Donald Trump Intensifies Criticism of Big Law Firms Linked to Democrats

Donald Trump has issued three orders revoking the security clearances of attorneys from prominent law firms. He labeled these firms as “dishonest and dangerous,” accusing them of weaponizing the judicial system. All three firms have connections to Trump’s political adversaries, raising concerns among legal experts.

On Friday, Donald Trump issued yet another order revoking security clearances for employees at Paul Weiss, a prominent law firm linked to his political rivals.

This Friday directive marks the third occurrence in three weeks where the president has targeted law firms—Paul Weiss, Perkins Coie, and Covington & Burling—for having their employees’ clearances revoked. He also demanded a review of their government contracts, just days after a federal judge blocked the order against Perkins Coie, deeming it likely unconstitutional.

Critics caution that the president’s initiative to prevent law firm employees from engaging with federal agencies or entering federal buildings could jeopardize the firms’ livelihood and undermine the rights of attorneys and individuals seeking legal assistance nationwide.

Representatives from the White House, Paul Weiss, Perkins Coie, and Covington & Burling were not immediately available to comment when contacted by Business Insider.

Have a tip? Reach out to this reporter via email at [email protected] or Signal at byktl.50. For privacy, use a personal email and a non-work device; here’s our guide to sharing information securely.

Connections to Trump’s Democratic adversaries

Trump’s order against Paul Weiss specifically pointed out attorney Mark Pomerantz, who previously left the firm to join the Manhattan District Attorney’s investigation into Trump’s financial dealings until resigning from the case in February 2022. Additionally, the order notes that a Paul Weiss partner, representing the District of Columbia Attorney General, filed a pro bono lawsuit against individuals accused of involvement in the January 6, 2021 Capitol attack.

The order claims that permitting Paul Weiss employees to keep their security clearance “would endanger the national security or otherwise conflict with the interests of the United States.”

Likewise, Trump’s March 6 order against Perkins Coie described the firm’s work as “dangerous and dishonest,” emphasizing its representation of former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton during her 2016 campaign against Trump.

“Perkins Coie employed Fusion GPS, which then crafted a false ‘dossier’ aimed at subverting an election,” the order states, referencing a memorandum compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele, which contained unverified allegations of collaboration between Trump’s campaign and the Russian government.

While many claims in the Steele dossier were unconfirmed, some were eventually validated.

On February 25, Trump issued a distinct memo targeting Covington & Burling. This memo specifically mentioned and suspended the security clearance of attorney Peter Koski, who provided legal support to former Special Counsel Jack Smith.

Smith oversaw investigations into Trump and his associates concerning attempts to disrupt the lawful transition of power post the 2020 presidential election and the holding of highly classified documents at the Mar-a-Lago social club after his presidency.

In all his orders, Trump accused the mentioned law firms and specific attorneys of manipulating the judicial system.

Significant repercussions for Big Law

Paul Weiss, Perkins Coie, and Covington & Burling are among the largest legal firms in the United States, boasting multibillion-dollar annual revenues, as per AmLaw Global 200 Rankings. Each firm employs over 1,000 attorneys along with support staff such as paralegals, researchers, and case managers.

Related stories

Any employee at these firms involved in cases concerning government contracts or representing clients related to government action— or filing claims against the government— would typically require a security clearance, explained Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor, in a conversation with Business Insider.

“It doesn’t matter if it’s someone working on a classified documents case or one tied to terrorism; they need clearance to review pertinent evidence and discovery,” Rahmani said. “Any issues related to national security or military secrets necessitate that lawyers obtain clearance; without it, they can’t effectively represent their clients.”

Revoking that clearance is detrimental to each firm’s operations— potentially even fatal, according to a lawyer representing Perkins Coie in a recent hearing.

“This literally endangers our existence,” Politico reported Dane Butswinkas, representing Perkins Coie, as saying during an emergency hearing where the firm contested the president’s directive. “It could very well lead to the end of the law firm.”

Rahmani noted that revoking the lawyers’ security clearances might also limit clients seeking legal counsel, as they would be constrained to retain only attorneys who have the clearance sanctioned by the Trump administration.

According to Politico, a judge ruled during the emergency hearing that the “retaliatory intent” of Trump’s order against Perkins Coie is “obvious” and “directly contradicts the protections offered by the First Amendment.”

Judge Howell issued a temporary restraining order, preventing certain aspects of the president’s directive from being enforced against Perkins Coie staff while legal disputes unfold. Meanwhile, the directives affecting employees of Paul Weiss and Covington & Burling remain in effect.

“This might be a source of amusement akin to ‘Alice in Wonderland’ where the Queen of Hearts exclaims, ‘Off with their heads!’ regarding bothersome subjects … and declares punishment before a verdict,” Politico noted Howell’s remarks. “This should not be the reality we are subjected to.”