Immergut: What I'll do is not modify my original TRO but issue a new TRO that prohibits the relocation or deployment of any federalized national guard to the state of Oregon....

Immergut: I'm handling this on expedited basis, but defendants haven't provided new info.

SHE RULES FROM THE BENCH: I grant the plaintiffs motion for a second TRO based on reasons stated in previous order...

Judge Immergut first give DOJ opportunity to respond to second motion for TRO.

He says his understanding is that members of the federalized California National Guard are being deployed to Oregon.

Meanwhile, Hegseth issued a memorandum purporting to federalize members of the Texas national guard for deployment to Portland and Chicago.

The memorandum was just filed as an exhibit on the docket not too long ago. That could explain the delay re: hearing but unclear at the moment....🤷‍♀️

Riley: We don't think this would create jurisdictional conflict....Court has jurisdiction to enter new injunction

I will never, ever, ever, ever, ever forgive the New York Times for making email security the singular issue of 2016, while essentially going "oh well, what can you do" with this clownish bullshit

After universal child health care, we’d love to see baby boxes in the US.