no oregon State body has asked for help: legislature; governor; and courts. all silent.
the protesters being arrested is suspected and actual vandals but attempting to paint them as insurrectionists is a complete vocabulary fail not requiring a Con Law expert to explain. doj lacks authority to arrest these folks off fed property while they ain't active committing offenses.
there is a third category where use o' fed cops w/o state approval is allowable, but we hesitate to mention 'cause is gonna cause confusion and be used by many to legitimize what is clear illegal.
post brown v. board, the fed granted unto itself the authority to use troops/fed police to protect Constitutional rights o' the people o' the US from the diminution and dilution o' state institutions. now keep in mind Gromnir is likely the only non overt racist sob you will ever meet who has public criticized brown v. board. (is just one reason we were never gonna be making it as a fed judge-- immediate dq if you criticize brown.) the Justices did the right and moral thing with brown, but the law, the specific decision, were flawed. use scaliaesque textualist reasoning to overturn plessy woulda' been possible, but not only would such a decision have failed to address the actual immediate problem, textualism weren't a thing in the 50's.
am not gonna get into all the legal flaws with brown, but part o' the problem with the decision which were immediate apparent were the Court's lack o' an enforcement capacity. the thing is, Congress and the President didn't have much authority neither. sure, Congress could withhold money from states who didn't enforce brown, but such wouldn't be much benefit to students current suffering from segregation practices. as difficult as it may be to believe, the POTUS didn't have more authority than Congress to enforce brown.
Congress rewrote laws to give the President authority to use troops to protect Constitutional rights, which is kinda suspect and should make one pause at potential abuses. nevertheless, the fed folks so recent dismissed as rabid dogs were doing the right thing as they saw it. the fed were trying to protect those who could not protect themselves from the real rabid dogs-- The People.
*sigh*
fast forward to 2020 and doj is using brown reasoning to arrest protesters in portland?
...
recall Constitution is not the Declaration, so if folks tell us 'bout protecting life and liberty and property (translation: pursuit of happiness) as legit rights needing and deserving fed protection we will callous and condescending mock 'em. Constitutional rights is not particular numerous and is not o' kinda and quality being protected by the dhs stormtroopers in portland. in fact, the militarized dhs troops is arguable violating rights o' speech, assembly, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, due process, and right to counsel... stuff off the top o' our noggin. gotta serious indulge in legal contortionism to use Constitution protection to validate faceless dhs paramilitary troop presence in portland as they arrest protesters and detain 'em w/o benefit o' counsel, nevertheless, in 2020 with bill barr's doj, such a heretofore ridiculous implausibility is what we are facing.
how is it possible for so many to not be horrified?