A federal appeals court panel on Thursday questioned President Donald Trump‘s authority to restrict federal contract work from major law firms and a separate effort to revoke the security clearances from attorneys at these firms, whom the government says engaged in “unscrupulous” and partisan behavior.The back-to-back hearings before the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit centered on whether courts can review security clearance decisions allegedly motivated by retaliation or politics, or whether such decisions are effectively immune from judicial scrutiny under presidential national security powers.In both arguments, Justice Department attorney Abhishek Kambli maintained that security clearance determinations are constitutionally reserved for the executive branch and therefore largely beyond federal courts’ review, even when judges posed hypotheticals involving race, religion, political affiliation, or speech.
“Even if it is for improper motives, it is ultimately unreviewable,” Kambli said during the law firm hearing.
Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan and Judge Cornelia Pillard, appointees of former President Barack Obama, repeatedly appeared skeptical of that position, while Trump-appointed Judge Neomi Rao focused more heavily on limits courts face in reviewing national security judgments.
