Over 500 US law firms have come together in support of Perkins Coie LLP, one of several law firms targeted under the control of President Donald Trump.
In an Amicus summary filed Friday, the law firm accused the Trump administration of pursuing a campaign of “Draconia’s Punishment” against legal experts who represent the people and raise eyebrows on the president.
“Controversial expressions challenge (or even cause foreclosure) the challenging actions of the current administration pose a risk of catastrophic retaliation,” Briefs said.
“Whatever the short-term advantages that a government can gain from exercising in this way, the rule of law cannot withstand the fear environment that such actions produce.”
Perkins Coie is one of at least four major law firms Trump has targeted in his executive order. They include Wilmer Hale, Paul Weiss, and Jenner & Brock.
The executive order included extensive accusations that included law firms participating in “destruction of American principles on the bedrock” and “actions that are detrimental to important American interests.”
As a punishment, the executive order attempts to revoke the security clearance required for high-stakes cases containing confidential information and blocks law firm officials from entering federal buildings like courts.
Each targeted law firm represents the cause or person Trump opposed.
In the case of Perkins Koy, the president cited the law firm’s research on behalf of Democrat Hillary Clinton, who opposed Trump in the 2016 presidential election.
Meanwhile, Wilmer Hale was selected for hiring Robert Mueller, a lawyer who previously served as head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). During Trump’s first term, Mueller, as a special advisor to the Justice Department, investigated alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election. This is an investigation Trump opposed.
Amicus Brief on Friday claims Trump is trying to turn these law firms into “cows.”
Shrinking security clearance and denying access to federal buildings was not to mention scaring clients, not to mention “threatening the survival of law firms.”
Already, several law firms have negotiated contracts with the Trump administration to either lift such sanctions or avoid them being imposed in the first place.
On March 20th, six days after the executive order against it, Paul Weiss, a New York-based law firm, first surrendered.
On social media, the president announced that in exchange for lifting the executive order, he agreed to “providing $40 million in pro bono legal services throughout President Trump’s term in order to support the administration’s initiatives.”
Other companies are following along. Skadden, Milbank, Willkie Farr & Gallagher – three major law firms – each offered to do $100 million in “Pro Bono Legal Services” on the cause of Trump’s preferences. Some of those companies have since resigned from their protest positions.
However, Perkins Koy is one of the law firms fighting Trump’s executive orders, calling them unconstitutional breach of freedom of speech and the right to legitimate proceedings before the law.
Wilmerhale and Jenner & Block have also announced their own legal challenges.
At Amicus Brief at Perkins Coie, over 500 law firms reflected the debate that underpins these challenges. They condemned the Trump administration’s executive order as a threat to the rights of all individuals seeking protection of the law.
“These orders pose a serious threat to the constitutional system of governance and the rule of law itself,” Brief said. “The judiciary should act now with determination to ensure that this abuse of enforcement ceases.”
He pointed out that law firms like Perkins Coie employ lawyers and experts across the political spectrum.
In particular, the brief comes two days after the Libertarian Cato Institute, alongside the American Civil Liberties Union, submitted its own Amicus brief to the case.
Friday’s petition even cited the fact that US “founder” John Adams was represented in an unpopular case.
Adams explained that he did so because he believed in the right to equal justice under the law.
“Until now, it would have been impossible for a law firm to risk punitive retaliation from the federal government in order to take on this kind of statement,” Brief explained.
It called on the federal court system to issue a permanent injunction to Trump’s executive order.
“Unless the judiciary acts decisively now, what once went beyond the pale will becomes a reality that was short-term.”
Source link
