Lawyers in Trump cases seek to recoup fees under equal justice law

By David Thomas and Mike Scarcella

March 26 (Reuters) - (Billable Hours is Reuters' weekly report on lawyers and money. Please send tips or suggestions to D.Thomas@thomsonreuters.com)

A law that benefits plaintiffs in some cases against the federal government could take on new prominence as lawsuits against U.S. President Donald Trump's administration begin reaching their conclusions and prevailing lawyers seek taxpayer-funded fees.

The 1980 Equal Access to Justice Act allows individuals and small organizations to recover limited legal fees from the federal government if they win a final judgment in their case and the government's position was not "substantially justified."

Certain tax-exempt organizations can be eligible, in addition to organizations with a net worth of under $7 million that employ up to 500 people.

Last week, prominent appellate lawyer Paul Clement and law firm Jenner & Block asked a U.S. judge in Massachusetts to award more than $529,000 in fees in a lawsuit they brought on behalf of the Association of American Universities against the U.S. Department of Defense. The association successfully challenged planned cuts to federal research funding provided to universities by the Pentagon.

The statutory rate for EAJA fees is generally $125 an hour but can be adjusted for cost of living and other factors, including the limited availability of qualified attorneys.

Clement, and Jenner & Block's Lindsay Harrison asked the court to award fees at $500 an hour, arguing that "distinctive knowledge and specialized skills were necessary to litigate this suit on an abbreviated timeline."

Clement and Harrison did not immediately respond to requests for comment. In a filing, they said their $500 hourly rate request was "substantially less than the hourly rate charged to AAU." Clement was charging $2,650 an hour for his legal work in other cases last year.

The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In another case, U.S. District Judge Stephanie Gallagher, in Maryland on Tuesday, awarded the American Federation of Teachers more than $162,000 in legal fees under the EAJA.

The organization was represented by nonprofit advocacy group Democracy Forward in a successful lawsuit accusing the U.S. Education Department of unlawfully expanding the definition of prohibited discrimination.

On Thursday, the Justice Department asked Gallagher to reconsider her order, telling the court that the government mistakenly missed its window to contest the fees. The government said in a filing that Gallagher's order was defective because it didn't include reasons justifying an award of more than $125 an hour.

Also this week, law firm Arnold & Porter reached a legal fee settlement with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The amount was not disclosed, but records show the firm was seeking $114,000 under the EAJA. The firm represented several Planned Parenthood entities in a lawsuit over new requirements on Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program grant recipients as a condition for ongoing receipt of funds.

HHS and Arnold & Porter lawyers did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Aggregate annual awards under the EAJA have fluctuated in recent years but have regularly exceeded $100 million, driven largely by cases involving disputed Social Security and veterans' benefits. Federal agencies paid more than $128 million in legal fee awards and expenses under the law between October 1, 2024 and September 30, 2025, according to a federal report published Thursday. Nearly all of the 15,406 awards were made in court cases; five stemmed from administrative proceedings.

The Social Security Administration and the Department of Veteran Affairs together accounted for more than $106 million of the total awards, the records show.

Earlier this month, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a bid by the Justice Department to review a ruling that said immigrant detainees ⁠who successfully challenged their detention can also recover legal fees and costs from the federal government under the EAJA.

Plaintiffs generally face a high bar to win fees under the law, said Daniel Rohlf, a law professor at Lewis & Clark Law School. For example, it would not apply if a plaintiff suing a government agency wins a preliminary order such as an injunction that the government does not contest, Rohlf said.

Still, he said the law is valuable for civil rights organizations, environmental groups and others engaging in litigation against the government with limited resources, citing the scope of legal challenges to the Trump administration's expansive agenda.

“It’s a long road, but the possibility of that [fee award] at the end allows organizations to hire attorneys and continue their efforts," Rohlf said.

Washington lawyer Mark Zaid, who is handling several civil cases against the Trump administration, including former government employees suing over their terminations, told Reuters he plans to pursue fee petitions under the EAJA.

"If we prevail in cases, we will absolutely be seeking fees because — unlike many of our earlier cases — these personnel disputes are novel and are requiring extensive costly litigation," Zaid said in an email.

Read more:

Jackson Walker inks partial deal with US Trustee over tainted fee claims

Lawyers flood tech expo wondering: Is AI about to devalue their time?

Hogan Lovells, Cadwalader disclose 2025 revenues ahead of law firms' merger