A federal judge recently deemed unconstitutional an executive order by former President Donald Trump that targeted the law firm Perkins Coie, describing it as an assault on the core principles of the American legal system. U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell’s decision is the first to permanently block an executive order penalizing a law firm for representing clients or causes opposed by Trump.
Judge Howell criticized the unprecedented nature of Trump’s order, which aimed adverse actions at Perkins Coie’s employees, including terminating their security clearances, restricting access to government offices, and severing government contracts. The judge’s 102-page ruling summarized the order as a threat to the independence of the legal profession and judicial system.
Perkins Coie was originally the focus of a comprehensive executive order that imposed significant penalties on the firm. This order was part of a broader initiative targeting several other law firms perceived as political adversaries by Trump. These firms, alongside Perkins Coie, have initiated legal actions that have led to temporary blocks against the orders. Perkins Coie, however, has now secured a permanent injunction.
The ruling highlighted the essential role of independent legal representation in maintaining a fair judicial system, a principle valued since the country’s founding. Howell’s decision condemned the order for vilifying a specific firm and its employees because of its advocacy for clients in conflicts disapproved by Trump.
Perkins Coie expressed satisfaction with the ruling, which it views as a vindication of constitutional rights, including free speech and due process. A spokesperson reiterated the firm’s dedication to defending its interests and the rule of law. The Justice Department has yet to provide a comment on the ruling.
The order against Perkins Coie was part of a series of actions by Trump against at least three other firms, which also resulted in temporary injunctions. Some firms have reportedly reached agreements with Trump to avoid similar orders, agreeing to substantial commitments in pro bono work for causes aligned with the former president’s interests.
