Perkins Coie LLP v. U.S. Department of Justice

In Perkins Coie LLP v. U.S. Department of Justice, the Institute for Justice submitted an amicus brief in support of four law firms that have been targeted by the government with adverse executive orders because the President doesn’t like positions they’ve advocated and clients they’ve represented. Our brief makes two points on issues where IJ is a national leader: First Amendment retaliation, and abusive disclosure requirements. First, we point out that the First Amendment prohibits adverse government action taken because of animus against protected speech and association. Because of that, it is no defense that the government could hypothesize legitimate reasons to take actions against the law firms, because here the actual reason (clear from the face of the executive orders) is retaliation. Second, we home in on an especially troubling aspect of the executive orders: requiring all government contractors to disclose all relationships with the target law firms, even if they have nothing to do with government contracts. We show the long history of Supreme Court First Amendment doctrine protecting organizations against these kinds of abusive disclosure requirements that enable retaliation, that governments of all political stripes can weaponize disclosure requirements if there are no constitutional protections, and that a broad range of organizations spanning the political spectrum that have long advocated for First Amendment protections against such disclosure requirements.