White House blasts Perkins Coie law firm that helped fuel Russia hoax after challenging Trump order
The lawsuit filed by Perkins Coie, a law firm with ties to the FBI’s Russia investigation during President Donald Trump’s first term, has been deemed “absurd” by the White House. The firm, known for hiring the company responsible for the controversial “Steele dossier” that alleged Trump’s connections to Russia, sought a restraining order to prevent the Trump administration from cutting off its access to federal resources. U.S. Judge Beryl Howell approved the request, prompting strong reactions from both sides.
White House spokesman Harrison Fields criticized the lawsuit, stating that the Trump administration is committed to eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse in the federal government. He called the lawsuit frivolous, referring to Perkins Coie as a billion-dollar law firm seeking to retain government perks and handouts. Attorney Dane Butswinkas, representing Perkins Coie, expressed concerns about the firm losing a significant portion of its revenue and likened Trump’s order to a “tsunami waiting to hit the firm.”
The executive order signed by Trump suspended security clearances for Perkins Coie employees and restricted their access to sensitive information facilities. The order also limited the firm’s ability to represent clients with government contracts and prevented the federal government from hiring Perkins Coie employees without specific authorization. Perkins Coie argued that the order violated procedural due process and infringed on constitutional protections, including free speech and due process.
Attorneys general from several states filed an amicus brief in support of Perkins Coie, emphasizing the importance of upholding the rule of law and free speech. The coalition of attorneys general condemned the president’s actions as an attempt to silence dissenting voices and exclude certain viewpoints from reaching the courts. Perkins Coie, known for representing prominent Democratic figures like Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, has faced scrutiny for its involvement in commissioning the Steele dossier during the 2016 election.
The Steele dossier, compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele, contained salacious and unverified allegations against Trump, including claims of engaging in illicit activities with Russian prostitutes. Trump, who vehemently denied the allegations, filed a lawsuit against Orbis Business Intelligence, the company co-founded by Steele, citing personal and reputational damage caused by the dossier. Despite the legal battles, Trump remains steadfast in his belief that the executive order was necessary to prevent future abuses of power and political weaponization.
In conclusion, the ongoing legal battle between Perkins Coie and the Trump administration underscores the contentious issues surrounding the Russia investigation and the use of political opposition research. The outcome of this case will have far-reaching implications for the legal rights of law firms, the protection of sensitive information, and the boundaries of executive authority.
