The Trump administration ordered the deployment of the National Guard to several U.S. cities, including Portland, Chicago, and Los Angeles. The official reason was to protect federal property and personnel during protests. However, these moves were often made against the wishes of state governors and city mayors, which created a significant political and legal conflict.
The main issue was a question of authority. Does a president have the power to send military forces into a city if the local government does not want them? City and state officials argued that the president was overstepping his bounds. They believed that managing local law enforcement was their responsibility, not the federal government's.
In response, officials from the affected cities filed lawsuits. These legal challenges claimed the president's orders were unlawful. They argued that the situation in their cities was not a 'rebellion,' which is one of the rare conditions under which a president can take such an action. The lawsuits put the question of presidential power directly before federal judges.
Federal courts across the country began to hear these cases. In a major ruling, a judge in Oregon permanently blocked the deployment of troops to Portland. The judge, who was appointed by Trump, determined that the administration had not proven the situation was dangerous enough to justify using the military. Similarly, a court decided that the deployment in Los Angeles violated a law that limits military involvement in civilian law enforcement. These decisions showed that there are legal limits to a president's power.