A U.S. District Judge has temporarily blocked provisions of President Donald Trump’s executive order that targeted the prestigious law firm Perkins Coie, signaling a significant legal victory for the firm.
At a hearing on Wednesday, Judge Beryl Howell expressed concern over the broader implications of the executive order, describing it as an alarming development that is “watching in horror” among the legal profession.
The executive order, which stems from the firm’s diversity, equity, and inclusion policies as well as its previous work for Hillary Clinton, attempted to bar Perkins Coie from conducting business with federal contractors and restrict its lawyers’ access to government officials and buildings.
It also threatened the suspension of security clearances for firm attorneys, although the firm did not seek relief on that matter.
Judge Howell acknowledged that the legal challenges to the executive order would likely succeed, noting that Perkins Coie is entitled to challenge the constitutionality of such broad-reaching directives.
She granted the firm’s request for a temporary restraining order, which temporarily halts the enforcement of the order while litigation continues.
“This executive order is like a tsunami waiting to hit the firm. It threatens its very survival,” said Perkins Coie’s attorney, Dane Butswinkas, during the hearing. “It will be the end of the law firm if allowed to stand.”
Perkins Coie welcomed the ruling as a crucial step in protecting its constitutional rights, asserting that the executive order violated protections for free speech, free association, and due process under the U.S. Constitution.
In response, a White House spokesperson defended the executive order, emphasizing the administration’s efforts to curb “waste, fraud, and abuse” in government.
The spokesperson dismissed the law firm’s legal challenge, calling it “absurd” that Perkins Coie, a billion-dollar firm, is fighting to retain access to government contracts and “perks.”
The Justice Department, represented by Chad Mizelle, argued that the President holds broad authority to limit access to sensitive government information, particularly when it comes to individuals or firms deemed not trustworthy.
The legal clash highlights the ongoing tension between President Trump’s administration and law firms perceived to be aligned with opposition political forces.
Perkins Coie’s lawsuit further escalates this growing feud, which has already seen Trump’s administration target other firms, such as Covington & Burling, over similar concerns.
Perkins Coie claims that the executive order has already resulted in lost revenue, with at least seven clients — including a major government contractor — pulling legal work due to the restrictions, significantly impacting the firm’s operations. Furthermore, the firm’s lawyers have been blocked from attending government meetings, according to the lawsuit.
This ruling is the latest development in a broader battle between the Trump administration and legal institutions that have challenged key policies, from immigration restrictions to the handling of transgender rights.
The case underscores the ongoing tension surrounding legal representation in the face of politically charged mandates.
Perkins Coie remains committed to upholding its constitutional rights, with the court’s decision representing an important stand for free speech and professional independence in the face of government overreach.
Read more:
