Perkins Coie Sues U.S. Over Trump’s Security Clearance Order \ Newslooks \ Washington DC \ Mary Sidiqi \ Evening Edition \ Perkins Coie, a law firm targeted by President Trump over its past legal work, sued the federal government Tuesday over an executive order that revokes its attorneys’ security clearances. The firm argues the order is unconstitutional retaliation for its role in representing Democrats. The lawsuit, filed in Washington, seeks to block enforcement, citing financial harm and viewpoint discrimination. A court hearing is set for Wednesday.
Perkins Coie Lawsuit Quick Looks
- Trump’s Executive Order: Revokes security clearances, bans firm employees from federal buildings, and terminates contracts.
- Firm’s Lawsuit: Filed in federal court, calling the order unconstitutional retaliation.
- Political Tensions: Trump has long criticized Perkins Coie for its work with Democrats, including the Clinton campaign.
- Hearing Scheduled: A judge will review the case on Wednesday afternoon.
- Business Impact: The firm claims the order has already caused clients to cut ties.
- Past Lawsuits: Trump previously sued Perkins Coie over the Russia probe, but the case was dismissed.
Deep Look
A prominent law firm long targeted by President Donald Trump for its past legal work sued the federal government on Tuesday, challenging an executive order that revokes its attorneys’ security clearances and cuts off federal contracts.
The lawsuit, filed by Perkins Coie in Washington, D.C., federal court, argues that the order is an unconstitutional act of retaliation, violating the firm’s rights and undermining the legal profession’s independence. The firm is seeking an immediate injunction to prevent the order from being enforced, with a hearing set for Wednesday afternoon.
Trump’s Order: Targeting Perkins Coie
The executive order, signed last week, suspends security clearances for Perkins Coie attorneys, bars firm employees from entering federal buildings, and terminates federal contracts with the firm. The move is widely seen as a punitive measure against a law firm that has been involved in several high-profile legal battles opposing Trump and his allies.
This follows an earlier executive order targeting another law firm whose attorneys provided legal services to special counsel Jack Smith, who led criminal investigations into Trump. The latest order suggests an escalation in Trump’s efforts to punish legal professionals connected to past investigations and Democratic political efforts.
Perkins Coie’s Political History: A Trump Rival
Perkins Coie has a long history of working with Democratic clients and was notably involved in Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign. The firm also played a role in voting rights challenges during the 2020 election, representing Democrats in various legal battles.
In 2017, Perkins Coie made headlines when it was revealed that it had hired Fusion GPS, a private investigative research firm, to conduct opposition research on Trump. That research led to former British spy Christopher Steele compiling a dossier investigating Trump’s alleged ties to Russia.
Trump has publicly criticized Perkins Coie for years, often accusing the firm of participating in a conspiracy against him. In 2022, he sued Perkins Coie, along with Hillary Clinton, FBI officials, and others, over what he alleged was a coordinated effort to fabricate the Russia investigation. That lawsuit was dismissed.
Lawsuit Claims: Retaliation and Constitutional Violations
In its legal complaint, Perkins Coie argues that Trump’s executive order is politically motivated and a direct attack on the legal profession’s ability to represent clients without fear of government retribution.
The lawsuit highlights several key concerns:
- Unconstitutional Retaliation: The firm argues the order violates the First Amendment by punishing attorneys for representing clients Trump views as adversaries.
- Discrimination Based on Viewpoint: Perkins Coie contends that the order illegally targets the firm due to its legal work with Democrats and other Trump opponents.
- Financial Harm: The firm claims the order has already resulted in lost business, as clients have terminated engagements out of fear of government retaliation.
- Baseless Accusations: The lawsuit notes that the two primary attorneys whose work most angered Trump left the firm years ago, meaning their involvement in past legal matters should have no bearing on current actions against the firm.
“The Order is an affront to the Constitution and our adversarial system of justice,” the lawsuit states. “Its plain purpose is to bully those who advocate points of view that the President perceives as adverse to the views of his Administration.”
Legal and Political Ramifications
Trump’s latest executive order adds to his ongoing efforts to target the legal community, particularly firms and attorneys involved in cases against him. This raises serious legal and ethical questions about presidential authority, due process, and the independence of the legal profession.
Legal experts suggest that if the order stands, it could set a dangerous precedent where presidents retaliate against law firms for representing political opponents.
Upcoming Court Battle
The federal court hearing on Wednesday will be the first major test of whether Trump’s executive order can be enforced. A judge will decide whether to temporarily block the order, potentially preventing further harm to Perkins Coie as the lawsuit proceeds.
Legal analysts predict a fierce legal battle, with the Biden administration, legal advocacy groups, and civil rights organizations likely weighing in on the case.
What’s Next?
The case could take months or even years to resolve, but Wednesday’s hearing will be critical in determining whether the executive order remains in effect or faces an immediate legal setback.
Meanwhile, the political battle over the legal profession’s role in holding government officials accountable is likely to intensify as Trump continues to target firms involved in past investigations against him.
For now, Perkins Coie is fighting back, framing the order as a blatant attack on the rule of law—and a warning sign for any attorneys who might find themselves on the wrong side of a Trump administration.
You must Register or Login to post a comment.