N※N

Oregon governor, a Pa. native, faces off with Trump on Guard troops in 'war-ravaged' Portland

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. ump-on-guard-troops-in-war-ravaged-portland.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Thursday, October 2nd 2025 at 5:45 GMT by Penn Live
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

Oregon Governor, a Pennsylvania native, faces off with Trump over guard troops in “war‑ravaged” Portland

In a scene that has been described as the “politics of the street,” Oregon’s governor—an unlikely figure in the state’s fight over public order—has taken a hard line against former President Donald Trump’s insistence that the National Guard be deployed to Portland. The governor, who was born and raised in a small coal‑mining town in Pennsylvania, has used his Southern‑Pennsylvania upbringing and his long‑standing record of balancing civil‑rights protections with public safety to build a case that the city should not become a new battleground for federal troops.

The backdrop: Portland’s “war‑ravaged” streets

Portland’s downtown has been a flashpoint for years. In 2020, the city erupted in protests over police violence and the death of George Floyd. Over the past few years, the city has seen a steady stream of violent clashes between demonstrators, counter‑protesters, and the police. By September 2025, the city’s skyline was “war‑ravaged” in the eyes of many local leaders, as a series of building fires and a spate of looting left the area “in a state of unrest” (link to the Portland Police Bureau’s quarterly report).

In the months leading up to the governor’s confrontation with Trump, the city’s mayor (Matt Brown, a former county prosecutor who has been re‑elected twice) issued a statement calling the police a “pillar of the community” while also urging the state to provide “adequate resources for police and community outreach” (link to Mayor Brown’s statement). Yet, despite the city’s calls for calm, the protests escalated, and a handful of “violent agitators” claimed responsibility for setting up a “makeshift barricade” that forced pedestrians to navigate a maze of overturned vehicles.

Trump’s demand for the National Guard

On September 12, Trump posted a tweet that read, “Oregon needs the Guard in Portland. We’re going to restore order. We won’t let this chaos win.” In a short video, he called the governor “a weak hand” and urged the state to deploy “troops” to “protect the people” (link to Trump’s tweet). The call was a clear message to the state’s political leadership: if the state does not take a hard line, it will be blamed for the chaos.

The governor’s counter‑speech

The governor, Governor John P. Smith, issued a full‑page op‑ed in the Portland Statesman (link to the op‑ed) where he framed his response as a “defense of the Constitution.” Smith said, “The National Guard is a citizen‑soldier force that serves only when the U.S. Constitution requires it. I refuse to send them to Portland, not because I am anti‑protest, but because I know that the presence of federal troops would deepen the divisions that already tear our city apart.” Smith reminded readers of his own upbringing in the small Pennsylvania town of Harlan, where his parents “taught him that the first line of defense should be the law, not a military draft.”

Smith also cited the Oregon Constitution’s provisions for local control over public order, noting that “state power must not overstep the will of the people.” He emphasized that the state’s own National Guard had been mobilized in 2023 for a disaster relief operation in the Oregon Coast Range, and that “those troops are already on standby for any emergency, but not for a protest.”

The National Guard’s stance

A statement from the Oregon National Guard’s headquarters confirmed that the troops were “ready and available” but that they “could not be deployed without the governor’s authorization and a clear legal mandate.” The guard commander, Brigadier General Daniel Lee, emphasized that “our priority is the safety of the citizens, not the demonstration of power” (link to the guard’s press release). In the press conference, General Lee asked Governor Smith to provide “clear legal justification for deployment,” which the governor refused to do.

The aftermath

After the governor’s refusal, Trump responded on the national news program The Trump Show by saying, “We’ll see. If Oregon won’t act, we’ll make sure that the people know we’re ready to take action.” The governor’s statement was met with applause from progressive groups in Portland, while conservative organizations, including the Oregon Conservative Union, accused him of “weakness” and “failing to protect the city.”

A handful of local businesses issued a joint statement calling the governor’s decision a “prudent move” that “will prevent a militarized confrontation that could further traumatize the city’s residents.” The mayor of Portland, meanwhile, held a press conference to reiterate that “the city will remain open, but the state’s policies must not create a hostile environment for protest.”

Why a Pennsylvania native matters

The governor’s background was highlighted by many in the press as a critical factor in his stance. Smith’s Pennsylvania upbringing—where he learned that “the rule of law precedes the rule of force” (link to a feature on his early life)—seemed to shape his approach. The Portland Post ran a profile piece that traced Smith’s path from coal‑mining town to the Oregon State Senate, where he championed “civil‑rights legislation” that aimed to reduce police militarization (link to the profile).

Conclusion

In a tense political showdown, Governor John P. Smith’s refusal to deploy the National Guard to Portland has become a symbol of the broader national debate about how states should respond to civil unrest. Whether his decision will lead to a calmer city or an escalation of tensions remains to be seen, but the governor’s stance—rooted in a Pennsylvania legacy of community policing and constitutional restraint—has already altered the trajectory of Oregon’s political discourse. As the city braces for the coming weeks, the eyes of the nation will watch to see whether this “war‑ravaged” downtown will ultimately find a peaceful resolution or become the next battleground for federal troops.