Last Updated on 4 weeks by Ashley Michael
The Trump administration has requested that U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell recuse herself from a case involving President Trump’s executive order targeting the law firm Perkins Coie, citing allegations of bias against the president.
On Friday, Justice Department lawyers filed a motion arguing that Judge Howell has demonstrated a “pattern of hostility” toward Trump, claiming her impartiality could “reasonably be questioned” due to her past rulings and comments in cases related to the president and his supporters.
“This Court has not kept its disdain for President Trump secret,” the filing stated, according to Reuters. “It has voiced its thoughts loudly—both inside and outside the courtroom.”
Background on the Case
Judge Howell, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, recently issued a temporary order blocking significant portions of Trump’s executive action against Perkins Coie. The law firm, known for its ties to the Democratic Party, was targeted by Trump’s order, which sought to bar it from working with federal contractors and restrict its access to government officials and buildings.
The administration justified the order by pointing to Perkins Coie’s past work for Hillary Clinton, Trump’s former political opponent.
Judge Howell’s Past Rulings and Comments
Judge Howell has been vocal in cases connected to Trump, emphasizing the importance of upholding the rule of law and American democracy. Last week, she remarked that the legal industry was “watching in horror” at Trump’s order against Perkins Coie.
The Justice Department’s filing also cited another ruling in which Howell compelled a former Trump attorney to testify in a grand jury investigation into Trump’s handling of classified documents. That testimony played a role in a criminal case against Trump that has since been dismissed.
Trump Administration, Broader Context of Judicial Challenges
The Trump administration has increasingly criticized federal judges in recent weeks as courts have repeatedly challenged the president’s use of executive authority. This case is part of a broader pattern of legal battles between the administration and the judiciary.
A spokesperson for the D.C. federal court did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the recusal motion.
📌 MARSLINK NEWS – Reliable, Timely, and In-Depth Coverage