National Guard deployments in Washington, DC, and Portland, Oregon, are focus of court hearings

The deployment of National Guard troops to the streets of Washington faces challenges Friday in two courts — one in the nation’s capital and another in West Virginia — while across the country, a judge in Portland, Oregon, will consider whether to allow President Donald Trump to deploy troops there.

The hearings are the latest developments in a series of overlapping lawsuits and rulings driven by Trump’s push to send the military into Democratic-run cities, despite fierce resistance from mayors and governors. The rollout remains stalled in the Chicago area, where all sides are waiting to see whether the U.S. Supreme Court steps in to allow it.

Here’s what you need to know about the legal efforts to block or deploy the National Guard in various cities.

U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb, appointed by former President Joe Biden, scheduled a hearing Friday to determine whether to grant District of Columbia Attorney General Brian Schwalb’s request for an order that would remove more than 2,000 members of the Guard from the streets of Washington.

In August, President Donald Trump issued an executive order declaring a state of crime emergency in the city — although the U.S. Department of Justice itself says violent crime there is at its lowest level in 30 years.

Within a month, more than 2,300 National Guard troops from eight states and the District were patrolling the city under the command of the secretary of the Army. Trump also deployed hundreds of federal agents to assist the patrols.

It’s unclear how long those deployments will last, but lawyers in Schwalb’s office said Guard troops will likely remain in the city at least until next summer.

“Our constitutional democracy will never be the same if these occupations are allowed,” they wrote.

Government lawyers said Congress empowered the president to control the operations of the Washington National Guard. They argued that Schwalb’s trial is a frivolous “political stunt” that threatens to undermine a successful campaign to reduce violent crime in the District.

Republican governors of several states also sent units to Washington. Although the emergency period ended in September, more than 2,200 troops remain. Several states told The Associated Press they would bring their units home by Nov. 30 unless extended.

Among the states that sent troops to the nation’s capital was West Virginia. A civic organization called West Virginia Citizen Action Group says Gov. Patrick Morrisey overstepped his authority by deploying 300 to 400 National Guard members to support Trump’s efforts there.

Under state law, the group argues, the governor can only deploy the National Guard out of state for certain purposes, such as responding to a natural disaster or an emergency request from another state.

“The governor cannot turn our citizen-soldiers into a roving police force available at the whim of federal officials who circumvent proper legal channels,” the group’s lawyers, from the American Civil Liberties Union of West Virginia, wrote in a court document.

Morrisey said West Virginia “is proud to stand with President Trump in his efforts to restore the pride and beauty of our nation’s capital,” and his office said the deployment was authorized under federal law. The state attorney general’s office asked Kanawha County Circuit Court Judge Richard D. Lindsay to dismiss the case, saying the group suffered no harm and had no standing to challenge the governor’s decision.

U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut, a Trump appointee in Portland, finds herself in a particularly delicate legal situation.

She issued two temporary restraining orders earlier this month — one barring the president from calling up troops from Oregon so he could send them to Portland, and another stopping him from sending Guard members to Oregon after he tried to evade the first order by deploying California troops instead.

A panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday stayed its first ruling, allowing Trump to take command of the 200-strong Oregon National Guard. She must now decide whether to disband her second order as well, paving the way for deployment.

The Justice Department insisted it was being asked to immediately overturn the second order because its reasoning was the same as that rejected by the appeals board. Attorneys for the state disagree, saying she must wait to see if the 9th Circuit will reconsider the panel’s decision.

A hearing scheduled for Friday is expected to focus on those arguments.

U.S. District Judge April Perry on Wednesday blocked the deployment of Guard troops to the Chicago area until the case is decided by her court or the U.S. Supreme Court intervenes. Perry had already blocked the rollout for two weeks thanks to a temporary restraining order.

Lawyers representing the federal government said they would agree to extend the order, but stressed that they would continue to push for an emergency order from the Supreme Court to authorize the deployment.

Lawyers representing Chicago and Illinois asked the Supreme Court to continue blocking the rollout, calling it a “dramatic step.”

In Tennessee, Democratic elected officials filed a lawsuit last Friday to stop the ongoing deployment of the Guard in Memphis. They said Republican Gov. Bill Lee, acting at Trump’s behest, violated the state constitution, which says the Guard can be called in the event of a “rebellion or invasion” — but only with the blessing of state lawmakers.

Since their arrival on October 10, the troops have been patrolling downtown Memphis, including near the iconic Pyramid, wearing camouflage uniforms and protective vests marked “military police,” with rifles in holsters. Guard members have no power of arrest, officials said.

___

Associated Press writers Christine Fernando in Chicago, Adrian Sainz in Memphis and John Raby in Charleston, West Virginia, contributed.