<
div class=”field field–name-body field–type-text-with-summary field–label-hidden”>
<
div class=”field__items”>
<
div class=”field__item even”>
“Pernicious.”
“Unprecedented… cringe-worthy.”
“Egregious.”
“Shocking.”
These are just some of the words that federal judges used in recent weeks to describe President Trump’s politically motivated and vindictive executive orders targeting law firms that have employed people or represented clients or causes he doesn’t like.
But our favorite word by far is “unconstitutional.”
EFF was one of the very first legal organizations to publicly come out in support of Perkins Coie when it became the first law firm to challenge the legality of President Trump’s executive order targeting it. Since then, EFF has joined four amicus briefs in support of other targeted law firms, and in all four cases, judges from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia have indicated they’re having none of it. Three have issued permanent injunctions deeming the executive orders null and void, and the fourth seems to be headed in that same direction.
Trump issued his EO against Perkins Coie on March 6. In a […]
Content was cut in order to protect the source.Please visit the source for the rest of the article.
Read the original article: