Addressing Risks From Perkins Coie LLP

The Constitutional Critic Analysis

Executive Order 14230: Addressing Risks from Perkins Coie LLP

Document Summary:

President Donald Trump, in his second term, has issued Executive Order 14230, which focuses on the law firm Perkins Coie, alleging a history of unethical behavior, racial discrimination, and actions aimed at undermining democratic elections. The order suspends security clearances, stops government contracts, and limits access to federal buildings for Perkins Coie employees.

Stated Government Rationale:

The government's publicly stated rationale for this executive order includes:

1. Election Interference: Criticizing Perkins Coie for the alleged manufacturing of a false dossier to influence the 2016 election.
2. Unethical Behavior: Highlighting the firm's lack of candor before the court and involvement in overturning election laws.
3. Discrimination: Addressing Perkins Coie's racial quotas and discriminatory hiring practices as violations of civil rights laws.
4. Protecting National Security: Suspending security clearances and contracts with Perkins Coie to safeguard national interests.

Real or Potential Underlying Motives:

Political Manipulation and Hypocrisy:

• Rewriting History: The order portrays Perkins Coie as the singular threat to democracy while conveniently ignoring instances of political manipulation by the Trump administration or its supporters. The selective focus on this firm could be an attempt to divert attention from other political scandals or acts of government overreach.
• Political Retribution: Targeting Perkins Coie, which represented Trump’s 2016 opponent Hillary Clinton, might be seen as a direct form of political retribution rather than genuine concern for constitutional rights.
• Mudslinging: This executive order could serve as a tool for Trump to engage in political mudslinging, presenting his administration as the champion of justice and righteousness while undermining his opponents.

Rights Erosion and Constitutional Concerns:

• Due Process: By unilaterally suspending security clearances and stopping contracts without due process, this order undermines the Fifth Amendment's guarantee of due process. While Perkins Coie may have engaged in problematic behavior, the proper avenue is through legal proceedings, not executive fiat.
• Freedom of Association: The restriction on government employees' interactions with Perkins Coie staff and the limitations on hiring Perkins Coie attorneys potentially infringe upon the freedom of association outlined in the First Amendment.
• Freedom of Enterprise: Limiting Perkins Coie’s access to government contracts and buildings might be seen as an abuse of executive power, potentially violating the Takings Clause by interfering with the firm's property rights.

Educate and Inform:

• Hiding Behind Good Intentions: The government's stated intent to end discrimination and protect election integrity might appear noble at first glance. However, this executive order goes beyond these goals, revealing a more insidious agenda of political retribution, with little regard for constitutional limitations.
• Selective Enforcement: By focusing on one law firm known for its association with political adversaries, the administration is sending a message of selective enforcement, a practice that undermines the rule of law.
• Implications for the Future: This order might set a precedent for future presidents to use executive power to target political opponents, potentially destabilizing the political environment and further eroding the balance of power.

Call to Action:

• Public Scrutiny: It's essential for Americans to critically examine executive actions, seeking out the underlying motives that may infringe upon their rights. This executive order should be subjected to rigorous public debate and oversight to prevent it from becoming a weapon against political opponents.
• Judicial Review: Given the constitutional concerns, this order should face legal challenges to ensure adherence to constitutional principles.
• Defending Democracy: The focus on one firm doesn't absolve us of the need to protect election integrity and civil rights in a consistent and lawful manner. Defending democracy means upholding the principles of the Constitution, not selectively targeting political enemies.

This executive order represents a concerning overreach of executive power, potentially eroding personal freedoms, and should be critically examined through the lens of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. It serves as a stark reminder of the importance of constitutional safeguards and the need for eternal vigilance against government overreach.