A nine-day-old video clip of Oregon’s top military leader is rapidly circulating on social media as Portland awaits a decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit regarding President Donald Trump’s plan to deploy National Guard troops to the city.
General Gronewold’s Statement Before Lawmakers
Brigadier General Alan R. Gronewold, the head of the Oregon National Guard, appeared before a state Senate subcommittee last month to explain the potential role of Guard soldiers under Trump’s proposed federal order. His testimony, which some have praised and others criticized, emphasized that the troops’ mission would be protective in nature.
“Guard soldiers serve two purposes: to defend America, and to protect Oregonians,” Gronewold said. “By serving in this mission, they will be protecting any protesters at the ICE facility.”
Also Read
He explained that before deployment, the two companies of soldiers were scheduled to undergo “protective crowd control” training. However, those plans were halted when Governor Tina Kotek ordered the troops to stand down on Tuesday following a federal court ruling that found Trump lacked the authority to mobilize them.
Legal Uncertainty Surrounding the Deployment
The deployment remains in limbo after a federal judge temporarily blocked Trump’s mobilization order last weekend and expanded the injunction Sunday to prevent similar actions involving troops from other states, including California and Texas.
The Trump administration has appealed the ruling to the Ninth Circuit, which is scheduled to hear the case on Thursday. There is no clear timeline for when a final decision will be issued, leaving questions about whether any Guard units will ultimately deploy outside Portland’s U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility.
Command Structure and Federal Oversight
Gronewold clarified that if federalized, Oregon’s Guard members would no longer be under his command but instead under the U.S. Northern Command. He also questioned the language used by the president on social media, noting that Trump’s call for “full force” was “not a doctrinal term that the Army uses.”
A Call for Respect and Understanding
Concluding his testimony, Gronewold urged lawmakers and the public to understand the difference between National Guard troops and federal law enforcement.
“We’re the home team, and our job is to protect and serve Oregonians,” he said. “We follow lawful orders, and that’s what we’re doing. Please treat them with dignity and respect.”
He reiterated that message in a letter to troops dated September 29, acknowledging that service members may hold differing personal views about the mission.
“I know some of you may have strong feelings about this mission. That’s okay,” Gronewold wrote. “You are citizens first, but also service members who took an oath to support and defend the Constitution and follow the orders of the President and the Governor. That oath doesn’t come with an asterisk that says, ‘Only when I agree with the mission.’”
As the legal and political battles unfold, Gronewold’s remarks continue to fuel debate online — reflecting Oregon’s ongoing divide over the role of federal authority and the military in local protest responses.
