Latest news with #Democratic-tied
Yahoo
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump Ramps Up War on Big Law Firms with New Threat to ‘Sue'
President Donald Trump has claimed he is suing the biggest law firm to fight back against his sweeping attempts to do them harm. Trump said in a Truth Social post Wednesday that he was 'suing' Perkins Coie, a Democratic-tied firm, accusing it of 'egregious and unlawful acts' just hours before a court hearing about an executive order he signed which target them. The order banned Perkins Coie lawyers from entering federal buildings, which makes it impossible for them to work on cases involving security clearances and makes other cases difficult too. They were also banned from bidding for federal contracts. Other big law firms targeted by Trump had settled with his Department of Justice, offering free legal services for MAGA-friendly causes worth in the hundreds of millions of dollars. But Perkins Coie stood up to Trump—and hired a different law firm, Williams & Connolly, to sue the government. His Truth Social rant also claimed his action was targeted at one specific, unnamed, lawyer at the firm. In the same post, Trump also ranted at District Judge Beryl Howell. The Obama appointee is presiding over the case challenging his executive order and described Perkins Coie's lawyers as 'brave' for bringing the challenge against it. The president blasted Howell for a 'sick judicial temperament' and being a 'highly biased and unfair disaster.' 'She ruled against me in the past, in a shocking display of sick judicial temperament, on a case that ended up working out very well for me, on appeal,' the president claimed in his post. 'Her ruling was so pathologically bad that it became the 'talk of the town,'' he continued. Lawyers for both Perkins Coie and another Trump target, law giant, WilmerHale were in court Wednesday in an effort to permanently block executive orders against them. The two firms have argued that the orders are unconstitutional and should be dismissed without a trial, according to The New York Times. Despite the post claiming Trump was suing, there was no evidence that he, or the Department of Justice, is doing so. The White House and Perkins Coie did not respond to requests for comment. Last month, Howell rejected a Trump administration request that she recuse herself from the case over Trump's executive order against the law firm. 'When the U.S. Department of Justice engages in this rhetorical strategy of ad hominem attack, the stakes become much larger than only the reputation of the targeted federal judge,' Howell wrote in her March 26 opinion. '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 continued. On Wednesday, the president accused Howell of 'Trump Derangement Syndrome.' 'To put it nicely, Beryl Howell is an unmitigated train wreck. NO JUSTICE!!!,' Trump finished his post. It is the latest in a series of attacks Trump has lobbed against federal judges assigned to cases challenging the president's actions since the start of his second term. Trump has also raged against District Court Chief Judge James Boasberg who was at the center of the fight over deportation flights. The president took to social media last month to call for his impeachment and blast him as an Obama appointee. Boasberg was an Obama appointee but had previously been appointed to a lower rung in the judiciary by George W. Bush.
CNN
26-03-2025
- Politics
- CNN
Judge rips DOJ for attempting to remove her from case challenging Trump's executive order on law firm
A federal judge sharply rejected a Trump administration request that she recuse herself from a case challenging an executive order targeting Democratic-tied law firm Perkins Coie, accusing the Justice Department of attacking the messenger because it could not attack the message. 'When the U.S. Department of Justice engages in this rhetorical strategy of ad hominem attack, the stakes become much larger than only the reputation of the targeted federal judge,' District Judge Beryl Howell wrote on Wednesday. '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 added. In its disqualification request, the Justice Department had made a variety of accusations about Howell's conduct in other cases, as well as comments she made at a recent hearing in the law firm case, that the administration claimed amounted to a bias against President Donald Trump. Howell's defense of the role of the judiciary comes as Trump and his allies have gone beyond just criticizing rulings against his policies by going after the judges themselves. They have called for the impeachment of multiple judges, including Howell's colleague at the DC federal courthouse, Chief Judge James Boasberg, who is overseeing a high-stakes deportation case. Trump in a social media post earlier this month called Boasberg a 'Radical Left Lunatic, a troublemaker and agitator.' The rhetoric prompted Chief Justice John Roberts to issue an extraordinary rebuke of the impeachment calls. Both Howell and Boasberg were appointed by President Barack Obama. Howell's new opinion responded to each of those allegations, but not before making a larger point about the department's rationale for why she should step aside from the case. While it's not surprising that Howell rejected the request for her to step aside, as such motions rarely succeed, she notably used her opinion to weigh in on the larger attacks on the judiciary as it navigates dozens of legal challenges brought against Trump policies. Howell pointed to the opening line in DOJ's disqualification motion, in which the department expressed 'the need to curtail ongoing improper encroachments of President Trump's Executive Power playing out around the country.' 'This line, which sounds like a talking point from a member of Congress rather than a legal brief from the United States Department of Justice, has no citation to any legal authority for the simple reason that the notion expressed reflects a grave misapprehension of our constitutional order,' the judge wrote. 'Adjudicating whether an Executive Branch exercise of power is legal, or not, is actually the job of the federal courts, and not of the President or the Department of Justice,' Howell wrote, adding, 'though vigorous and rigorous defense of executive actions is both expected and helpful to the courts in resolving legal issue.' Howell's opinion rejecting the disqualification request took issue with the Justice Department's 'blanket denigration of the merits of all the lawsuits' filed against Trump's agenda, while noting that courts have warned that motions for disqualification should not be taken lightly. 'This larger concern about the overall damage to the rule of law and the federal judicial system from the feckless impugning of the decision-making process of individual federal judges has prompted Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., to criticize 'regrettabl[e] … attempts' by '[p]ublic officials … to intimidate judges,' including by 'suggesting political bias in the judge's adverse rulings without a credible basis for such allegations,'' she wrote.
