Chaotic riots in Portland, Oregon during the summer of 2020 echoed through a test On President Trump’s efforts to send National Guard troops onto city streets.
Federal officials and government lawyers have portrayed Portland as being under siege in an attempt to convince a judge that Trump’s plan to acquire and deploy state troops is lawful and necessary to protect federal immigration facilities.
But local police officers testified that, already, the presence of federal officers has increased tensions with protesters.
The protests have been mostly peaceful, he said, and better local policing tactics have helped keep it that way — unlike months-long protests five years ago, some of which he helped suppress.
“This was a completely different type of disorder,” said Commander of the Portland Police Bureau. Franz Schoening said.
Trump called Oregon National Guard In September, vowed to protect “war-torn” Portland and its U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facilities.
The move quickly drew lawsuits from state and city officials seeking to block the president’s efforts. They argue that Trump should not be allowed to place military boots on American soil to remedy the situation instigated by federal agents.
The President initially moved to unionize and deploy 200 Oregon National Guard members, but U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut temporarily blocked the effort, seeking to send troops from California and Texas, leading the judge to block the deployment of any troops. The administration has appealed.
Although the matter has nothing to do with 2020 protestsInspired by the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, it took an unexpected focus as Immergut heard testimony about the city’s protest site and whether National Guard intervention was needed.
“I want to understand the time period that is at issue in this case, and perhaps, longer than 2020,” the judge said. “So, if you can define it as two things, deadlines, it’s relevant to what I need to decide.”
Peaceful protests against police violence began in 2020 about 200 days Continued protests turned into riots as Black Lives Matter protesters clashed with law enforcement and counter-protesters. Pictures showed burning cars, trash bins and police barricades, and streets fogged with tear gas.
Schoening, who was commander of the public order unit team during the unrest, recalled significant criminal conduct, particularly arson and “prolific” use of commercial fireworks. He said protests outside Portland’s ICE facility in recent months pale in comparison.
“The level of violence, the level of criminal conduct, that we saw in 2020 was markedly different,” he said.
Craig Dobson, assistant chief of the Portland Police Bureau, testified that law enforcement observed “a fair amount of illegal behavior” at the ICE facility in June, which he said lasted about a week before it ended.
Local police announced June 14 riot demonstration But it has not been done since then.
Portland Police Bureau Cmdr. Brian Hughes called the 2020 ICE facility protests “much more widespread” and “on a larger scale” than the protests, calling them incomparable.
In the years since, the Portland Police Bureau has overhauled its policing, officials said.
Hughes said the bureau has worked to build “greater trust” and “legitimacy” among organizers, and since 2020, there have been few arrests at legally protesting demonstrations with “thousands of people.”
The bureau also changed the way it trains to avoid indiscriminate use of force or aimlessly targeting unruly crowds in an effort to “bring things under control,” said Dobson, the overall incident commander amid the 2020 protests.
He has received “hundreds of emails” thanking him for his new approach.
“Are you saying that police activity could incite the mob?” Portland attorney Caroline Turco asked.
“Yes,” Dobson replied.
“Did it in 2020?” Turco followed. Dobson again replied in the affirmative.
Five years ago, Trump sent federal officers to Portland amid riots to break up nightly protests at the federal courthouse where the trial is now underway. But instead of stopping the riots, the level of conflict between community members and local police “significantly increased” after the increase in federal law enforcement, according to an independent firm appointed to assess the city’s response to the 2020 protests.
Dobson said he shares report assessment and expressed “concerns” about the National Guard being deployed to Portland.
“My concern again is what is their training?” Dobson said. “Crowd management is complex and depending on how you look and what you do, it can have a negative impact on the crowd.”
Schoening described two incidents last month that raised fears of a recurrence on the horizon.
He said that protest groups from whom police had previously received “good compliance” refused to comply with his request to allow traffic to proceed on October 4, after federal officers had used tear gas earlier in the day.
On October 18, federal officers fired tear gas at protesters on their way to an ICE facility, but missed, causing the canister to bounce off the roof of the building. Other federal officers stationed there responded by firing pepper balls and tear gas into the crowd; Police and protesters alike were attacked, Schoening said.
Brian Marshall, a senior assistant attorney general at the Oregon Justice Department, said that crowd unrest, even if instigated by federal authorities, is one of the factors the administration has used to justify sending troops.
“And I think there is a serious legal question, whether an unreasonable use of force that generates a crowd reaction – can that reaction be considered a good faith basis for the deployment of the National Guard,” he said.
Federal officials testifying in the government’s case drew different lessons from the 2020 protests.
Maj. Gen. Timothy Rieger, acting deputy chief of the National Guard Bureau, testified that when the National Guard was sent to Los Angeles amid the 2020 protests, the impact was “immediate.”
Fires, looting, looting – “When we showed up, it stopped,” he said. The result, Rieger added, was that people who gathered to protest legally were able to exercise their constitutional right to protest and demonstrate.
Lawyers for state and city officials emphasized that, when the National Guard was sent to Oregon in 2020, they were under the control of the governor — not Trump — and they questioned the relevance of their testimony about the California city.
Rieger reiterated that he “never saw” the National Guard escalate or escalate any situation.
Two Federal Security Service supervisors, who testified anonymously, also claimed the National Guard would de-escalate tensions. Although he had no role in Trump’s decision to call in the troops, he said that requests for help from local police went unanswered.
One of the officers, identified as the “Commander,” said he has seen peaceful protests at the ICE facility, and it doesn’t concern him. Instead, it is that the facility does not have “sufficient numbers” of staff to prevent potential breaches, even with people roaming the property looking for a way into the building.
When federal officers try to enter on their own, he said, they risk harm.
“There is a persistent narrative that we deserve to die,” the officer said.
Turco, the Portland attorney, argued Wednesday that a “manufactured crisis” underpinned Trump’s efforts to send the National Guard, arguing that the protests have not been violent enough to justify deployment.
But the Justice Department argues that, at the end of the day, the location of the protest doesn’t matter. Trump’s judgment is given great respect, and Judge Immergut will only have to determine whether the President’s bid reflects an “honest decision” made after objectively evaluating the law and facts before him.
