ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø

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

Troops in Oregon remain in limbo

A federal appeals court on Friday paused a decision issued by a three-judge panel earlier in the week that could have allowed President Donald Trump to deploy 200 Oregon ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø Guard troops, ostensibly to protect federal property in Portland.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said it needs until 5 p.m. Tuesday to decide whether to reconsider the panel’s decision, and the panel's decision won't take effect until then.

U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut, a Trump appointee in Portland, issued earlier this month — one prohibiting Trump from calling up Oregon troops to Portland and another blocking him from sending any Guard members to Oregon at all after he tried to evade the first order by deploying California troops instead.

A 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel put the first ruling on hold Monday, letting Trump take command of 200 Oregon ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø Guard troops. But the second order remained in effect, blocking him from actually deploying them.

At a hearing Friday, the Justice Department told Immergut she must immediately dissolve the second order because its reasoning was the same as that rejected by the appeals panel in a 2-1 decision Monday. Attorneys for Oregon disagreed, saying the orders were distinct and that she should wait to see if the 9th Circuit will reconsider the panel’s ruling.

A challenge to troops in Washington, DC

U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, heard arguments Friday on District of Columbia Attorney General 's request for an order that would remove more than 2,000 Guard members from Washington streets. She did not rule from the bench.

In August, Trump issued an executive order declaring a crime emergency in the district — though the Department of Justice itself says violent crime there is at .

Within a month, more than 2,300 Guard troops from eight states and the district were patrolling under the Army secretary's command. Trump also deployed hundreds of federal agents to assist them.

“Our constitutional democracy will never be the same if these occupations are permitted to stand,� .

Government lawyers said Congress empowered the president to control the D.C. ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø Guard’s operation. They argued that Schwalb’s lawsuit is a frivolous “political stuntâ€� threatening to undermine a successful campaign to reduce violent crime in 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.

Judge continues hearing on West Virginia's deployment

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

Under state law, the group argues, the governor may deploy the ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø Guard out of state only for certain purposes, such as responding to a natural disaster or another state’s emergency request.

“The Governor cannot transform our citizen-soldiers into a roving police force available at the whim of federal officials who bypass proper legal channels,� the group's attorneys, with the American Civil Liberties Union of West Virginia, wrote in a court document.

Morrisey has said West Virginia “is proud to stand with President Trump,� and his office has said the deployment was authorized under federal law. The state attorney general's office has asked Kanawha County Circuit Court Judge Richard D. Lindsay to reject the case, saying the group has not been harmed and lacks standing to challenge Morrisey's decision.

Lindsay heard some arguments Friday before continuing the hearing to Nov. 3 to give the state time to focus more on whether Morrisey had the authority to deploy the Guard members.

In Chicago, awaiting word from the Supreme Court

U.S. District Judge April Perry on Wednesday blocked Guard deployment to the Chicago area until the case is decided in her court or the U.S. Supreme Court intervenes. Perry previously blocked the deployment through a temporary restraining order.

Attorneys representing the federal government said they would agree to extend the order, but would also continue pressing for from the Supreme Court that would allow for the deployment.

Lawyers representing Chicago and Illinois have asked the Supreme Court to continue to block the deployment, calling it a “dramatic step.�

___

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