Judge Blocks Trump Order Targeting Perkins Coie, Clients (2)

A DC federal judge on Wednesday temporarily barred the Trump administration from enforcing an executive order targeting law firm Perkins Coie.

The ruling freezes parts of President Donald Trump’s March 6 order, which threatened government contracts for Perkins Coie clients and banned firm employees from accessing federal buildings.

“That’s pretty extraordinary power for the president to exercise,” Judge Beryl Howell said during a hearing in the US District Court for the District of Columbia. The idea that the president can ban a business from a federal building if it’s operating against US interests “sends little chills down my spine,” she said.

Howell granted an injunction halting sections of the executive order. Perkins Coie didn’t challenge other parts of Trump’s order, directing agency heads to suspend security clearances for the firm’s lawyers and investigate “industry leading law firms” for racially discriminatory practices.

Trump said he issued the order because the firm was involved in “weaponization against a political opponent’’ during the 2016 presidential campaign. Perkins Coie lawyers advised Hillary Clinton and retained Washington firm Fusion GPS for research that resulted in the so-called Steele dossier, which alleged Trump’s campaign coordinated with Russian government officials.

Perkins Coie on Tuesday sued the Justice Department and other federal agencies to challenge the order. The decision is the first step in ensuring the president’s “unconstitutional” executive order is never enforced, the firm said in a statement.

“We will follow the court’s direction regarding next steps and will continue to challenge the Executive Order, which threatens our firm, our clients, and core constitutional protections important to all Americans,” the firm said.

Perkins Coie is represented by Dane Butswinkas and a team of Williams & Connolly lawyers. The firm is “very brave” to take a case “when not many in this city or nation would,” Howell said.

Perkins Coie clients are rattled by Trump’s move, with some already dropping the firm, it said.

Trump’s order poses an “existential risk” by disrupting the firm from interacting with federal agencies on behalf of clients, partner David Burman said in a declaration filed with the court. It also threatens federal contracting opportunities for the firm’s 15 largest clients, who collectively paid Perkins Coie more than $343 million in fees last year, nearly a quarter of its annual revenue.

An unidentified company who has spent more than $1 million in fees for Perkins Coie to defend it against a federal enforcement action hired other law firms to continue the work, Burman said. That came after federal agency official informed the client that Perkins Coie lawyers should not attend an agency meeting to discuss the matter, he said.

As clients leave the firm, its own lawyers could follow, Burman said.

“We take pride in the loyalty of our partners and associates, but lawyers of their quality have other opportunities, including the easy one of following their clients to other firms,” Burman wrote. “Exceptional lawyers are the basis for our reputation and success. Every passing day increases our risk.”

Chad Mizelle, the Justice Department’s chief of staff, argued for the Trump administration. He called Perkins Coie’s allegations about the harm caused by the order speculative “boogeymen, ghosts.” The firm’s clients may have left to work with a firm that has closer ties to the new presidential administration, he said.

“While I have no reason to doubt” Burman’s statements, “I have no way to test them,” Mizelle said.

Trump’s order reflects the “clear Article II authority” given to the executive branch in the Constitution, he argued. The “president can determine if certain individuals and companies aren’t trustworthy with national security.”

‘Very Fragile’

The injunction likely won’t undo all of the damage already caused by the order, according to legal observers. More trouble could be brewing for the firm.

“It was essential that Perkins Coie win this, but the problem is everyone in the government knows that the president does not like this particular law firm,” said George Conway, co-founder of the Lincoln Project, an anti-Trump political action group. “People know if they work with Perkins Coie, they will earn the displeasure of the White House.”

The chaos that followed Trump’s order highlights how vulnerable law firms are if they draw the president’s ire, said John Morley, a Yale Law professor who has written about how firms fail.

“This isn’t like an ordinary business where it can go through a few lean years and come out as something smaller,” Morley said. “Law firms aren’t like that. They’re very fragile.”

Client concerns could cause a “run on the bank,” at Perkins Coie, said Janet Stanton, a partner at law firm consultancy Adam Smith, Esq.

“The issue is that clients are spooked,” Stanton said. “And the lawyers must react to that.”

The case is: Perkins Coie v. U.S. Department of Justice, D.D.C., 1:25-cv-00716, 3/12/25