Trump Authorizes Military to Portland Amid ICE Facility Protests
On a recent Saturday, former President Trump publicized his decision to mobilize troops to Portland, having been requested to do so by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem. The move was aimed at preserving the integrity of the city and its Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facilities. Alongside this, Trump authorized the use of ‘full force’, if deemed necessary, underlining the seriousness of the situation.
Tricia McLaughlin, the Assistant Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, rationalized Noem’s request by emphasizing the ongoing incidents of violence observed in past weeks at ICE facilities. These included numerous instances of battery against law enforcement agents and even a terrorist attack on an ICE facility situated in Dallas.
A Department of Homeland Security communiqué highlighted three significant instances when protestors displaying anti-ICE sentiments had targeted Portland in late June. The official release noted recurring attacks on the city’s processing center, insinuating a disruptive pattern of behavior from the groups involved.
Since the start of June, the federal ICE detention facility in Portland has been a continual stage of protest. Notably, tensions escalated noticeably during both the Fourth of July and Labor Day gatherings. Several confrontations escalated to a point that warranted the use of tear gas and necessitated intermittent facility shutdowns.
The legal confines of the federal constitution put the government within its rights to undertake such measures. These include the deployment of officers for the purpose of securing federal structures and, by extension, exerting constitutional authority even if local or state officials endorse a differing view.
These mass gatherings frequently veered towards destruction, with numerous incidences of arson, looting, and vandalism being reported. A sustained onslaught on the downtown federal courthouse was particularly noteworthy. Over three months of consistent displays of unrest entrenched themselves as a new norm for the city, with the turning of summer seeding the growth of riots that the majority of residents perceived more as public disturbances than genuine protests.
Portland was economically devastated due to the relentlessly persistent demonstrations. The federal courthouse alone stood testament to this, bearing the brunt of damage amounting to $1.6 million. Prominent retail chains felt the strain, leading to closures of several outlets. Among those affected were Walmart, which closed two stores, and Target, which shuttered three.
Other notable names that vacated included Nike, the outdoor gear retailer REI, the ubiquitous coffee chain Starbucks, and the comfort food diner Cracker Barrel. The latter closed three of its four Oregon outlets, reflecting the significant impact these events had on even the most established commercial players in the market.
Portland tracked a net closure of 408 independently owned business establishments during 2019 with this trend holding steady throughout the subsequent years in 2020 and 2021. It wasn’t just these small businesses that were affected, however. Larger businesses also experienced hardships due to decimated consumer traffic and decreased revenues.
The results of a 2020 survey of businesses within the city painted a bleak picture. As per the findings, over half of the enterprises experienced a fall in revenue. Moreover, the nightly acts of destruction led to an erosion of what was once a vibrant urban atmosphere and precipitated a decline in pedestrian traffic, which fell by 41 percent when compared to levels observed in May of the previous year.
What’s more, the economic destabilization and degeneration faced by Portland appeared to lag behind that experienced by its peer cities which managed to recover back to pre-pandemic employment levels by April of 2021. Meanwhile, the employment situation in Portland remained strained until as late as July 2022. This further underscores the prolonged and significant impact of these events on the city’s economy.