US judge blocks Trump order banning Dem-linked law firm from government business
In a significant ruling on Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Beryl A. Howell blocked the Trump administration’s attempt to enforce an executive order targeting the Democrat-linked law firm Perkins Coie. The judge sided with plaintiffs from the firm who argued that the order was unconstitutional and violated due process protections.
The decision came just one day after attorneys representing Perkins Coie filed a request for an emergency restraining order to prevent the executive order from taking effect. The order sought to penalize the firm by stripping its employees of security clearances, banning them from accessing government buildings, and terminating existing contracts with government clients.
During the hearing, Judge Howell expressed concern over the breadth of power granted to the president by the executive order. She noted that labeling a law firm as a threat and denying them access to government entities and businesses was an extraordinary move.
Attorneys for Perkins Coie argued that the executive order violated due process protections, free speech, and free association rights under the U.S. constitution. They contended that the order would bring their business to a halt, potentially causing irreparable harm to the firm.
The lawyers emphasized the severe impact the order would have on Perkins Coie, citing evidence that clients had already withdrawn legal work or were considering doing so, leading to a significant loss of revenue for the firm.
President Trump signed the executive order last week, accusing Perkins Coie of engaging in dishonest and dangerous activities that undermined democratic elections, the integrity of courts, and honest law enforcement. The firm’s involvement in hiring Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm behind the “Steele Dossier,” was also cited as a reason for targeting them.
In a rare court appearance, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi’s chief of staff, Chad Mizelle, represented the Trump administration in the lawsuit. The order accused Perkins Coie of racially discriminating against its own attorneys and staff through diversity, equity, and inclusion programs.
Perkins Coie’s attorneys argued that the executive order was a form of political bullying, aimed at stifling viewpoints perceived as adverse to the administration. They highlighted the potential loss of government contracts, which account for a significant portion of the firm’s revenue.
This is not the first time the Trump administration has targeted law firms perceived as opposing its interests. Earlier this year, a similar executive order was issued against Covington & Burling, which represents former special counsel Jack Smith. The order revoked the security clearances of two lawyers at the firm and ordered a review of all government contracts.
The White House has not yet responded to the ruling. The case underscores the ongoing tensions between the administration and legal firms representing opposing viewpoints, raising concerns about the erosion of constitutional protections and the rule of law.
