Trump Issues Sweeping Executive Order Against Perkins Coie, Targeting Law Firm Tied to Political Rivals
In a dramatic escalation of his campaign against legal firms linked to political adversaries, President Donald Trump signed an executive order on March 6, 2025, severely restricting the operations of Perkins Coie, a global law firm based in Seattle.
The order revokes security clearances for the firm’s employees, cancels government contracts, and limits its lawyers’ access to federal buildings and officials. It goes further than a similar order issued earlier against Covington & Burling, which had represented Special Counsel Jack Smith.
Trump’s animosity toward Perkins Coie stems from its role in the 2016 election. Two former attorneys, Marc Elias and Michael Sussmann, were involved in the FBI investigation into alleged ties between Trump’s campaign and Russia. The executive order accuses the firm of “undermining democratic elections, the integrity of our courts, and honest law enforcement” by compiling a dossier containing unverified allegations against Trump.
The order instructs federal agencies to suspend security clearances for Perkins Coie attorneys, terminate government contracts, and limit access to federal buildings when deemed a national security threat. It also urges agencies to curtail interactions with the firm’s employees.
In a notable addition, the order targets Perkins Coie’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. It accuses the firm of discriminatory hiring practices and calls for a federal review of large law firms to assess whether they reserve positions based on race or other DEI criteria opposed by the administration.
Perkins Coie has swiftly condemned the order as “patently unlawful” and vowed to challenge it in court. The firm is expected to seek a temporary restraining order while litigation proceeds.
Legal experts warn that the order represents a dangerous escalation in targeting law firms. The president of the American Bar Association, William R. Bay, has condemned the move, emphasizing that lawyers must be free to represent clients without fear of retribution.
This action aligns with Trump’s broader push to dismantle DEI initiatives across various industries, a campaign that has already prompted some corporations to modify their internal policies.
The legal battle over the executive order is expected to intensify in the coming weeks. Perkins Coie will likely argue that the order violates constitutional protections, setting up a high-profile courtroom showdown. Meanwhile, concerns persist over the chilling effect this move could have on legal professionals, potentially discouraging firms from representing high-profile political figures in the future.
As Trump continues his campaign against legal adversaries, his administration’s approach raises questions about the balance of power between the executive branch and the legal profession. The outcome of this legal battle and its implications for the independence of the legal system remain to be seen.
Trump’s Executive Order Sparks Widespread Concerns Over Legal Profession’s Independence
The executive order targeting Perkins Coie has sent shockwaves through the legal community, with many viewing it as an unprecedented overreach by the executive branch. Legal scholars and practitioners alike are raising alarms about the potential erosion of the independence of the legal system, as well as the chilling effect this could have on law firms representing politically sensitive clients.
Perkins Coie, a firm with a long history of high-profile political work, has found itself at the center of a growing controversy. The firm’s attorneys, many of whom have held prominent roles in Democratic legal efforts, are now facing significant professional hurdles as a result of the order. The revocation of security clearances alone could severely hamper their ability to handle sensitive cases, raising questions about the future of political legal work in the U.S.
Legal experts point to the broader implications of the order, which they argue sets a dangerous precedent for the targeting of law firms based on their political affiliations or clients. “This is not just about Perkins Coie,” said one constitutional law expert, who wished to remain anonymous. “It’s about whether the executive branch can unilaterally punish entire law firms for their perceived political leanings. If this stands, it could fundamentally alter the legal landscape in this country.”
The order’s focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives has also drawn sharp criticism. By accusing Perkins Coie of discriminatory hiring practices, the administration has opened a new front in its broader campaign against DEI programs. Critics argue that this aspect of the order is particularly troubling, as it appears to conflate legitimate diversity efforts with discrimination, potentially setting the stage for further attacks on DEI initiatives across other industries.
Perkins Coie has vowed to fight the order vigorously, with legal experts predicting a protracted and contentious battle in the courts. The firm is expected to argue that the order violates constitutional protections, including the First Amendment rights of its attorneys and the due process rights of the firm itself. Meanwhile, the administration is likely to defend the order as a necessary measure to protect national security and uphold the integrity of the legal system.
As the legal community braces for the fallout, many are left wondering what this means for the future of legal representation in politically charged cases. “If law firms start to feel that they’ll be targeted for representing certain clients, it could have a chilling effect on the entire profession,” said William R. Bay, president of the American Bar Association. “Lawyers must be free to represent their clients without fear of retribution from the government. That’s a fundamental principle of our justice system.”
The coming weeks and months will be crucial in determining the outcome of this high-stakes legal battle. With the independence of the legal profession hanging in the balance, all eyes will be on the courts as they grapple with the constitutional implications of Trump’s executive order. The ultimate ruling could have far-reaching consequences, not just for Perkins Coie, but for law firms across the country and the clients they serve.
Conclusion
President Trump’s executive order targeting Perkins Coie represents a significant escalation in the administration’s campaign against legal firms perceived as political adversaries. By revoking security clearances, canceling government contracts, and limiting access to federal buildings, the order poses a direct challenge to the independence of the legal profession. Perkins Coie’s history of high-profile political work, particularly in the 2016 election, has made it a focal point in this broader effort to reshape the legal landscape.
The order’s implications extend beyond Perkins Coie, raising concerns about the potential erosion of the legal system’s independence and the chilling effect on law firms representing politically sensitive clients. The targeting of DEI initiatives adds another layer of controversy, as critics argue it conflates legitimate diversity efforts with discrimination. As the legal battle unfolds, the outcome will have far-reaching consequences for the balance of power between the executive branch and the legal profession.
The coming weeks and months will be critical in determining whether the order stands or is overturned. Regardless of the outcome, the executive order has already sparked widespread debate over the role of the legal profession in politically charged cases and the limits of executive authority in targeting law firms.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why did Trump issue an executive order against Perkins Coie?
The executive order was issued due to Perkins Coie’s role in the 2016 election, particularly its involvement in the FBI investigation into alleged ties between Trump’s campaign and Russia. The order accuses the firm of “undermining democratic elections, the integrity of our courts, and honest law enforcement.”
What does the executive order do to Perkins Coie?
The order revokes security clearances for the firm’s employees, cancels government contracts, limits access to federal buildings, and urges federal agencies to curtail interactions with the firm. It also targets the firm’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, accusing it of discriminatory hiring practices.
How is Perkins Coie responding to the executive order?
Perkins Coie has condemned the order as “patently unlawful” and has vowed to challenge it in court. The firm is expected to seek a temporary restraining order while litigation proceeds, arguing that the order violates constitutional protections.
What are the broader implications of this executive order?
The order sets a dangerous precedent for targeting law firms based on their political affiliations or clients. It raises concerns about the independence of the legal profession, the chilling effect on representing politically sensitive clients, and the potential erosion of constitutional protections.
Why is the order targeting Perkins Coie’s DEI initiatives?
The order accuses Perkins Coie of discriminatory hiring practices and calls for a federal review of large law firms’ DEI initiatives. Critics argue this conflates legitimate diversity efforts with discrimination, potentially setting the stage for further attacks on DEI initiatives across other industries.
What is the significance of this legal battle?
The legal battle over the executive order will determine the balance of power between the executive branch and the legal profession. The outcome could have far-reaching consequences for the independence of the legal system, the representation of politically sensitive clients, and the future of DEI initiatives in the legal industry.