Whistleblower Lawyer Sues Trump to Reclaim Security Clearance
Source: Bloomberg Law
Whistleblower attorney Mark Zaid, known for representing the intelligence official whose complaint led to President Donald Trumps first impeachment, sued the Trump administration Monday to reclaim his security clearance.
The lawsuit comes in response to Trumps March 22 memorandum revoking Zaids security credentials amid the presidents crackdown on lawyers he said weaponize the justice system. The loss of Zaids security clearances, which allow him to review sensitive government documents, bars him from representing current and future clients in national security cases, including lawful whistleblowers, Zaid said in a statement Monday.
No American should lose their livelihood, or be blocked as a lawyer from representing clients, because a president carries a grudge toward them or who they represent, Zaid said. This isnt just about me. Its about using security clearances as political weapons.
Zaid filed the complaint in US District Court for the District of Columbia, where he is being represented by Abbe Lowells newly founded law firm, Lowell & Associates. In a statement announcing the launch of his firm, Lowell said the purpose of the new practice was to represent political targets of President Trump.
The administration admitted it revoked the clearance of a veteran, non-partisan national security lawyer to punish him for his proper representation of a client in the impeachment process, Lowell said. Thats illegal, unconstitutional, and exactly what this lawsuit will show.
Read more: https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/whistleblower-lawyer-sues-trump-to-reclaim-security-clearance
#MeidasMighty #fuckelonald #fucktrump #fuckProject2025 #fuckthenazis ðð¡ð¤¬ððð
— Judy Thompson ððððððð¨ð¦ ðºð¦ (@judythompson210.bsky.social) 2025-05-05T21:29:45.544Z
Read "Whistleblower Lawyer Sues Trump to Reclaim Security Clearance" on SmartNews: l.smartnews.com/p-kPviScE/bW...
Link to tweet


LetMyPeopleVote
(163,924 posts)SunSeeker
(55,890 posts)This was a blatantly unconstitutional action.