RBGG was proud to join 517 other law firms nationwide to sign an amicus brief supporting Perkins Coie LLP, the Plaintiff in Perkins Coie LLP v. U.S. Department of Justice, D.D.C. Case No. 25-716 (BAH), challenging the President’s March 6, 2025 Executive Order entitled “Addressing Risks from Perkins Coie LLP.” The amicus brief was authored by former U.S. Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli, Jr. of Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP. The unconstitutional March 6 Executive Order—like the five other similar ones targeting other law firms — would have imposed severe penalties on Perkins Coie due to its past work, including revoking security clearances and denial of access to federal buildings and facilities. The brief and supporting documents are set out below.
On May 2, 2025 Judge Beryl Howell of the U.S. District Court, District of Columbia ruled that the Executive Order targeting Perkins Coie was unconstitutional and directed the government to not enforce it’s terms. The order is here. The memorandum opinion is here.
Perkins Coie issued a statement welcoming the decision: “This ruling affirms core constitutional freedoms all Americans hold dear, including free speech, due process and the right to select counsel without the fear of retribution. We are pleased with this decision and are immensely grateful to those who spoke up in support of our positions.”
According to Judge Howell in the opinion, “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: ‘The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.'”
She went on to say that the order “stigmatizes and penalizes a particular law firm and its employees — from its partners to its associate attorneys, secretaries and mailroom attendants — due to the firm’s representation, both in the past and currently, of clients pursuing claims and taking positions with which the current president disagrees.”
“In a cringe-worthy twist on the theatrical phrase ‘Let’s kill all the lawyers,’” she added, the order was more specifically, “‘Let’s kill the lawyers I don’t like,’ sending the clear message: Lawyers must stick to the party line, or else.’”
As explained in the amicus brief:
“The looming threat posed by the Executive Order at issue in this case and the others like it is not lost on anyone practicing law in this country today: any controversial representation challenging actions of the current administration (or even causes it disfavors) now brings with it the risk of devastating retaliation. Whatever short-term advantage an administration may gain from exercising power in this way, the rule of law cannot long endure in the climate of fear that such actions create. Our adversarial system depends upon zealous advocates litigating each side of a case with equal vigor; that is how impartial judges arrive at just, informed decisions that vindicate the rule of law.”
The brief asks the Court to grant Perkins Coie’s motion for a permanent injunction enjoining the March 6 Executive Order, noting that it and other recent ones “pose a grave threat to our system of constitutional governance and to the rule of law itself.”
Errata re Amicus of 518 Law Firms and Appendix A, April 7, 2025
Unopposed Motion for Leave to File Amicus Brief by 504 Law Firms
Exhibit 2 – Text of Proposed Order