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, most recently as Deputy General Counsel at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Perrin advises clients on matters presenting significant legal, political, and reputational risks. During the Biden Administration, Perrin served as the lead attorney on oversight matters across two federal agencies. In this capacity, 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 – including numerous corporate executives, cabinet secretaries, and other senior government officials – 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.

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.
Continue Reading Recent Developments Shed Further Light on Congressional Subpoena Authority

Understandably, much of the commentary following the release of the Supreme Court’s blockbuster decision in Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP has focused on the impact of the Court’s ruling on the long-running quest for the President’s tax returns and other financial records.  Buried in the Court’s opinion, however, is an
Continue Reading The Supreme Court’s Mazars Decision Contains a Significant Suggestion That Congress May Be Bound by the Attorney-Client Privilege in Congressional Investigations

In a unanimous ruling, the D.C. Circuit shed new light this week on the applicability of key federal criminal statutes on proceedings before the Office of Congressional Ethics (“OCE”).  While largely removing the prospect of criminal obstruction liability for parties responding to inquiries from OCE, the court’s opinion is
Continue Reading D.C. Circuit Rules Obstruction of Office of Congressional Ethics Not a Crime, but Questions and Risks Remain

Last month, we highlighted congressional efforts to ensure that Congress is able to continue conducting the business of the American people during the ongoing COVID-19 crisis. After weeks of halting progress, those efforts took an important step forward this morning with the release of a proposed resolution that would temporarily
Continue Reading House Leaders Push Ahead with Proposal for Virtual Oversight

Congressional leaders are actively exploring ways to continue the work of Congress as the COVID-19 crisis continues to unfold.  Currently, Congress is not able to have live, in-person hearings, which are the primary tool for conducting oversight of both the private sector and the executive branch.  With existing oversight investigations
Continue Reading Congressional Paper Hearings: The Future or The Past?