Skip to content
Photo of Perrin Cooke

Perrin Cooke

Perrin Cooke is special counsel in the firm’s Washington, DC office and a member of the White Collar Defense and Investigations, Election and Political Law, and Public Policy Practice Groups, with a focus on assisting clients responding to high-profile congressional investigations.

Drawing on his experience in government, Perrin advises clients on matters presenting significant legal, political, and reputational risks. As a senior lawyer in the Biden Administration, Perrin served as the lead counsel on oversight matters across two cabinet agencies. Among other high-profile matters, he guided the development of strategic responses to congressional requests and subpoenas touching on a range of topics. Through his work in both government and private practice, Perrin has extensive experience preparing witnesses appearing in briefings, transcribed interviews, and hearings before congressional oversight committees.

In addition to his investigations practice, Perrin advises clients – including political campaigns, advocacy organizations, trade associations, and corporations – on a wide variety of election and political law compliance matters.

Contact:Read more about Perrin CookeEmail

Last week, the Georgia state Senate authorized a sweeping investigation of former gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, continuing a national trend of increased state legislative investigations.  Although state-level investigations continue to lag far behind congressional investigations, state legislatures appear to be replicating what we see on the federal level with increasing…

Continue Reading Georgia Senate Launches Abrams-Focused Inquiry, Signaling Growing Risk of State Legislative Investigations

Recently, three key investigative committees of the House of Representatives—the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Judiciary Committee, and Energy and Commerce Committee—each adopted their respective committee’s oversight plan for the new Congress, offering a window into the committees’ investigative priorities for the next two years. The newly adopted oversight plans provide insights into the companies and industries most likely to draw congressional scrutiny from these three significant committees.

Under clause 2(d) of Rule X of the House, each authorizing committee is required to adopt and submit an oversight plan to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the Committee on House Administration by March 1 after the start of a new Congress. The Oversight and Government Reform Committee collects the individual oversight plans and later publishes a comprehensive collection by April 15.

With some exceptions, the current oversight plans described below align with the plans adopted by these committees in the last Congress, and the Republican Members of the committees rebuffed the Democratic Members’ efforts to expand the plans to encompass oversight of the new Trump Administration. During a series of contentious markups, the committees rejected various amendments that would have expanded the scope of the oversight plans to include reviews of the Trump Administration directives, federal funding freezes, the activities of the Department of Government Efficiency, and other topics. As a result, the oversight plans tend to focus on private sector investigations, suggesting that investigations of private sector interests may take an outsized role in these committees’ oversight activities in the current Congress.

Below we highlight those elements of the committees’ oversight plans that are mostly likely to have implications for private sector entities. The plans are especially relevant to clients in industries including energy and environment, aerospace and defense, communications, technology, artificial intelligence, higher education, and pharmaceuticals.Continue Reading Preparing Now for Expected Congressional Oversight: Newly Released Oversight Plans Signal Investigations of Private Parties

In the latest in a series of executive actions that aim to reshape much of government, President Trump signed an executive order on February 18 expanding the President’s authority over so-called independent agencies within the executive branch.  The impact of this executive order will be felt across the federal government…

Continue Reading New Executive Order Gives President Veto Power Over Some FEC Rulemaking

With the end of the Biden Administration, the start of the Trump 2.0 Administration, and a change of power in the U.S. House, the steady churn of high-skill professionals moving in and out of government positions has reached an all-time high. Indeed, beyond the typical cadre of newly unemployed political…

Continue Reading Don’t Get Stuck in the Revolving Door: A Primer on Federal Post-Government Employment Restrictions

The House Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties held a hearing on Tuesday on potential reform of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (“FARA”), the first FARA hearing by the House Judiciary Committee in over 30 years.

FARA is an arcane statute that requires “agents of…
Continue Reading House Judiciary Committee Holds Hearing on Foreign Agents Registration Act Reform

Yesterday, the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol filed a highly consequential brief in ongoing litigation relating to a subpoena seeking documents involving attorney John Eastman’s alleged participation in efforts to thwart Congress’s certification of the results of the 2020 Presidential election. …
Continue Reading January 6 Committee Filing Provides Further Support for Parties Asserting Attorney-Client Privilege in Congressional Investigations

Late last week, the Supreme Court indicated that it intends to review a challenge by Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) to federal limits on the use of post-election contributions to repay pre-election loans that candidates make to their own campaigns.  This follows an earlier three-judge district court decision that struck down…
Continue Reading Considering the Broader Implications of Cruz v. FEC

Throughout recent months, we have closely monitored important developments in the courts and on Capitol Hill related to Congress’s power to issue and enforce subpoenas for documents or witness testimony.  As members of the 117th Congress continue to develop legislative and oversight priorities, a number of recent events signal continued uncertainty in congressional subpoena authority and interest in Congress in clarifying and strengthening that authority.  As discussed below, these recent developments hold significant implications for Congress’s ability to compel cooperation with their investigations.

Back to Square One in the Courts

Historically, investigators on Capitol Hill have relied on civil enforcement proceedings to enforce their subpoenas and compel the production of sought-after documents or testimony.  As we detailed in November, however, the D.C. Circuit cast doubt on the ability of investigators in the House to pursue this common avenue for enforcing its subpoenas.
Continue Reading Recent Developments Shed Further Light on Congressional Subpoena Authority

With a growing chorus of support across the progressive landscape, the For the People Act of 2021 has emerged as a key legislative priority for congressional Democrats in the 117th Congress. Envisioned as a “transformational anti-corruption and clean elections reform package,” the bill would enact sweeping changes to federal election

…
Continue Reading Understanding H.R. 1 (Part 1): Corporate & Trade Association Campaign Activity

In recent months, we have highlighted key developments on Capitol Hill and discussed the implications of the change in Administration on the pace and focus of congressional investigations.  With a Democratic majority now in both the House and the Senate, investigations targeting the private sector are primed to take center

…
Continue Reading Congressional Investigations with a Democratic House and Senate