{"id":117533,"date":"2025-05-02T18:02:42","date_gmt":"2025-05-03T02:02:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/05\/02\/its-official-executive-order-targeting-perkins-coie-is-unconstitutional\/"},"modified":"2025-05-02T18:02:42","modified_gmt":"2025-05-03T02:02:42","slug":"its-official-executive-order-targeting-perkins-coie-is-unconstitutional","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/05\/02\/its-official-executive-order-targeting-perkins-coie-is-unconstitutional\/","title":{"rendered":"It\u2019s Official: Executive Order Targeting Perkins Coie Is Unconstitutional"},"content":{"rendered":"

From the moment that Donald Trump signed an Executive Order<\/a> (EO 14230) targeting Perkins Coie \u2014 one of the first Biglaw firms to be on the receiving end of this type of retaliation but far from the last<\/a> \u2014 legal commentators<\/a> were pointing out all the ways the EO failed to square with the Constitution. Perkins Coie certainly thought the order was problematic and immediately filed suit<\/a>, alleging violations of the First, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments.<\/p>\n

Judge Beryl Howell was assigned the case and barred the enforcement of key provisions<\/a> of the EO on the same day as the temporary restraining order hearing. Today, Judge Howell made it official, enjoining the enforcement of any aspect of the EO. And she began her 102-page order (available below) on a poetic note, quoting Shakespeare.<\/p>\n

\n

No American President has ever before issued executive orders like the one at issue in this lawsuit targeting a prominent law firm with adverse actions to be executed by all Executive branch agencies but, in purpose and effect, this action draws from a playbook as old as Shakespeare, who penned the phrase: \u201cThe first thing we do, let\u2019s kill all the lawyers.\u201d WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE, HENRY VI, PART 2, act 4, sc. 2, l. 75. When Shakespeare\u2019s character, a rebel leader intent on becoming king, see id. l. 74, hears this suggestion, he promptly incorporates this tactic as part of his plan to assume power, leading in the same scene to the rebel leader demanding \u201c[a]way with him,\u201d referring to an educated clerk, who \u201ccan make obligations and write court hand,\u201d id. l. 90, 106. Eliminating lawyers as the guardians of the rule of law removes a major impediment to the path to more power. See Walters v. Nat\u2019l Ass\u2019n of Radiation Survivors, 473 U.S. 305, 371 n.24 (1985) (Stevens, J., dissenting) (explaining the import of the same Shakespearean statement to be \u201cthat disposing of lawyers is a step in the direction of a totalitarian form of government\u201d).<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

It\u2019s a helluva opening graph, and the opinion is being called a \u201ctour de force<\/a>\u201d as she continues the Shakespearean analogy later: \u201cIn a cringe-worthy twist on the theatrical phrase \u2018Let\u2019s kill all the lawyers,\u2019 EO 14230 takes the approach of \u2018Let\u2019s kill the lawyers I don\u2019t like,\u2019 sending the clear message: lawyers must stick to the party line, or else.\u201d<\/p>\n

Howell ruled the \u201cunprecedented\u201d EO violates the First, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments and ordered it \u201cnull and void.\u201d In an interesting twist, the judge felt obligated to order the DOJ to \u201cnotify all recipients that they are required to comply with this Order, under penalty of contempt.\u201d It\u2019s not standard boilerplate<\/a> to remind everyone about the concept of contempt. But the reality is, given the history<\/a> of shenanigans<\/a> in the case, it\u2019s better to make extra clear that every single government agency<\/a> must actually follow the judge\u2019s ruling.<\/p>\n

Judge Howell Order Perkins Coie Case<\/a>Download<\/a><\/div>\n
\n

\"\"Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, host of The Jabot podcast<\/a>, and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer<\/a>. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her<\/a> with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter @Kathryn1<\/a>\u00a0or Mastodon @Kathryn1@mastodon.social.<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

