Law firm says Trump order targeting it specifically is attack on rule of law
The law firm Perkins Coie is suing the Trump administration, alleging that a recent executive order targeting the firm is unconstitutional and aims to punish it for representing clients and causes that are opposed to the administration.
President Trump signed an executive order last week, “Addressing Risks from Perkins Coie LLP,” that accused the firm of “dishonest and dangerous activity” that sought to overturn laws and elections, and also said it “racially discriminates against its own attorneys and staff” through its diversity, equity and inclusion programs.
In the lawsuit filed Tuesday in federal court in Washington, D.C., attorneys for Perkins Coie call the executive order “an affront to the Constitution and our adversarial system of justice.”
“Its plain purpose is to bully those who advocate points of view that the President perceives as adverse to the views of his Administration, whether those views are presented on behalf of paying or pro bono clients,” the lawsuit says.
Trump’s executive order, it adds, presents a threat to Perkins’ Coie’s ability to represent the interests of its clients and its ability to operate as a business. The suit is asking the court to strike down the order and to prevent it from being implemented.
The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Trump’s executive order accused Perkins’ Coie of a range of nefarious actions over the years allegedly seeking to undermine democratic elections as well as the integrity of U.S. courts and law enforcement.
The order specifically mentions the firm’s representation of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, and the role attorneys at Perkins Coie played in the creation of a dossier of unsubstantiated allegations about possible Trump-Russia ties.
The lawsuit pushes back against any allegation of wrongdoing. It notes that Trump filed a lawsuit in 2022 against Perkins Coie, Hillary Clinton and others alleging a conspiracy against Trump. The case was dismissed months later by a federal court.
It also notes that the two attorneys who led the firm’s work for the Clinton campaign no longer work for Perkins Coie. One of lawyers, Michael Sussmann, was charged by a Justice Department special counsel in connection with his work related to the dossier. A jury found him not guilty at trial.
Trump’s order also accuses the law firm of racial discrimination because of it diversity, equity and inclusion policies.
The lawsuit pushes back on that accusation as well. Perkins Coie, it says, is committed to diversity and inclusion, but “does not discriminate against its attorneys or employees on the basis of race or otherwise.”
The firm’s attorneys say Trump’s order is unconstitutional on several grounds, including violations of the First, Fifth and Sixth Amendments.
NTSB warns that defense bill could undermine aviation safety changes after DCA crash
The head of the NTSB is voicing strong opposition to provisions in the defense policy bill. The NTSB says the House bill would undermine safety improvements made after the mid-air collision near DCA.
Philip Rivers’ return to the NFL, by the numbers
Philip Rivers is coming out of retirement at age 44 for a shot at playing for the Indianapolis Colts, who are struggling to make the playoffs. He last played in the NFL in 2021.
New books coming in December tell tales of the sea, colonialism and midlife
As the year wraps up, we bring you some final notable titles — including The Sea Captain's Wife and The Rest of Our Lives — publishing before 2025 comes to a close.
Egypt and Iran object to playing in a Seattle ‘Pride’ match in next year’s World Cup
Local organizers had planned to include the June 26 game with Seattle's Pride celebrations. Then, FIFA announced the match would include Egypt and Iran, two countries where gay rights are nil.
Judge blocks Trump’s National Guard deployment in LA with sharp rebuke
In the latest in a series of legal setbacks for Trump's deployments, a judge ruled the administration must end its deployment to Los Angeles and return control of National Guard troops to California.
Supreme Court struggles over whether Alabama can execute man found to be intellectually disabled
There was no clear outcome apparent after the justices heard two hours of arguments in an appeal from Alabama, which wants to put to death a man who lower federal courts found is intellectually disabled.
