Federal Judge Rejects DOJ Bid to Disqualify Her in Trump Executive Order Case Targeting Perkins Coie

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading...

Federal Judge Beryl Howell Denies DOJ Effort to Disqualify Her in High-Stakes Trump Executive Order Lawsuit

In a forceful rebuke to the Justice Department, U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell on Wednesday denied a motion seeking her disqualification from a lawsuit over former President Donald Trump’s controversial executive order aimed at the Democratic-aligned law firm Perkins Coie. The case, now shaping up as a constitutional showdown, centers on allegations that Trump is using federal power to retaliate against his political and legal opponents.

Howell, a senior judge for the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, accused the DOJ of launching “ad hominem attacks” to discredit her impartiality. In her ruling, Howell warned that the disqualification attempt represents a dangerous tactic designed to undermine public confidence in the judiciary.

“This strategy is designed to impugn the integrity of the federal judicial system and blame any loss on the decision-maker rather than fallacies in the substantive legal arguments presented,” she wrote in her opinion.

  

What

Where

Search Jobs

---

Trump’s Executive Order: A Direct Attack on Law Firms

The lawsuit stems from a March 2025 executive order signed by Trump, which effectively blacklisted Perkins Coie from federal government interactions. The order:

• Barred employees of the firm from entering federal buildings
• Directed agencies to terminate contracts with Perkins Coie clients
• Cited the firm’s previous political work, including representing Democratic campaigns and connections to Fusion GPS

The executive action prompted immediate legal action by Perkins Coie, arguing that the order unlawfully punishes the firm for engaging in protected political and legal activity. The firm’s court filings detailed the economic damage, including the loss of a 35-year relationship with a major government contractor—within just six days of the order’s issuance.

---

DOJ Claims Bias Over Trump Comments

DOJ officials Chad Mizelle and Richard Lawson filed the March 21 motion to disqualify Howell, citing what they allege is clear judicial bias. They pointed to remarks Howell made during a 2023 speech, where she warned of the “impact of big lies” in connection with January 6 prosecutions. At that event, hosted by the Women’s White Collar Defense Association, Howell expressed concern about public disregard for factual integrity—a sentiment the DOJ says indicates hostility toward Trump.

They also referenced a recent court hearing in which Howell remarked that Trump had a “bee in his bonnet” about Fusion GPS, the political research firm tied to the infamous Steele dossier.

“This court has repeatedly demonstrated partiality against and animus towards the president,” Mizelle and Lawson claimed.

However, Howell dismissed these arguments as lacking merit and reaffirmed her commitment to fairness:

“The parties will have the opportunity to present relevant evidence and legal arguments, which will receive full, fair, and impartial consideration, as does every case before this court.”

---

Broader Pattern: Trump’s Retaliatory Targeting of Law Firms

Perkins Coie is not alone. Trump’s latest executive orders also singled out Jenner & Block, directing federal agencies to:

• Revoke access to federal facilities for firm employees
• Investigate diversity hiring practices
• Revoke security clearances
• Cancel government contracts with Jenner clients

The targeting of law firms with perceived Democratic ties is unprecedented, marking a dramatic escalation in the weaponization of executive power against legal institutions.

---

Political Fallout: Stefanik Demands Judicial Investigation

The legal battle also has a political dimension. Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), a vocal Trump ally, filed a formal complaint in December 2023 urging an investigation into Howell’s remarks at the 2023 white-collar defense event. Her request, currently pending with the Judicial Council of the D.C. Circuit, claims Howell’s comments reflect unacceptable political bias from the bench.

---

What’s Next for Perkins Coie v. DOJ?

The case—Perkins Coie v. U.S. Department of Justice, No. 1:25-cv-00716—could become a landmark test of constitutional limits on executive power, particularly regarding retaliation, due process, and the First Amendment. With Howell remaining on the case, the spotlight now shifts to whether Trump’s sweeping executive actions will survive legal scrutiny.

This lawsuit may shape future debates over the independence of the legal profession, judicial impartiality, and political retaliation under color of law.

Related Articles:

• Trump Targets Law Firms Over Democratic Ties—Legal Experts Warn of Dangerous Precedent
• Perkins Coie Countersues DOJ Over Retaliatory Executive Order
• Fusion GPS: The Research Firm at the Center of Trump’s Legal Obsession
• Judicial Ethics Under Fire: Rep. Stefanik’s Push to Investigate Federal Judges