Two prominent law firms sued the Trump administration on Friday, seeking to block executive orders that would halt the firms’ business with the government and revoke the security clearances of its attorneys.
The two firms, Jenner & Block and WilmerHale, both sued in federal court in Washington and asked a judge to quickly step in and try and halt the orders. They are two of the five firms Trump has targeted with executive orders so far, all in retaliation for employing or representing political enemies. The other firms targeted are Paul, Weiss; Covington & Burling; and Perkins Coie. Until Friday, only Perkins Coie had challenged the order in court and successfully convinced a US district judge in Washington to block it.
The suits are significant because they come at a moment when there is deep concern that the legal community is not doing enough to push back against Trump’s efforts to target firms. Lawyers and other experts see Trump’s executive orders targeting firms as an anti-democratic program to intimidate adversaries and make it more difficult to challenge him and his administration in court.
“Today, Jenner & Block filed a lawsuit to stop an unconstitutional executive order that has already been declared unlawful by a federal court. We expect to prevail quickly,” the firm said in a statement. “For more than 100 years, Jenner has stood firm and tirelessly advocated for our clients against all adversaries, including against unlawful government action. We once again go to court to do just that. To do otherwise would mean compromising our ability to zealously advocate for all of our clients.”
In its own suit, lawyers for WilmerHale wrote: “In an unprecedented assault on that bedrock principle, the President has issued multiple executive orders in recent weeks targeting law firms and their employees as an undisguised form of retaliation for representing clients and causes he disfavors or employing lawyers he dislikes.”
WilmerHale is being represented by Paul Clement, one of the most prominent conservative lawyers who argues frequently before the US supreme court and served as a solicitor general in the George W Bush administration. “The Order’s declared purpose is to retaliate against WilmerHale – and certain of its clients – for WilmerHale attorneys’ constitutionally protected advocacy in matters that President Trump perceives to be adverse to his personal and/or political interests,” the lawsuit says.
That concern escalated after Paul, Weiss reached an agreement with the Trump administration to withdraw the executive order against it. Another major firm, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, reached an agreement with the Trump administration to avoid an executive order. Among other things, it agreed to provide $100m in pro-bono work “in the Trump administration and beyond” in service of “causes that the President and Skadden both support”, Trump said in a statement posted on Truth Social.
Trump also said Skadden had agreed not to engage in “illegal DEI discrimination and practices”. Skadden is the first firm to reach an agreement with the Trump administration before an executive order was issued. “This was essentially a settlement,” the president said.
Elon Musk targeted Skadden in a post on Twitter last week after Dinesh D’Souza complained the firm should be punished for representing a Georgia man who sued him for defamation in connection with the film 2000 Mules. D’Souza apologized to the man for falsely accusing him of fraud. The film’s distributor separately settled the lawsuit, agreed to stop distributing the film, and apologized to Andrews.
Trump targeted Jenner & Block over the firm’s employment of Andrew Weissmann, a former prosecutor who worked on Robert Mueller’s investigation into the Trump campaign’s relationship with Russia during the 2016 campaign. Weissmann has not worked at the firm since 2021 and has been a prominent Trump critic, frequently appearing on television. Trump targeted WilmerHale because it once employed Mueller.
Jenner & Block’s suit, filed in the federal district court in Washington DC, details how the order cripples the firm. Over the last five years, 40% of its revenue has come from clients who are government contractors, subcontractors, or affiliated with the government. It also says it harms the firm’s pro-bono practice because it may represent clients and take positions that are at odds with the administration.
Lawyers from Cooley LLP, which is representing Jenner & Block, say that the executive order targeting the firm is blatantly unconstitutional.
“The Constitution, top to bottom, protects against such attempts by the government to target citizens and lawyers based on the opinions they voice, the people with whom they associate, and the clients they represent,” the lawsuit says. Creating a list of disfavored law firms, it says, “is anathema to our scheme of ordered liberty”.
