Judge Strikes Down Trump Order Targeting Perkins Coie as Unconstitutional

A U.S. federal judge has invalidated President Donald Trump’s executive order targeting law firm Perkins Coie, ruling it unconstitutional and politically motivated. U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell declared the March 6 directive a violation of the First and Fifth Amendments, protecting free speech and due process. Howell criticized the move as an attempt to "settle personal vendettas," warning that punishing disfavored individuals or businesses is not a legitimate use of presidential power.

Perkins Coie, which represented Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, filed suit after Trump’s order barred its lawyers from government buildings and threatened to revoke federal contracts involving its clients. In a 102-page opinion, Judge Howell described the order as a targeted attack on the legal profession and the rule of law, asserting that "lawyers must stick to the party line, or else" was the message Trump sent.

The ruling marks the first major legal rebuke of Trump’s efforts to penalize law firms connected to investigations or political rivals. Perkins Coie welcomed the decision, reaffirming its commitment to protecting its clients and upholding democratic principles.

Three other prominent firms—WilmerHale, Jenner & Block, and Susman Godfrey—have also challenged similar orders. While their cases are pending, judges have issued temporary blocks. Meanwhile, firms like Skadden Arps and Latham & Watkins have struck deals with Trump, offering pro bono services worth nearly $1 billion to avoid punitive measures—a move criticized by some as yielding to political pressure.

The Justice Department may appeal the decision to the D.C. Circuit Court. Trump’s order also accused Perkins Coie of “racial discrimination” due to its diversity hiring policies, echoing broader attacks by Trump allies on inclusion efforts.

This decision reinforces legal protections against politically motivated government retaliation.