In scathing ruling, judge halts part of Trump's executive order against prominent Democratic-tied law firm Perkins Coie

[JimH52]

The authoritarian Trump regime – using the power of the state to attack perceived political opponents is fundamentally fascist.

It's what dictators do...ask Poootin.

 

[Delldude]

The authoritarian Trump regime – using the power of the state to attack perceived political opponents is fundamentally fascist.

Fair exchange is no robbery.

 

[Leo123]

Judge shuts Trump down...again. When will he learn that he is not the King..or the dictator--and that rule of law applies to him...he cannot use his office to pursue his personal vendettas. This one won't even make it through the SCOTUS, as it is just too egregious to stand.
But hey..red meat for the base.
It seems that is really all Trump wants..the continual applause~

https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-ju...r-targeting-law-firm-perkins-coie-2025-03-12/

A U.S. judge blocked provisions of President Donald Trump's order targeting attorneys at Perkins Coie on Wednesday, saying the legal profession was "watching in horror" at what the law firm was experiencing.
U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell said Perkins Coie was likely to ultimately prevail in court with its challenge of Trump's executive order, which was prompted by the firm's diversity, equity and inclusion policies and its prior work for Trump's political opponent Hillary Clinton.


MSN

Howell granted the firm’s request for a temporary restraining order for some sections of Trump’s order. The parts being blocked include its limitations on government contracts with clients of the firm and the potential restrictions it puts on the firm’s employees, such as bans on hiring those employees for government positions or barring their access to federal buildings.

The executive order, Howell said as she read her opinion in court for more than 30 minutes, is “a punishment for a singled-out entity being disloyal.”

When “the Queen of Hearts yells ‘off with their heads’ for her subjects,” Howell added, that “cannot be the reality we are living under.”

The judge, an appointee of President Barack Obama, said the case also touches on larger tests of Trump’s executive authority. The executive order, she said, is an unconstitutional use of “taxpayer dollars and government resources … to pursue a personal vendetta.”

“The president is certainly entitled to his own beliefs, entitled to his own causes, and entitled to his own dislikes,” Howell said. But the president cannot “bring the federal government down on his political opponents … as he has done here.”

Unelected judges are running the country. Marxism.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Unelected judges are running the country. Marxism.

Really?

 

[JimH52]

Really?

These people desperately want a King.

 

[martybegan]

These people desperately want a King.

Says the man that wants a Politburo.

 

[Delldude]

These people desperately want a King.

Jimmy, where you been?

 

[Rigby5]

Just curious..why do lawyers need security clearances?

Also, goes to prove, you can do just about anything to a republican..and never be held accountable.

Lawyers need security clearances if they represent people involved in classified information. Such as military contracts.

 

[Rigby5]

Fuck her. Where was she for all of the four years Biden did it to the extreme? Trump will prevail. His actions are more than justified.

I agree that the lawfare against Trump was illegal, but this has nothing to do with that, and is also illegal.
Trump cannot prevail since it is obviously illegal to impose any penalty without a trial.

 

[Rigby5]

So this judge doesn’t have a problem with Democrats pushing the fake Russia narrative to go after a political opponent but when Trump does it, that’s wrong.

Judges can't start lawsuits.
Trump should have sued to stop the illegal lawfare against him.
But this case has nothing to do with that, and is an illegal attempt to punish a law firm without a trial.

 

[Paradoxical#1]

Judges can't start lawsuits.
Trump should have sued to stop the illegal lawfare against him.
But this case has nothing to do with that, and is an illegal attempt to punish a law firm without a trial.

Why should they have access to our sensitive information? Because they pay off the FBI and judges? Theyu screwed Trumo and colluded with Hellery and the FBI.

 

[Rigby5]

She is full of shit. The order will get reinstated.

Once again, the judicial branch of is out of bounds.

No, the executive has almost no discretion.
It is almost always supposed to only do what the legislative and judicial say.
In this case, it is harming others, so then requires a hearing.

 

[Rigby5]

I predict a bunch of federal judges being removed in the not too distant future.

Only other judges can remove a judge.
Impeachments have to be presided over by a judge.

 

[Rigby5]

Most dims just don't get it -- The damage is done. Clients aren't going to hire that POS Law Firm now. They're mortally wounded.

Who would use a Law Firm for a sensitive National Security case when the Law Firm might, at any moment, have its security clearance pulled?

Trump has already won. It's over. That Law Firm will, hopefully, fall apart and a new group will form with the same parasites as Perkins.

That is the whole point, that a hearing will rule that their security clearance cannot be "pulled".
The law firm will get compensation in the judgement.

 

[Rigby5]

OK, that case is over. They no longer need a security clearance.

The law firm is involved in hundreds of military contracts that all require a security clearance, so it is not at all over and never will be.

 

[westwall]

Only other judges can remove a judge.
Impeachments have to be presided over by a judge.

It's amazing how absolutely clueless you are about almost everything.

 

[Rigby5]

Why should they have access to our sensitive information? Because they pay off the FBI and judges? Theyu screwed Trumo and colluded with Hellery and the FBI.

Only lawyers can write up contracts, and to make a contract for the production of an item that requires a security clearance, then the lawyers has to have a security clearance. Which is illegal to deny if the person has a valid need like that.

 

[Paradoxical#1]

Only lawyers can write up contracts, and to make a contract for the production of an item that requires a security clearance, then the lawyers has to have a security clearance. Which is illegal to deny if the person has a valid need like that.

So what?

 

[toobfreak]

Only other judges can remove a judge.

So who installed the first judge then?

Did he spontaneous appear?

 

[Rigby5]

It's amazing how absolutely clueless you are about almost everything.

Wrong.
First of all, you can't impeach arbitrarily, but has to have probable cause of evidence of a crime, and second is that a judge presides over any legislative impeachment procedure.
In a presidential impeachment, the SCOTUS chief justice presides.