The Justice Department argued to a judge at a hearing on Wednesday that she should dismiss a lawsuit brought by Perkins Coie, a prominent Democratic-aligned law firm, over allegations that President Donald Trump unconstitutionally revoked its employees’ security clearances and attempted to curb its lucrative work with government contractors.
Richard Lawson, a deputy associate attorney general, told Judge Beryl Howell that the heart of the dispute between Perkins Coie and the Trump administration was whether the president’s order was issued under “executive discretion” or whether it was a constitutional violation intended to punish lawyers for their viewpoints.
“We view this as not designed to punish,” Lawson said. “We view this as designed to fulfill the concerns that were laid out in section one” of the executive order.
Howell, an Obama appointee, is weighing the government’s request to dismiss the case and whether to grant Perkins Coie a permanent injunction. She previously imposed a temporary, partial block on Trump’s order against the firm.
The hearing comes as Trump has picked off Big Law firms one by one, targeting each of them with executive orders or announcing agreements reached with them. About half a dozen have been named in executive orders that strip their employees of security clearances, block them from entering federal buildings, and warn government contractors not to use the firms.
Perkins Coie, one of Trump’s top targets, has spearheaded legal fights waged by some of the firms that chose to fight the orders and is furthest along in the court process. Judges have sided entirely with the firms in the early stages of litigation. The hearing with Howell continued into Wednesday afternoon, and one with WilmerHale is scheduled for later in the day.
Perkins Coie, in particular, was tied to the dissemination of the discredited Trump-Russia dossier during the president’s first campaign.
Trump said in his order that Perkins Coie was “dangerous” because while it was representing Hillary Clinton during the 2016 election, the firm hired Fusion GPS, which used former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele to craft the dossier. The document, containing salacious but unsubstantiated claims about Trump, leaked to the media and dominated headlines during his first term. One of Perkins Coie’s then-partners, Michael Sussmann, was prosecuted over allegations that he lied to the FBI about his work with Clinton when encouraging the FBI to investigate Trump’s Russia ties, but he was later acquitted by a jury.
Perkins Coie hired the prestigious law firm Williams & Connolly to argue to Howell that Trump’s order would cripple the firm and that it was unconstitutional.
Some firms, including Paul Weiss, have reached agreements with the administration that involve the firms committing millions of dollars in pro bono services to the government. Howell noted during the hearing that Trump’s deputy chief of staff for policy, Stephen Miller, recently touted that the White House had secured nearly $1 billion in services.
“The purpose was not to force Perkins to its knees to come up with more to reach the $1 billion goal of a free legal fund?” Howell asked Lawson.
“I don’t view it that way, your honor,” the attorney replied.
The hearing also came hours after Trump raged at the firm on social media and called Howell an “unmitigated train wreck.” The president appeared to reference an unsuccessful lawsuit he brought against Perkins Coie in Florida. He also cited a decision Howell made against him in an unspecified past case.
WHY TRUMP’S FIGHT WITH BIG LAW HAS SOME DEFENDERS IN THE LEGAL WORLD
“Her ruling was so pathologically bad that it became the ‘talk of the town,’” Trump wrote. “I could have a 100% perfect case and she would angrily rule against me. It’s called Trump Derangement Syndrome, and she’s got a bad case of it.”
Last month, the DOJ unsuccessfully attempted to recuse her from the lawsuit with Perkins Coie.
This story is developing.
