The prominent law firm Perkins Coie LLP has been embroiled in a significant legal battle against the Trump administration after being targeted by a controversial executive order issued by President Donald Trump in March 2025. The executive order, titled “Addressing Risks From Perkins Coie LLP,” sought to penalize the firm for its legal work representing Trump’s political adversaries, including Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign.
Perkins Coie Trump Lawsuit Injunction
Background of the Lawsuit
On March 6, 2025, the Trump administration issued an executive order accusing Perkins Coie of engaging in “dishonest and dangerous activity” and of “working with activist donors including George Soros” to challenge election laws and push policies opposed by the administration.
The order suspended the firm’s federal security clearances, barred Perkins Coie attorneys from federal buildings and officials, and terminated government contracts with the firm.
Perkins Coie, a major law firm with a long history dating back to 1912, immediately sued the Trump administration, arguing that the executive order was unconstitutional retaliation violating their First Amendment rights to free speech and association, as well as due process rights under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments.
Judge Beryl Howell’s Ruling
On May 2, 2025, U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell issued a landmark 102-page ruling permanently enjoining the government from enforcing the executive order against Perkins Coie.
Judge Howell described the order as “an unprecedented attack” on the legal profession and the rule of law itself. The ruling stated that targeting a law firm based on its clients’ political affiliations and the causes it supports violates constitutional protections.
Howell quoted Shakespeare, saying the order recalls the line “The thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers,” but added a chilling twist that Trump’s order essentially aimed to eliminate lawyers whose views he disapproved of.
Key Legal Findings
- First Amendment Violation: The judge found the order was retaliatory punishment for protected speech and association.
- Due Process Violation: The executive order barred Perkins Coie from government work without proper legal procedures.
- Overbroad and Punitive: The order unfairly punished not only attorneys involved in politically sensitive cases but all employees, including support staff.
Trump Administration Appeal
Following the ruling, the Trump administration filed an appeal on June 30, 2025, challenging the district court’s decision, signaling its intent to continue fighting against Perkins Coie and other law firms subjected to similar orders.
The appeal raises constitutional and administrative law arguments, seeking to uphold the president’s authority over federal contracting decisions.
Impact on Legal Profession and Political Landscape
The Perkins Coie lawsuit and victory represent a crucial defense of law firms’ independence and protect clients’ rights to representation without political retribution.
The case highlights the risks posed by executive power wielded to settle political scores, emphasizing the importance of judicial checks on such actions.
Statements from Perkins Coie and Observers
A Perkins Coie spokesperson praised the ruling as a “reaffirmation of essential constitutional freedoms,” and committed to continuing to defend the rule of law and serve clients without fear of government retaliation.
Legal experts characterize the ruling as an important precedent safeguarding political speech, legal representation, and due process against executive overreach.
Conclusion
The Perkins Coie injunction ruling against the Trump administration’s executive order is a landmark affirmation of constitutional protections for law firms and their clients. It marks a significant check on politicized efforts to undermine legal advocacy based on viewpoint discrimination.
As the appeal process unfolds, the case will remain a bellwether for the limits of executive power in regulating and retaliating against legal professionals involved in politically sensitive matters.
