After his safety permit was revoked by President Donald Trump, the famous whistleblower lawyer Mark Zaid on Monday filed a lawsuit against the Trump government who tried to restore his safety permit-said that it was revoked because of the “improper political retaliation.”
“Trump’s government is trying to neutralize someone who is seen as a threat of hostility,” complaints, submitted in Washington, DC, stated.
In March, Trump issued a presidential memorandum who revoked security permits of more than a dozen people, including Zaid, former President Joe Biden, former Vice President Kamala Harris, and Hillary Clinton – a complaint step said “dangerous retaliation, not constitutional by the President of the United States against his political enemies.”
In his memorandum, Trump wrote that he had “decided that it was no longer in the national interest” for Zaid and others to have access to confidential information.
Zaid, according to his complaint, has represented “whistleblower in every government” originating from Bill Clinton, doing it “without paying attention to party politics” – and that the revocation of his permission now “damages” his ability to fully represent his client.
According to the complaint, Zaid has access to confidential information in several capacities for around three decades, since around 1995. The first “permit was approved”, according to the complaint, came in 2002 as part of the ongoing litigation. He was given a “secret” permit, which he maintained for years, until he was upgraded during the first Trump reign to be confidential/sensitive information (TS-SCI) as part of the case he handled for Whistleblower DHS. He last “read” his safety in 2024, although not fully processed until 2025.
“In short, Mr. Zaid has been a practical lawyer for more than thirty years and for most of his professional careers he has maintained official access to confidential information,” said the complaint. “Indeed, far from security risks, he has established himself and has been recognized by legal and non-legal entities as leaders in the legal community and in the field of national security in particular.”
National security lawyer Mark Zaid was photographed at his home in the Washington Metro area, DC, July 20, 2016.
Nikki Kahn/The Washington Post via Getty Image
Zaid’s complaint said he had suffered real world losses as a result of Trump’s memo after being “implemented blindly” by a number of agencies. In one example, complaints said Zaid was told in an email from the Office of the Director of the National Intelligence Inspector General Office that he “was rejected by his access to the confidential complaint of the client” because he no longer had a security permit.
“In short, Mr. Zaid currently represents many clients who now cannot access confident confidential information as part of effective and enthusiastic representatives,” said the complaint.
Lawyers to Zaid, including Abbe Lowell and Norm Eisen, said that in the complaint that they were suspicious of Zaid “came to President Trump’s radar” when he represented a whistleblower in 2019 who filed a complaint about Trump’s 2019 telephone call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, which led to the first impeachment.
Complaints said the revocation was a violation of the first and fifth amendments, and asked the judge to declare the non -constitutional president’s memorandum, block further implementation, cancel the revocation, and “required the defendants to conduct a cleaner hearing.”
“No Americans have to lose their livelihoods, or be blocked as lawyers to represent the client, because a president brought a grudge against them or what they represent,” Zaid said in a statement. “This is not just about me. This is about using security permits as a political weapon.”