A recently resurfaced video clip of Oregon’s top military official has ignited debate online, as Portland awaits a ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on President Donald Trump’s effort to deploy National Guard troops to the city.
The testimony, delivered September 30 by Brigadier General Alan R. Gronewold before an Oregon Senate subcommittee, has been widely shared on social media over the past week. In it, Gronewold describes the Guard’s potential role in Portland and emphasizes that troops would be tasked with “protecting any protesters” during the planned federal deployment.
Guard Deployment on Hold Amid Legal Battle
Governor Tina Kotek ordered Oregon’s Guard members to stand down earlier this week after a federal judge ruled that Trump lacked legal authority to mobilize state troops under federal command.
Also Read
The ruling temporarily halted the administration’s plan to send two companies of Oregon soldiers to assist federal agencies in securing the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility in South Portland — a site that has been the focus of ongoing demonstrations.
Kotek’s order came just as the Trump administration appealed the judge’s decision to the Ninth Circuit, which is expected to hold a hearing on Thursday. There is no set timeline for a ruling, leaving questions about whether troops from Oregon or other states could ultimately be deployed.
General Gronewold’s Comments Resurface
In his testimony, Gronewold explained that the Guard’s mission, if activated, would be primarily protective in nature. “Guard soldiers serve two purposes: one, to defend America, and two, to protect Oregonians,” he told lawmakers. “And so by serving in this mission, they will be protecting any protesters at the ICE facility.”
He added that before deployment, Guard members would undergo “protective crowd control” training, though those preparations were paused following the governor’s stand-down order.
The remarks struck sharply different chords across political lines — some praising Gronewold for emphasizing restraint and protection, others accusing him of minimizing public safety concerns.
Gronewold also clarified the chain of command, noting that if federalized, the Oregon Guard would operate under the U.S. Northern Command, not state control. He said Trump’s online call for “full force” by the military was “not a doctrinal term that the Army uses”, leaving commanders uncertain about its meaning.
A Call for Respect and Understanding
The general concluded his remarks by urging lawmakers to help the public understand the Guard’s role and to avoid conflating state troops with federal agents.
“We’re the home team,” Gronewold said. “Our job is to protect and serve Oregonians, and we follow lawful orders. Please treat them with dignity and respect.”
In a September 29 letter to Guard members, Gronewold acknowledged the sensitivity of the mission and the strong personal feelings some soldiers might hold.
“You are citizens first, but you’re also service members who took an oath to support and defend the Constitution and follow the orders of the President and the Governor,” he wrote. “That oath doesn’t come with an asterisk that says, ‘Only when I agree with the mission.’”
Online Reaction and Political Fallout
The clip of Gronewold’s testimony has since spread widely on social media platforms, generating both praise and outrage. Supporters say his comments reflect a measured, constitutional approach to a volatile situation, while critics argue they signal complicity in what they see as federal overreach.
As Oregon awaits the Ninth Circuit’s decision, the testimony has become a flashpoint in the larger national debate over Trump’s federal deployment orders and the boundaries between state sovereignty and federal power.
For now, Oregon’s troops remain at home — and the general’s words continue to echo far beyond the state Capitol.
