Trump's Law Firm Targeting Over Security Queried by Judges (1)
Source: Bloomberg Law News
Trump’s Law Firm Targeting Over Security Queried by Judges (1)
May 14, 2026, 12:24 PM EDT; Updated: May 14, 2026, 1:19 PM EDT
Justin Henry, Reporter
Meghan Tribe, Reporter
Tatyana Monnay, Reporter
President Donald Trump signs executive orders in the Oval Office of the White House.
Photographer: Jim Lo Scalzo/EPA/Bloomberg
US appeals court judges on Thursday morning questioned whether President Donald Trump’s executive orders targeting four law firms were a defensible use of his authority over security clearances. ... Paul Clement, representing the firms, argued before the three-judge panel—two appointees by Obama and one by Trump—that Trump had used a “blunderbuss” approach in deciding access to government buildings, sidestepping a careful 13-step analysis the executive branch typically conducts for security dating back to World War II. ... The goal of the orders is “maximizing punishment of law firms” for their client advocacy and “let’s hurt them everywhere we can,” Clement said. “The executive orders run afoul of the better part of the Bill of Rights.”
Four lower courts struck down as unconstitutional the orders against Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, WilmerHale, and Susman Godfrey that threatened to restrict lawyers’ access to government buildings, cancel clients’ government contracts, and revoke lawyers’ security clearances. ... The Justice Department lawyer arguing in favor of the orders, Abhishek Kambli, said law firms’ decisions to hire attorneys who had done improper conduct in the view of the president aren’t constitutionally protected. He also argued that reviewing security clearances is outside the authority of the judicial branch.
The judges—Sri Srinivasan, Cornelia Pillard, and Neomi Rao—pressed the parties on constitutional authority relating to stripping security clearances and the merit of the national security reasoning. The judges also pressed the government on its use of national security versus national interest in its defense of the president’s issuance of the executive orders.
Clement was hired by WilmerHale to bring the firm’s lawsuit in federal court before he was tapped by the other three—Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, and Susman Godfrey—for this week’s oral advocacy. All of the lead counsel for the law firms were in attendance, and were seated next to Clement.
{snip}
The case is Perkins Coie LLP v. DOJ, et al, D.C. Cir., 25-05241, 5/14/26
Read more: https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/trumps-targeting-of-law-firms-over-security-questioned-by-judges