Federal Judge Blocks Trump's Memorandum on Security Clearances

Wed Dec 24 2025 22:13:41 GMT+0200 (Eastern European Standard Time)

A federal court has ruled against the Trump administration's attempt to revoke the security clearance of attorney Mark Zaid, who alleged the move was part of a political retribution campaign.

In a legal decision reflecting the ongoing tensions and challenges facing the Trump administration, U.S. District Judge Amir Ali has issued a preliminary injunction blocking the enforcement of a March memorandum meant to revoke the security clearance of attorney Mark Zaid and 14 others. Zaid's lawsuit specified the action as politically motivated retaliation linked to his high-profile legal representation of whistleblowers and political adversaries. This ruling highlights the judiciary's role in checking executive power and addresses broader concerns about the politicization of legal processes in Washington.

WASHINGTON (AP) — In a significant legal setback for the Trump administration, a federal judge has barred the enforcement of a presidential memorandum aimed at revoking the security clearance of prominent attorney Mark Zaid. This ruling also affects 14 other individuals named in the memorandum, addressing broader accusations of retaliatory politics within the administration.

U.S. District Judge Amir Ali granted Zaid’s request for a preliminary injunction after ruling that the government's order represented an act of improper political retribution. Zaid's legal actions stemmed from concerns that losing his clearance would impair his ability to defend clients involved in sensitive national security matters.

The memorandum, issued in March, targeted Zaid and others considered unfavorable to the administration, claiming that their continued security clearance was not in the national interest. Among those affected were high-profile figures from both political and legal backgrounds, including former Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco and current New York Attorney General Letitia James.

This decision follows another critical setback for the administration, as the Supreme Court declined to allow an initiative to deploy National Guard troops in Chicago. Taken together, these events underscore the administration's struggle to carry out its agenda against increasing scrutiny from the courts.

Judge Ali emphasized that while his ruling prevents the government from using the memorandum for punitive measures, it does not eliminate the government's authority to revoke or suspend security clearances through regular procedures. The injunction is slated to take effect temporarily until January 13.

Commenting on the ruling, Zaid stated, This is not just a victory for me, it’s an indictment of the Trump administration’s attempts to intimidate and silence the legal community, especially lawyers who represent people who dare to question or hold this government accountable. This case raises fundamental questions about the interplay between political power and legal protections in the U.S.