The federal District Court in the District of Columbia (Amir H. Ali) has issued a preliminary injunction against the Office of the President and a variety of other federal agencies from using the summary revocation of security clearances to penalize lawyers from representing people adverse to it. “The Constitution forbids government officials from using their power to retaliate against people for their speech, and that is so even when the speech is critical of the government,” the Court said.
The case was brought by Mark S. Zaid, an attorney who had previously represented whistleblowers against the federal government. The Court concluded that he was likely to succeed on the merits of a First Amendment retaliation claim, a procedural due process claim, a violation of his clients’ Fifth Amendment right to counsel claim, violation of the Administrative Procedures Act, a claim that the memorandum revoking his clearance was void for vagueness and his claim that it violated the Bill of Attainder Clause. (Zaid v. Executive Office of the President, D. DC, No. 25-01365, 12/23/25.)
Add new comment