Judge halts Trump’s effort to revoke whistleblower lawyer Mark Zaid’s security clearance

Judge Amir Ali said that officials canceled Mark Zaid’s security clearance without due process and failed to conduct a proper national security review
PUBLISHED DEC 24, 2025
The White House defended Mark Zaid’s clearance revocation as a national interest decision, while Zaid argued that it was retaliatory rather than security-based (Getty Images)
The White House defended Mark Zaid’s clearance revocation as a national interest decision, while Zaid argued that it was retaliatory rather than security-based (Getty Images)


WASHINGTON, DC: A federal judge temporarily blocked President Donald Trump’s move to revoke the security clearance of attorney Mark Zaid, ordering that the clearance be restored while the legal challenge proceeds.

US District Judge Amir Ali issued a preliminary injunction on late Tuesday, December 23, concluding that the process used to revoke Zaid’s clearance did not meet procedural standards typically applied in national security cases.

The ruling paused the administration’s actions while the court considered the broader legal arguments raised in Zaid’s lawsuit.

Judge faults government over clearance procedures

(x/@MarkSZaidEsq)
Attorney Mark Zaid, who represented the Ukraine whistleblower, successfully argued that his clearance was stripped without due process (@MarkSZaidEsq/X)

In his written order, Judge Ali said that the government acted without following the customary procedures associated with security clearance determinations.

He wrote that the action against Zaid was carried out by "summarily canceling the attorney’s security clearance without any of the process that is afforded to others."

The judge said that the government did not conduct an individualized national security assessment before revoking the clearance, which Zaid had held for more than 20 years.

Ali also cited evidence presented by Zaid that access to classified information was necessary for him to effectively represent current clients in whistleblower-related cases.

Mark Zaid slams attempts to intimidate



Zaid responded to the ruling by praising the court’s decision and rejecting claims that the revocation was justified on national security grounds.

"I will not be intimidated and look forward to continuing to defend the brave men and women who stand up to the unlawful retaliation of the Trump administration," Zaid said in a statement to CBS News.

He described the injunction as a response to what he characterized as attempts to discourage lawyers from representing clients critical of the government.

Zaid previously represented the whistleblower whose complaint led to Trump’s first impeachment inquiry related to Ukraine.

White House justifies clearance revocation

NEW YORK, NEW YORK - MAY 01: Hillary Clinton speaks onstage during a conversation with Margaret Hoover for
Mark Zaid was allegedly targeted in a broader order that also stripped clearances from top Democrats like Kamala Harris and Hillary Clinton (Dominik Bindl/Getty Images)

Zaid filed the suit in May after Trump revoked his clearance along with those of several prominent political figures.

Those affected included former Vice President Kamala Harris, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and multiple former officials from the Biden administration.

At the time, the White House said that it was "no longer in the national interest" for those individuals to retain access to classified information.

Zaid’s lawsuit argued that the decision was retaliatory rather than based on national security considerations.

Order on hold for potential appeal

WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 1: The E. Barrett Prettyman United States Federal Courthouse on June, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Kevin Carter/Getty Images)
Judge Amir Ali has given the Justice Department 21 days to appeal before the order to restore Zaid's clearance takes full effect (Kevin Carter/Getty Images)

Although Judge Ali ordered the government to "immediately and fully restore" Zaid’s security clearance, he placed a 21-day administrative stay on the injunction.

The pause allows the Justice Department time to seek appellate review of the ruling.

If no appeal is filed, the injunction is set to take effect on January 13. Judge Ali also denied a Justice Department motion to dismiss the lawsuit.

The case remains ongoing as the court considers the merits of Zaid’s constitutional and administrative law claims.

GET BREAKING U.S. NEWS & POLITICAL UPDATES
STRAIGHT TO YOUR INBOX.

MORE STORIES

Melania Trump is set to preside over a UN Security Council session titled 'Children, Technology, and Education in Conflict', scheduled for March 2
50 minutes ago
Jimmy Kimmel mocked Trump’s speech, joking about its length, partisan reactions in the chamber, and Trump’s immigration and economic statements
1 hour ago
Nancy Mace praised GOP support after a closed-door deposition where she asked Clinton about Bill Clinton’s past ties to Epstein
2 hours ago
Lauren Boebert claimed Hillary Clinton gave vague answers on past ties with Epstein, highlighting GOP efforts to demand accountability
3 hours ago
Rep James Comer also said Americans will ‘find hard to believe’ a lot of what Hillary Clinton had to say in the deposition
3 hours ago
Ranking member Robert Garcia (D-CA) said 'everybody was very taken aback by the committee rules being essentially not enforced'
4 hours ago
Kristi Noem claimed Deep State ran a secret SCIF spy room inside DHS headquarters with hidden files
4 hours ago
Nancy Mace pressed Clinton near the end of her deposition; she declined to speculate and kept a calm, measured stance throughout
4 hours ago
Robert Garcia said lawmakers want clarity on the status of the alleged missing FBI documents
5 hours ago
Hillary Clinton criticized Republicans for off-topic questions on UFOs and Pizzagate, calling the closed-door deposition tedious and frustrating
5 hours ago