Perkins Coie Wins Temporary Restraining Order Against Trump’s Restrictions

Seattle, WA – A federal judge ruled Wednesday to temporarily block an executive order issued by former President Donald Trump that sought to impose restrictions on the Seattle-based law firm Perkins Coie. The firm, which notably represented Hillary Clinton during her 2016 presidential campaign, filed a lawsuit challenging the order.

Trump’s March 6 executive order instructed federal agencies to sever contracts with Perkins Coie, limit the firm’s employees’ access to federal buildings, and suspend security clearances for its staff. The order claimed that the firm hired Fusion GPS to compile a dossier critical of Trump while representing Clinton and accused the firm of racial discrimination in its hiring practices.

At a hearing on Wednesday, Judge Beryl Howell indicated that she would issue a temporary restraining order to block the executive action while the legal battle continues. The firm’s lawsuit argued that the order was an attempt to destroy Perkins Coie based on a small portion of its work and would have devastating effects on its operations.

“Unless restrained, the Order realistically might succeed in that objective within days, given the substantial pressure being exerted by the federal government on the firm’s clients,” the firm stated in its filing.

The lawsuit also highlighted broader concerns about the far-reaching consequences of the executive order, particularly its potential to undermine the firm’s ability to operate and represent clients.

About Perkins Coie

Founded in 1912, Perkins Coie is headquartered in Seattle and operates 21 offices worldwide, including major locations in Washington, D.C., and New York. The firm is widely recognized for its legal expertise in areas such as corporate law, labor law, environmental law, privacy, and real estate. It has also established itself as a leading firm for tech companies and startups.

Perkins Coie employs over 1,100 lawyers and is highly regarded for its political law practice. Over the years, the firm has garnered significant attention for its work on high-profile legal issues, including advising clients involved in contentious political cases.

Firm’s Response to Judge’s Ruling

Following the judge’s decision, Perkins Coie released a statement calling the ruling “an important first step” in halting the enforcement of Trump’s executive order. The firm reiterated its commitment to challenging the order, which it argued poses a serious threat not only to its business but also to the broader constitutional rights of Americans.

“We will continue to challenge the Executive Order, which threatens our firm, our clients, and core constitutional protections important to all Americans,” the statement read.

Support from Washington State Attorney General

Washington State Attorney General Nick Brown, along with a coalition of over a dozen other state attorneys general, filed a legal brief in support of Perkins Coie. In a statement, Brown condemned the executive order, calling it an illegal attempt to punish the law firm for taking on controversial cases and representing clients that Trump opposed.

“The American legal system depends on lawyers taking difficult cases and defending unpopular clients,” Brown said. “The President’s illegal order is clearly meant to bully Perkins Coie and punish them for taking cases and clients that he disagrees with.”

States joining Washington in supporting the law firm include Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Vermont. The District of Columbia also filed in support.

Background on the Trump Dossier

The controversy surrounding Perkins Coie centers on its involvement with Fusion GPS, a firm hired by the Clinton campaign to investigate Trump’s ties to Russia. Fusion GPS hired former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele to compile a dossier on Trump, which included allegations of extensive connections between the then-candidate and the Russian government. Trump has consistently denied these claims, calling them false and “disgraceful.”

A 2019 Department of Justice investigation concluded that there was no evidence of collusion between Trump’s 2016 campaign and the Russian government, but the dossier remains a point of contention in political circles.

Next Steps

With the temporary restraining order in place, the legal challenge to Trump’s executive order will continue to unfold in court. Perkins Coie remains committed to fighting the order and protecting its constitutional rights and the rights of its clients.