AILSA CHANG, HOST:
High-stakes legal arguments over President Trump's efforts to deploy the National Guard in Portland and in Chicago played out at the same time in two federal courthouses today. Both cases have major implications for questions over presidential authority and the use of federal troops on American soil. NPR's Jaclyn Diaz has been following all of this and joins us now, Hi, Jaclyn.
JACLYN DIAZ, BYLINE: Hi. Thanks for having me.
CHANG: Well, thanks for being with us. OK, so explain what these hearings were about, exactly. Like, what were the arguments on the different sides?
DIAZ: Yeah, of course. So they're both very similar. In Chicago, a federal judge heard arguments over imposing a ban on the deployment of National Guard troops from the state, along with soldiers all the way from Texas. And for the case out of Portland, three judges on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments over whether to end a similar ban imposed by a federal judge over the weekend.
CHANG: OK. And it can be kind of confusing to understand exactly where these troops are, if they're even deployed yet or not. Can you just break all of that down for us, at least as of now?
DIAZ: Right. So in Chicago, a U.S. official who was not authorized to speak publicly told NPR that a couple dozen Texas National Guard soldiers are guarding an ICE facility outside the city as of this morning. But broadly, a few hundred Texas and Illinois National Guard troops have been federalized to respond to Chicago, which Trump claims is overrun by protests and violence. And he wants them to help with immigration enforcement. And local officials strongly disagree, by the way. But troops are not out in the streets of Chicago just yet.
And in Portland, a couple hundred National Guard soldiers are kind of in this limbo. They've been federalized but haven't been sent out onto the streets because of this ongoing court battle blocking their deployment.
CHANG: Right, OK. So what were some key moments from today's hearings?
DIAZ: So in the Oregon case, DOJ prosecutor Eric McArthur was representing the federal government, and he wrapped his arguments by saying that the Portland protesters were violent people and that there is a major risk of future violence if the government puts their guard down. And Oregon Assistant Attorney General Stacy Chaffin, who's arguing to block the deployment, says courts can give the president a lot of deference in his judgments, but she says...
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
STACY CHAFFIN: That deference has a limit, and that limit is this case, where the president's determinations are untethered from reality.
DIAZ: And Chaffin said the judges should focus on whether the current situation in Portland can justify sending troops in and that the judges should not consider events from earlier this summer. And that's when protesters forced an ICE facility in the city to shut down for a few weeks. But at least two of the judges just didn't seem to buy that argument.
CHANG: OK, so that's Portland. Tell us about Chicago.
DIAZ: And in Chicago today, there was a similar focus. Eric Hamilton, the attorney for the U.S. Justice Department, said the president's decision to send troops basically can't be challenged or reviewed. Chicago Public Media reporters were in that courtroom, and they reported on this interesting moment when U.S. District Judge April Perry acknowledged the seriousness of threats facing public servants like ICE agents and those National Guard troops. And she said she started getting threats about 10 minutes after getting assigned this case. And it's worth noting, Judge Perry is planning to reconvene at 4:30 local time, so we might have an update in that case later today.
CHANG: OK. Well, can we talk about the larger implications here, Jaclyn? Like, how might today's proceedings impact these kinds of cases overall, you think?
DIAZ: Yeah, so at the center of these cases is this much bigger question - you know, just how far does presidential power really go? Are there limits? And University of Houston law professor Christopher Mirasola said, this is not just about National Guard deployments. It's an issue that continues to come up in other legal cases, including some that have gone before the Supreme Court.
CHRISTOPHER MIRASOLA: It's really at issue in the cases about sanctions, about presidential immunity. It's this larger trend that I think is coming to typify the current Supreme Court.
CHANG: OK, so what can we expect next? Real quick.
DIAZ: Now we're kind of waiting. Legal scholars like Mirasola said these judges will likely take their time to consider the arguments. But he thinks maybe we can see something the next 24 to 48 hours, maybe. But it's important in the long run that regardless of the outcome of these cases, either side will probably appeal.
CHANG: OK. That is NPR's Jaclyn Diaz. Thank you, Jaclyn.
DIAZ: Thank you. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
