The Department of Justice has moved to disqualify Judge Beryl Howell from a case involving President Trump, citing her history of alleged bias and hostility toward him.
Key Takeaways
- The Justice Department filed a motion requesting Judge Beryl Howell’s recusal from a case involving Perkins Coie law firm and President Trump, citing her “hostility” and “partiality” against Trump.
- The case centers around an executive order targeting Perkins Coie, which was involved in funding the controversial “Steele dossier” during previous investigations of Trump.
- Judge Howell temporarily blocked enforcement of sanctions against Perkins Coie, prompting the DOJ to question her impartiality in the matter.
- This move mirrors a similar DOJ action to remove Chief Judge James Boasberg from a deportation case, suggesting a broader pattern of challenging Obama-appointed judges presiding over Trump-related cases.
- Disqualifying judges is an unusual legal tactic typically reserved for clear conflicts of interest or misconduct.
DOJ Questions Judge Howell’s Impartiality
The Justice Department has taken the extraordinary step of requesting Judge Beryl Howell’s removal from a case involving Perkins Coie, a law firm with Democratic connections that played a role in commissioning the controversial “Steele dossier.” According to court filings, DOJ attorneys argue that Judge Howell has “repeatedly demonstrated partiality against and animus towards the president,” making her unfit to preside over the matter. The motion specifically cites Judge Howell’s past statements and rulings related to Trump and claims she has shown disdain for him in official proceedings.
Deputy Associate Attorney General Richard Lawson emphasized the need for impartiality in the filing, pointing to Judge Howell’s history of remarks suggesting Trump could lead to authoritarianism and her criticism of his pardons related to the January 6 Capitol protest. The DOJ cited multiple instances where they believe Howell displayed bias, including labeling Trump a potential flight risk in previous legal matters and, during this case, remarking that Trump had “a bee in his bonnet” over the dossier’s allegations about him and Russia.
The Perkins Coie Executive Order Dispute
At the center of this legal battle is President Trump’s executive order targeting Perkins Coie, which stripped the firm’s lawyers of security clearances and denied them access to government buildings. The order cited the firm’s alleged “dishonest and dangerous activity,” particularly referencing their role in hiring Fusion GPS, which subsequently employed Christopher Steele to compile the dossier on Trump. The law firm responded by filing a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the executive order, which they perceive as retaliatory action for their past work opposing Trump.
“Defendants deserve a court proceeding free from concerns about impartiality. In order to remove the possibility of any impartiality to these proceedings, defendants respectfully request that this court recuse itself,” Richard Lawson said.
Judge Howell recently issued a temporary order blocking the enforcement of the sanctions against Perkins Coie, scheduling further arguments on the executive order’s constitutionality. This decision prompted the Justice Department’s recusal request, as they believe her past interactions with Trump-related cases compromise her ability to rule fairly. The DOJ motion requests the court to “return this matter to assignment before a judge free from any appearance of hostility toward this administration and is otherwise unconnected with any matter related.”
It's full on war between the executive branch and the judiciary as the DOJ moves to disqualify District Court Judge Beryl Howell from the @PerkinsCoieLLP case. https://t.co/LgDZB2SSYe
— Cate Long (@cate_long) March 21, 2025
Pattern of Judicial Challenges
The motion against Judge Howell appears to be part of a broader pattern within the administration. The DOJ recently made a similar request to remove Chief Judge James Boasberg from a case involving the deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members, citing “improper procedures.” Both Howell and Boasberg were nominated by President Obama and sit on the Washington D.C. district court. According to court records, Howell is currently presiding over at least five cases challenging Trump, while Boasberg has three pending cases related to the administration.
“The Justice Department accused Judge Beryl Howell of ‘hostility’ to President Trump and asked that she take herself off a case in which she blocked the president’s attempt to punish a Democrat-connected law firm that helped sponsor the infamous ‘Steele dossier,'” the Justice Department said.
Legal experts note that disqualifying a judge is an unusual move typically reserved for clear conflicts of interest or misconduct. The DOJ motion argues that “Reasonable observers may well view this Court as insufficiently impartial to adjudicate the meritless challenges to President Trump’s efforts to implement the agenda that the American people elected him to carry out.” The fact that the administration is pursuing this strategy against multiple judges suggests a significant shift in how the Justice Department approaches cases where they perceive potential judicial bias against the president’s policies.
Sources:
- DOJ moves to boot federal judge from Perkins Coie case – POLITICO
- Trump Administration Sees Bias in a Judge and Tries to Push Her Off a Case – The New York Times
- Justice Dept. asks for judge to be booted off case after ruling against Trump – Washington Times