The post It\u2019s Official: Executive Order Targeting Perkins Coie Is Unconstitutional<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\"\"
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tPerkins Coie (photo by David Lat).\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

From the moment that Donald Trump signed an Executive Order<\/a> (EO 14230) targeting Perkins Coie \u2014 one of the first Biglaw firms to be on the receiving end of this type of retaliation but far from the last<\/a> \u2014 legal commentators<\/a> were pointing out all the ways the EO failed to square with the Constitution. Perkins Coie certainly thought the order was problematic and immediately filed suit<\/a>, alleging violations of the First, Fifth and Sixth Amendments.<\/p>\n

Judge Beryl Howell was assigned the case and barred the enforcement of key provisions<\/a> of the EO on the same day as the temporary restraining order hearing. Today Judge Howell made it official, enjoining the enforcement of any aspect of the EO. And she began her 102 page order (available below) on a poetic note, quoting Shakespeare. <\/p>\n

\n

No American President has ever before issued executive orders like the one at issue in this lawsuit targeting a prominent law firm with adverse actions to be executed by all Executive branch agencies but, in purpose and effect, this action draws from a playbook as old as Shakespeare, who penned the phrase: \u201cThe first thing we do, let\u2019s kill all the lawyers.\u201d WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE, HENRY VI, PART 2, act 4, sc. 2, l. 75. When Shakespeare\u2019s character, a rebel leader intent on becoming king, see id. l. 74, hears this suggestion, he promptly incorporates this tactic as part of his plan to assume power, leading in the same scene to the rebel leader demanding \u201c[a]way with him,\u201d referring to an educated clerk, who \u201ccan make obligations and write court hand,\u201d id. l. 90, 106. Eliminating lawyers as the guardians of the rule of law removes a major impediment to the path to more power. See Walters v. Nat\u2019l Ass\u2019n of Radiation Survivors, 473 U.S. 305, 371 n.24 (1985) (Stevens, J., dissenting) (explaining the import of the same Shakespearean statement to be \u201cthat disposing of lawyers is a step in the direction of a totalitarian form of government\u201d).<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

It\u2019s a helluva opening graph, and the opinion is being called a \u201ctour de force<\/a>\u201d and a she continues the Shakespearean analogy later: \u201cIn a cringe-worthy twist on the theatrical phrase \u2018Let\u2019s kill all the lawyers,\u2019 EO 14230 takes the approach of \u2018Let\u2019s kill the lawyers I don\u2019t like,\u2019 sending the clear message: lawyers must stick to the party line, or else.\u201d<\/p>\n

Howell ruled the \u201cunprecedented\u201d EO violates the First, Fifth and Sixth Amendments and ordered it \u201cnull and void.\u201d In an interesting twist, the judge felt obligated to order the DOJ to \u201cnotify all recipients that they are required to comply with this Order, under penalty of contempt.\u201d It\u2019s not standard boilerplate<\/a> to remind everyone about the concept of contempt. But the reality is, given the history<\/a> of shenanigans<\/a> in the case, it\u2019s better to make extra clear that every single government agency<\/a> must actually follow the judge\u2019s ruling.<\/p>\n

Judge Howell Order Perkins Coie Case<\/a>Download<\/a><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
    \n

    \"\"Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, host of The Jabot podcast<\/a>, and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer<\/a>. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her<\/a> with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter @Kathryn1<\/a>\u00a0or Mastodon @[email\u00a0protected].<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    From the moment that Donald Trump signed an Executive Order (EO 14230) targeting Perkins Coie \u2014 one of the first Biglaw firms to be on the receiving end of this type of retaliation but far from the last \u2014 legal commentators were pointing out all the ways the EO failed to square with the Constitution. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":117507,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-117533","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-above_the_law"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/xira.com\/p\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/IMG_5243-1-scaled-e1623338814705-620x568-f0Cf36.jpeg?fit=620%2C568&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/117533","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=117533"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/117533\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/117507"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=117533"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=117533"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=117533"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}