Posts

troops

Federal Judge Blocks Trump’s Attempt to Send Out-of-State Troops to Oregon

/in /by

A federal judge in Oregon accused the Trump administration of directly defying her court order Sunday night after the White House continued mobilizing National Guard troops from multiple states for deployment in Democratic-led cities.

Judge Karin Immergut of the U.S. District Court in Oregon, who is herself a Trump appointee, had issued a restraining order just a day earlier, blocking the federal government from deploying out-of-state Guard members to Oregon. Yet within 24 hours, the administration began rerouting hundreds of troops from California and Texas, prompting an emergency hearing and an expansion of the judge’s order.

Immergut’s revised ruling now bars “the relocation, federalization, or deployment of members of the National Guard of any state or the District of Columbia in the state of Oregon.” During the hearing, she told Justice Department lawyers that the president’s actions were “in direct contravention” of her directive.

The president’s efforts to tap Guard units from Texas, California, and elsewhere have triggered chaos among governors and the courts alike. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth confirmed Sunday that up to 400 Texas National Guard members were being prepared for “federal protection missions” in Portland, Chicago, and other cities.

In Illinois, Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker condemned the move outright. “We must now start calling this what it is: Trump’s invasion,” he said.

“It started with federal agents. It will soon include deploying federalized members of the Illinois National Guard against our wishes, and it will now involve sending in another state’s military troops.”

Embed from Getty Images

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, voiced full support on social media, saying his state’s Guard could out-train any in the nation.

“You can either fully enforce protection for federal employees or get out of the way and let the Texas Guard do it. No Guard can match the training, skill, and expertise of the Texas National Guard.”

The president justified the deployments as a response to protests at Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facilities in Portland and suburban Chicago. But Judge Immergut’s Saturday order noted that Portland’s demonstrations were “not significantly violent or disruptive,” adding that the president appeared to have exceeded his constitutional authority.

The weekend’s legal scramble followed a separate decision to redirect 200 California National Guard members, previously federalized for duty in Los Angeles, to Oregon.

“I am certainly troubled by now hearing that both California and Texas are being sent to Oregon, which does appear to be in direct contradiction of my order,” Immergut said.

That move, criticized as an end-run around the court’s ban, drew sharp objections from both Gov. Gavin Newsom of California and Gov. Tina Kotek of Oregon.

“The rule of law has prevailed — and California’s National Guard will be heading home,” Newsom said after the court reaffirmed its injunction Sunday night.

“President Trump’s actions are an effort to occupy and incite cities and states that don’t share his politics,” Gov. Tina Kotek said in a statement, “and I believe that we should expect him to continue to push the limits of his authority.”

“This is a continuation and escalation of the President’s dangerous, un-American misuse of states’ National Guard members and hard-earned taxpayer dollars.”

Oregon’s attorney general, Dan Rayfield, warned that the situation still fell far short of any condition justifying federal military intervention.

“What was unlawful yesterday is unlawful today,” he said.

Embed from Getty Images

The controversy spotlights a murky legal question: can the president federalize one state’s National Guard and send those troops into another state that objects?

Elizabeth Goitein, a national security law expert at NYU’s Brennan Center for Justice, said the California troops were technically part of the federal armed forces once “federalized.” Still, she added that Judge Immergut’s reasoning likely rendered such a deployment unlawful.

The relevant statute, Section 12406 of Title 10 of the U.S. Code, allows the president to take control of state Guards only under specific conditions, which Immergut found were “not present in Portland.”

Representative Adam Smith of Washington, the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, said he could not recall another instance where one state’s National Guard had been sent into another state over both governors’ objections.

Despite the administration’s insistence that Portland was “under siege,” Immergut’s order cited local police reports describing protests as small and largely peaceful. On Sunday morning, the city’s streets were calm — marathon runners, brunch lines, and dog walkers replaced the chaotic imagery depicted by the White House.

Outside the ICE facility that prompted the federal response, roughly 70 protesters gathered peacefully, barbecuing and handing out bottled water. “There are more people filming each other than rabble-rousers,” said Alex Knots, 58, who joined the demonstration.

