Trump widens assault on prominent law firms

Trump widens assault on prominent law firms

The New York Times reports:

President Trump on Friday opened a third attack against a private law firm, restricting the business activities of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison just days after a federal judge ruled such measures appeared to violate the Constitution.

The president signed an executive order to suspend security clearances held by people at the firm, pending a review of whether such clearances are consistent with the national interest. The order also seeks to sharply limit Paul, Weiss employees from entering government buildings, getting government jobs or receiving any money from federal contracts.

The move widened an assault by Mr. Trump on some of nation’s most prominent law firms. Legal experts have warned the aggressive campaign sets a dangerous precedent that threatens not just the ability of lawyers to do their jobs, but also the ability of private citizens to obtain lawyers to represent them.

The order said it was intended to end “government sponsorship of harmful activity” at Paul, Weiss and specifically punish one of its former lawyers, Mark F. Pomerantz.

Mr. Trump mentioned Mr. Pomerantz by name in an angry speech Friday at the Justice Department, where he complained about prosecutors and private lawyers who pursued cases against him, calling them “really bad people.” Mr. Trump, in the same speech, claimed he was ending the “weaponization” of the Justice Department, though his move against the firm showed he will continue using his power to exact retribution on his opponents.

Mr. Pomerantz had tried to build a criminal case against Mr. Trump several years ago when he worked at the Manhattan district attorney’s office. The White House announcement called Mr. Pomerantz “an unethical lawyer” who tried to “manufacture a prosecution against President Trump.”

The order also cited a case brought by a Paul, Weiss partner against pro-Trump rioters at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, and the firm’s diversity policies as reasons for the restrictions. [Continue reading…]

Comments are closed.