特朗普一纸总统令，大批美军奔赴关键地点，美国内战一触即发？

Core Viewpoint - President Trump's recent order to deploy a large number of U.S. troops to Portland, Oregon, has sparked significant controversy and opposition from state and local officials, raising questions about the legality and implications of such military intervention [1][3][5]. Oregon State's Response - Oregon Governor Kate Brown publicly opposed Trump's order, asserting that the state has sufficient capacity to manage its public safety without federal military intervention [3]. - Brown emphasized that there is no "insurrection" or "national security threat" in Portland, and she has communicated with other state governors to discuss responses to the unexpected military deployment [3]. Portland City's Response - Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler also condemned the federal military presence, stating that the city does not require federal intervention and questioning whether Trump is attempting to create a "state of anarchy" [5]. - Oregon and Portland have filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, claiming overreach and infringement on local governance [5]. Reactions from Other State Leaders - California Governor Gavin Newsom criticized Trump for waging "war on American cities," suggesting that Trump's actions are politically motivated rather than aimed at addressing violence [7]. - Trump's military interventions have been previously challenged in court, with a ruling against his deployment of National Guard troops in California, yet he continues to pursue similar actions in other states [7]. Social Division and Presidential Power Controversy - Trump's frequent use of military force to address domestic issues has intensified societal divisions and raised alarms about potential power abuses [9]. - The ongoing military interventions could exacerbate internal conflicts and challenge the constitutional balance between federal and state powers, leading to increased tensions between the federal government and local authorities [9].