Still, local officials fear that continued federal intervention could inflame tensions. Portland Mayor Keith Wilson warned that “this is an aggressive approach trying to inflame a situation that has otherwise been peaceful.”

In recent days, federal agents at the ICE facility escalated crowd control tactics, using tear gas, flash-bang grenades, and pepper balls to disperse demonstrators several blocks from the building.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta accused the president of abusing his powers for political theater:

“It’s our National Guard — not Trump’s Royal Guard, as he seems to think.”

Both Oregon and California have secured temporary relief in court, but Guard deployments to Illinois and other states remained pending. With multiple lawsuits and appeals underway, the clash over presidential authority and the boundaries of federal power appears to be far from over.

teacher

Portland Public School Teachers Reach Tentative Deal After More Than Three Weeks Of Striking 

/in , /by

Portland Public Schools and the Portland Association of Teachers have reached a tentative deal to end the teachers strike that’s been occurring for over three weeks, keeping schools in the area closed since November 1st. This week, more than 40,000 students were able to return to the classroom. 

According to the Portland Public Schools letter sent out to families last weekend, union members will have to ratify the terms of the agreement, and the school board will also need to approve the full contract, according to Oregon Public Broadcasting.

Embed from Getty Images

“We are relieved to have our students returning to school and know that being out of school for the last three weeks — missing classmates, teachers, and learning — has been hard for everyone,” Superintendent Guadalupe Guerrero and the PPS school board said.

“We thank our students, families, and community for your patience and perseverance through these protracted negotiations. We also want to express our deep appreciation for our educators, who are the backbone of our district, and who enrich the lives of our students.”

The Portland Association of Teachers said “educators are ending the strike, securing a historic tentative agreement with key wins for student mental health support, class size, protected planning time, building health and safety protections, and cost-of-living increases.”

Embed from Getty Images

The district’s statement said the “agreement includes processes for resolving class size concerns that involve impacted educators, school leaders, and parents.” The teachers union suggested parents would be more than simply involved, describing the new structure as “shared decision-making committees involving educators and parents.”

Portland Association of Teachers president Angela Bonilla stated that parents would not gain access to private student information, and further discussions will be about identifying necessary support for class sizes that are growing too large. 

“That might look like saying, ‘Hey, this class is in the small classroom on the second floor now that they have an extra student, we gotta move them to the big classroom. But we know that the best solutions to problems that we have in our schools come from the folks who actually attend them, who work at them and who send their students to those places,” Bonilla said. 

As outlined in statements from PAT and PPS, “the contract also increases dedicated planning time, access to mental health support teams for students throughout the district, and funding to address building conditions, among other things.”

“This contract is a watershed moment for Portland students, families and educators. Educators walked picket lines alongside families, students and allies — and because of that, our schools are getting the added investment they need,” Bonilla said.

Military Silhouettes

Oregon Attorney General Calls Out Federal Agents ‘Blatant Abuse’ Towards Protesters

/in , /by

Protests against police brutality/in solidarity with Black Lives Matter have been occurring throughout the world ever since George Floyd’s untimely death at the hands of Minneapolis Police in May. While these protests have all remained relatively peaceful, there are countless examples of police/military forces coming in and acting extremely violent towards these protesters who are expressing their first amendment right. 

Portland, Oregon has now become a spot of experimentation for how violent these forces can get, as Trump and his administration have deployed militarized federal agents into the city to put a stop to the protests. The breaking point for Portland specifically occurred after police claimed that protesters broke into the Portland Police Association building and set it on fire. 

Embed from Getty Images

In one video posted on Twitter this week, a reporter records as a man who is repeatedly beaten by multiple federal officers for simply standing still in the middle of the road. Tear gas and the sounds of explosions echo in the background, a setting that has become all too familiar at these protests that all remain peaceful until outside forces get involved.

“We have dozens, if not hundreds of federal troops descending upon our city. And … they are sharply escalating the situation. Their presence is actually leading to more violence and more vandalism,” one protester claimed. 

