Oregon Democrats and one Republican in the House voted Friday to draw a “line in the sand” to try to prevent President Donald Trump — or any of his successors — from ordering the Oregon National Guard to act as law enforcement.
Supporters of the bill say they want to make clear that U.S. presidential administrations don’t have the power in Oregon to do what the Trump administration did in Los Angeles earlier this month: deploy California’s National Guard to respond to protests against the will of the state’s governor. Trump says he has the power to use the troops when local law enforcement “can’t get the job done.”
Rep. Paul Evans, a chief sponsor of House Bill 3954 and a Monmouth Democrat, urged colleagues Friday to stop that from happening in Oregon.
“The one thing that you cannot do, is you can’t use them as cops,” Evans said. “That’s where the line is supposed to be drawn.”
The bill passed by the nearly party line vote — 32-16 — with Rep. Anna Scharf, a Republican from Amity, the only member of her party siding with the Democrats. Scharf didn’t explain why.
Evans said the bill reaffirms the governor of Oregon’s command of Oregon’s National Guard, with some outlined exceptions.
“The problem we face is we’re living in a time where there is a person who happens to be president who does not care much for military tradition, who does not respect federal code in many ways,” Evans said. “It could very well lead to 18- and 19-year-old kids sent into a situation that is impossible.”
The bill comes as the legalities of what happened in California are being duked out in court. The dust-up has been a major point of contention between Trump and California Gov. Gavin Newsom. A judge in San Francisco ruled that Trump must return command of the state’s National Guard to Newsom, but late this week a federal appeals court found that the judge was mistaken.
Specifically, Oregon’s bill details when the federal government could call upon Oregon’s National Guard and require Oregon’s guard-leading adjutant general to override even otherwise acceptable federal deployments, if Oregon’s troops are needed for an in-state emergency.
Rep. Dacia Grayber, a Portland Democrat and a firefighter, said Oregon’s National Guard shouldn’t be pulled away from national disasters. She held up a map of Oregon’s wildfire risk this summer, which predicts it could be the worst season in at least 30 years.
“We are in for a heck of a ride this year with fire season,” Grayber said.
Evans envisioned the need for the bill long ago — as Trump campaigned for a second term in office and Evans said he became alarmed. Evans spent two decades in uniform across stretches in the U.S. Air Force and the Oregon Air National Guard.
The now-president’s approach to military command, including comments about using the National Guard or branches of the military to participate in Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids, crossed the line of what Evans thinks is appropriate.
Members of Oregon’s National Guard play a dual role, serving concurrently as part of the Oregon National Guard — the state’s militia — and the National Guard, which can be mobilized to aid federal efforts.
House Bill 3954 lays out six circumstances under which the federal Department of Defense can call Oregon’s troops into active duty, some of which require authorization from Congress. They include: Supporting the response to a national emergency or disaster preceded by a declaration of war, presidential declaration or congressional authorization for use of military force; training; helping the U.S. Department of Homeland Security with congressional approval and helping out another state with the permission of the other state’s governor.
The bill specifies that Oregon’s National Guard is not to be used as law enforcement or immigration enforcement unless the troops are providing “indirect support or surveillance” as a matter of border security.
The bill prohibits Oregon’s adjutant general from relaying communication from the Department of Defense to the Oregon National Guard if the federal government’s requests fall outside the scope of the law. It also says that even in circumstances in which federal officials could legitimately call on Oregon’s National Guard, the adjutant general may not allow that to happen if the deployment would mean Oregon’s Guard would be “effectively incapable of responding to a statewide emergency, such as a natural disaster or terrorism event.”
Oregon should be ready for when, not if, the federal government oversteps, Evans said. If nothing else, he said he hopes passing the new law would buy the state time by launching a court battle over the appropriate use of the National Guard in the 21st century.
“We are literally at the beginning point of what I think will be a downward spiral of putting Americans against Americans in impossible situations,” Evans said.
The bill is personal for Evans. As a young Air Force officer he was deployed to Central and South America in the “counter drugs and counter insurgency business” during U.S. drug wars in the region. He’s seen what happens, he says, “when young people who are scared, who are armed make bad choices.”
“I don’t want 19- or 20-year-old Oregon Guard folks participating in ICE raids or other types of activities that might get them into a situation where they have to make a choice they live with for the rest of their life,” Evans said.
“This is a time for old guys like me, who’ve been there, to stand up and say: ‘We don’t want this generation of warriors to have to go through that.’”
The bill next moves to the Senate for consideration.
©2025 Advance Local Media LLC. Visit oregonlive.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
