The fourth brief from Friday:
#PerkinsCoie:
• We have the evidence, the government brought none. 260 unrebutted statements of material fact and the government can't produce evidence of any reason to investigate us other than the President's animus.
• This was retaliation for our use of Constitutional rights, which requires strict scrutiny of the government's interest to take some narrowly tailored action. It wasn't narrow and they didn't attempt to argue so. That's why *we* won a full #SummaryJudgment. (To be fair, #Trump picked on us first — he's always hated us, he was sanctioned for his lawsuit against us — so we had a bit more time.)
• The Constitution gives *us* the right of speech protected from the Government. That the government wants to hide their motive by suppressing the Section 1 they wrote is not supporting any of their rights but part of an engineered scheme to murder ours.
• #PaulWeiss caved and got security clearances back across the board. Quid pro quo isn't how this is supposed to work, right?
• The Government never mentions the Fact Sheet which lays out this scheme and makes everything ripe for the courts to review. If agency X "will restrict" our access that's totally ripe for review, right?
Docs here: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70694462/perkins-coie-llp-v-doj/