Even more disturbing in Portland, and other parts of the US as well, there have been multiple reports of federal agents driving through the city in unmarked vehicles, picking up protesters from the streets without any explanation or reading of Miranda rights. Many of these agents don’t even have professional credentials, and are reportedly just men dressed in camouflage with “police” patches on. 

Embed from Getty Images

One protester recounted the gruesome scenes in Portland as she discussed the goals of these protests, and how much more passionate the crowds are becoming as a response to the government’s violent actions towards its own citizens.

“We can talk about defunding the police, but it’s more than that. We need to defund Ice [Immigration and Customs Enforcement], we need to demilitarize our border. There’s so much that’s wrapped up in this.”

On Sunday Trump responded by tweeting how he wants to help Portland and protecting “Federal property and our people” is his number one priority. However, the mayor of Portland even called out these federal officers and Trump, claiming that the “president has a complete misunderstanding of cause and effect.”

Governor Kate Brown also recently spoke out against the president’s actions within her state, claiming that Trump is guilty of a “blatant abuse of power by the federal government.” Oregon attorney general Ellen Rosenblum went as far as filing a lawsuit in federal court against the Department of Homeland Security, Marshals Service, Customs and Border Protection, and the Federal Protection Service. Within the lawsuit Rosenblum is making a similar claim to Brown’s, and is suing on the grounds of federal agents violating state citizen’s right to peacefully protest as well as their due process rights; as many citizens are continuously ripped off the streets and “arrested.” 

Kratom

Potentially Dangerous Drug, Kratom, Surges in Popularity

/in , /by

Some use the drug in an attempt to rid themselves of an opioid addiction, while others simply use it to get high. The drug has been used in herbal medicines in Asia for hundreds of years, but little research has been conducted on its effects on the body. Despite the potential danger of using it, the drug is legal throughout most of the United States, as regulators have not yet caught up with its growing popularity. The drug, derived from a tree indigenous to Southeast Asia, is called kratom, and while some swear by its supposed healing properties, others warn that it could carry as-of-yet unknown dangers.

Embed from Getty Images

In the United States alone, between ten to fifteen million people use kratom, for a wide variety of reasons. Though it is not itself an opioid, kratom has some opioid-like effects, as it’s often used to provide relief from chronic pain. While the scientific evidence for its effectiveness in treating addiction is scarce, many people who are addicted to opioids turn to kratom in desperation, and some swear by kratom’s effectiveness for this person. Others use the drug in a purely recreational way, as it generates a sense of euphoria, lasting for two to five hours. While the drug is not strictly speaking a hallucinogen, in high doses it can lead to psychosis. It has a number of other serious side effects as well: some users report nausea, vomiting, and constipation, while others experience dangerous effects like decreased rate of breathing, seizures, and addiction. At very high doses, kratom is potentially fatal.

For these reasons, the federal government, as well as many state governments, are pushing for a ban on the drug. While many view this as a necessary step to prevent the rise of another drug-related public health crisis, others warn that banning kratom could prevent people who are struggling with opioid addiction from accessing a potentially effective treatment. Kratom users believe that the drug offers a wide range of beneficial effects, from improving eyesight, to clearing skin, to boosting the immune system. Unfortunately, however, the scientific research that currently exists about the drug is far too sparse to justify any of these claims.

Embed from Getty Images

The research that does exist, however, ought to be sufficient to dissuade any reasonable person from using kratom, despite its mild euphoria-inducing effects. When taken with some prescription medicines, kratom causes abnormal brain function, leaving a person unable to communicate and experiencing a severe headache. Kratom has also been found to be harmful to fetuses when used by pregnant women, leading to an infant who is born with withdrawal symptoms as their access to kratom is cut off. And it can be difficult to tell whether kratom has been mixed with other drugs to alter its effects, posing even more and unpredictable dangers to the user. Kratom is even sometimes sold mixed with dirt and mold by careless dealers. Despite these risks, however, kratom has become a trendy drug just like CBD has, and kratom is sold openly in cities like Portland. What’s important to keep in mind, though, is that just because a drug is legal, that doesn’t mean it’s safe.