A federal judge in Washington, D.C., has issued a temporary restraining order halting the Trump administration's unprecedented penalties against the law firm Perkins Coie, which has represented clients deemed political adversaries by President Donald Trump. U.S. District Judge Beryl A. Howell ruled from the bench following a two-hour hearing, stating that Trump exercised “extraordinary power” and that Perkins Coie demonstrated it had sustained immediate damages as a result of the penalties.
Judge Howell's ruling effectively prevents certain punitive measures from taking effect while a full hearing is scheduled for a more comprehensive ruling. Last week, President Trump signed an executive order that imposed sweeping restrictions on Perkins Coie, prohibiting the federal government from hiring the firm or utilizing contractors associated with it, except under specific circumstances. The order also restricts the entry of Perkins Coie employees into federal buildings and suspends their security clearances.
In her remarks, Judge Howell expressed concerns that Trump's executive order could undermine the integrity of the entire legal profession, potentially deterring lawyers from representing clients that the president views unfavorably. “I have enormous respect for Williams & Connolly,” Howell noted, referencing the law firm representing Perkins Coie, “and enormous respect for them taking this case when not every law firm would.”
Judge Howell indicated that the executive order likely infringes upon the First Amendment rights of Perkins Coie and highlighted the absence of due process in the imposition of these penalties. She remarked that the language of the order was so broadly defined that it seemed to serve no purpose beyond mere retaliation against the firm. “It sends little chills down my spine,” Howell commented, articulating concerns about the president punishing a company for actions he perceives as against his interests. “Why shouldn’t we be chilled by this?”
While the temporary restraining order does not extend to parts of the executive order regarding the suspension of Perkins Coie’s security clearances or its diversity and inclusion initiatives, the firm has challenged these provisions in its ongoing lawsuit. Dane Butswinkas, the attorney from Williams & Connolly representing Perkins Coie, informed the court that the firm has been losing clients daily since the executive order was issued. He warned that the firm’s top 15 clients, which represent approximately 25 percent of its business, all hold government contracts. “This executive order takes a wrecking ball to the rule of law,” Butswinkas asserted, adding that the immediate effects could spell the end for Perkins Coie.
In an unusual move, Chad Mizelle, the chief of staff to Attorney General Pam Bondi, represented the government during the hearing. He contended that Trump possesses the authority to revoke access to government contracts from individuals or companies he deems untrustworthy. “This is clear Article II executive authority,” Mizelle argued, referencing the constitutional powers granted to the executive branch.
Perkins Coie has a history of representing prominent political entities, including Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee during the 2016 election cycle. The firm also collaborated with the research firm responsible for the now-discredited Steele dossier, which made unverified allegations of extensive connections between Trump and Russia during the campaign. Notably, Marc E. Elias, the primary attorney involved in that project, is no longer associated with Perkins Coie.
In recent weeks, President Trump has also ordered the suspension of security clearances for attorneys at Covington & Burling, a law firm that provided pro bono representation to former special counsel Jack Smith. Smith led federal investigations into Trump regarding allegations of mishandling classified materials and attempts to obstruct the 2020 election results. The ongoing legal battles highlight the contentious atmosphere surrounding Trump’s administration and its impact on legal practices and professionals.
