A federal judge has again been forced to consider whether the Trump administration had directly disobeyed her in its response to her Oct. 4 order temporarily blocking the deployment of federalized Oregon National Guard members in the city.
The judge, Karin J. Immergut, first wondered this on Oct. 5 when the administration, in what she said appeared to be in direct contravention of the previous day’s order, mobilized National Guard members from other states to the city, prompting her to issue a broader restraining order.
But the Trump administration admitted Wednesday morning to yet another instance in which it may have disobeyed the judge’s order, several hours after it was first published.
On the morning of Saturday Oct. 4, Portlanders were awaiting Immergut’s ruling on whether to issue an emergency block on the deployment of Oregon National Guard members to the city.
Meanwhile, behind the scenes, the federalized guard members were in motion, preparing for the mission. Some were converging on local military bases. And around 11:30 a.m. Oct. 4, according to a military document turned up in subsequent litigation, and reviewed by WW, a small advance group of 9 soldiers had arrived in the U.S. Immigration Customs and Enforcement facility itself.
By around noon that day, the document says, those troops “assumed their first support mission.”
A few hours later, at 3:40 p.m., the judge, Karin J Immergut, would issue a temporary restraining order blocking that mission.
But the troops, a military document indicates, remained at the until early Oct. 5—more than 8 hours after the restraining order was issued.
A government lawyer admitted as much to Immergut Wednesday morning, as a trial got under way to help the judge determine whether to issue a more durable block on the deployment.
The government lawyer explained to the judge that it took time for the feds to issue the information about the temporary restraining order to the people on the ground.
Whether the lingering presence of the troops constituted contempt of court or was in direct violation of her temporary restraining order, Immergut responded, would be discussed later: She had a trial to proceed with.
Asked about the matter, a spokesperson for U.S. Northern Command said, “We cannot comment on ongoing litigation.”

