

where it said if they move forward with en banc, they would then pick a panel of 11 to do the review (which I expect would be "active" only).

[onenote]

5. It's a two-step process.

Step one:if a majority of the active, non-recused judges vote in favor of rehearing en banc, then the case is reheard by the en banc court.

Step two: The en banc court that rehears the case consists of the Chief Judge, and ten non-recused judges who are randomly drawn. Senior judges are not eligible to serve on the en banc court, unless they served on the three judge panel.