A federal judge has temporarily halted portions of President Trump’s recent executive order that targeted the law firm Perkins Coie for its representation of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign and other causes opposed by the administration. The order accuses Perkins Coie of engaging in “dishonest and dangerous activity” and imposes penalties such as suspending security clearances, restricting government contractors from working with the firm, and banning interactions between Perkins Coie employees and federal officials.

During a hearing in Washington, D.C., U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell issued a temporary restraining order against enforcing the executive order, stating that it appears to be punitive and may infringe on the firm’s constitutional rights. Howell emphasized the importance of ensuring all parties have zealous legal representation, even those with unpopular views or causes. She expressed concerns about the chilling effect the order could have on the legal profession, potentially intimidating attorneys from advocating for clients and causes that clash with the president’s agenda.

Perkins Coie swiftly responded to Trump’s order by suing the government, asserting that it violates constitutional principles. The government defended the order, arguing that the president has the authority to act against entities deemed untrustworthy with national security. The executive order alleges that Perkins Coie undermined democratic processes, courts, and law enforcement, particularly through its involvement in the Trump-Russia dossier and representation of Clinton.

Perkins Coie, represented by attorneys from Williams & Connolly, reported losing clients and facing difficulties in legal proceedings due to the order’s repercussions. The legal battle underscores the clash between executive power and constitutional rights in a contentious political environment.