Yahoo
26-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Judge rips DOJ for attempting to remove her from case challenging Trump's executive order on law firm
A federal judge sharply rejected a Trump administration request that she recuse herself from a case challenging an executive order targeting Democratic-tied law firm Perkins Coie, accusing the Justice Department of attacking the messenger because it could not attack the message. 'When the U.S. Department of Justice engages in this rhetorical strategy of ad hominem attack, the stakes become much larger than only the reputation of the targeted federal judge,' District Judge Beryl Howell wrote on Wednesday. '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 added. In its disqualification request, the Justice Department had made a variety of accusations about Howell's conduct in other cases, as well as comments she made at a recent hearing in the law firm case, that the administration claimed amounted to a bias against President Donald Trump. Howell's defense of the role of the judiciary comes as Trump and his allies have gone beyond just criticizing rulings against his policies by going after the judges themselves. They have called for the impeachment of multiple judges, including Howell's colleague at the DC federal courthouse, Chief Judge James Boasberg, who is overseeing a high-stakes deportation case. Trump in a social media post earlier this month called Boasberg a 'Radical Left Lunatic, a troublemaker and agitator.' The rhetoric prompted Chief Justice John Roberts to issue an extraordinary rebuke of the impeachment calls. Both Howell and Boasberg were appointed by President Barack Obama. Howell's new opinion responded to each of those allegations, but not before making a larger point about the department's rationale for why she should step aside from the case. While it's not surprising that Howell rejected the request for her to step aside, as such motions rarely succeed, she notably used her opinion to weigh in on the larger attacks on the judiciary as it navigates dozens of legal challenges brought against Trump policies. Howell pointed to the opening line in DOJ's disqualification motion, in which the department expressed 'the need to curtail ongoing improper encroachments of President Trump's Executive Power playing out around the country.' 'This line, which sounds like a talking point from a member of Congress rather than a legal brief from the United States Department of Justice, has no citation to any legal authority for the simple reason that the notion expressed reflects a grave misapprehension of our constitutional order,' the judge wrote. 'Adjudicating whether an Executive Branch exercise of power is legal, or not, is actually the job of the federal courts, and not of the President or the Department of Justice,' Howell wrote, adding, 'though vigorous and rigorous defense of executive actions is both expected and helpful to the courts in resolving legal issue.' Howell's opinion rejecting the disqualification request took issue with the Justice Department's 'blanket denigration of the merits of all the lawsuits' filed against Trump's agenda, while noting that courts have warned that motions for disqualification should not be taken lightly. 'This larger concern about the overall damage to the rule of law and the federal judicial system from the feckless impugning of the decision-making process of individual federal judges has prompted Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., to criticize 'regrettabl[e] … attempts' by '[p]ublic officials … to intimidate judges,' including by 'suggesting political bias in the judge's adverse rulings without a credible basis for such allegations,'' she wrote.
CNN
26-03-2025
- Politics
- CNN
Judge rips DOJ for attempting to remove her from case challenging Trump's executive order on law firm
A federal judge sharply rejected a Trump administration request that she recuse herself from a case challenging an executive order targeting Democratic-tied law firm Perkins Coie, accusing the Justice Department of attacking the messenger because it could not attack the message. 'When the U.S. Department of Justice engages in this rhetorical strategy of ad hominem attack, the stakes become much larger than only the reputation of the targeted federal judge,' District Judge Beryl Howell wrote on Wednesday. '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 added. In its disqualification request, the Justice Department had made a variety of accusations about Howell's conduct in other cases, as well as comments she made at a recent hearing in the law firm case, that the administration claimed amounted to a bias against President Donald Trump. Howell's defense of the role of the judiciary comes as Trump and his allies have gone beyond just criticizing rulings against his policies by going after the judges themselves. They have called for the impeachment of multiple judges, including Howell's colleague at the DC federal courthouse, Chief Judge James Boasberg, who is overseeing a high-stakes deportation case. Trump in a social media post earlier this month called Boasberg a 'Radical Left Lunatic, a troublemaker and agitator.' The rhetoric prompted Chief Justice John Roberts to issue an extraordinary rebuke of the impeachment calls. Both Howell and Boasberg were appointed by President Barack Obama. Howell's new opinion responded to each of those allegations, but not before making a larger point about the department's rationale for why she should step aside from the case. While it's not surprising that Howell rejected the request for her to step aside, as such motions rarely succeed, she notably used her opinion to weigh in on the larger attacks on the judiciary as it navigates dozens of legal challenges brought against Trump policies. Howell pointed to the opening line in DOJ's disqualification motion, in which the department expressed 'the need to curtail ongoing improper encroachments of President Trump's Executive Power playing out around the country.' 'This line, which sounds like a talking point from a member of Congress rather than a legal brief from the United States Department of Justice, has no citation to any legal authority for the simple reason that the notion expressed reflects a grave misapprehension of our constitutional order,' the judge wrote. 'Adjudicating whether an Executive Branch exercise of power is legal, or not, is actually the job of the federal courts, and not of the President or the Department of Justice,' Howell wrote, adding, 'though vigorous and rigorous defense of executive actions is both expected and helpful to the courts in resolving legal issue.' Howell's opinion rejecting the disqualification request took issue with the Justice Department's 'blanket denigration of the merits of all the lawsuits' filed against Trump's agenda, while noting that courts have warned that motions for disqualification should not be taken lightly. 'This larger concern about the overall damage to the rule of law and the federal judicial system from the feckless impugning of the decision-making process of individual federal judges has prompted Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., to criticize 'regrettabl[e] … attempts' by '[p]ublic officials … to intimidate judges,' including by 'suggesting political bias in the judge's adverse rulings without a credible basis for such allegations,'' she wrote.
