Law firms targeted by Trump ask court to uphold rulings blocking executive orders

By Mike Scarcella

March 27 (Reuters) - Prominent U.S. law firms targeted last year by President Donald Trump urged a federal appeals court in Washington on Friday to uphold rulings that blocked punishing White House executive orders against them.

Law firms Jenner & Block, Perkins Coie, Susman Godfrey and Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr said in filings to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that the Trump administration’s orders were blatantly illegal and should remain permanently barred.

Trump's orders against the firms last year sought to restrict access to federal buildings for their lawyers and to end U.S. government contracts held by their clients. The president accused the firms of "weaponizing" the legal system against him and his allies and promoting workplace diversity policies he called discriminatory.

Four judges in Washington found Trump's orders violated the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment protections against government abridgment of free speech and Fifth Amendment promise of due process, and issued rulings permanently blocking the directives.

In its response to the government's appeal on Friday, Susman Godfrey said a ruling for the Trump administration would put it and other law firms "under the thumb of the President, forced to submit to his whims regardless of their own sense of duty to the Constitution, their clients, and the rule of law."

"Lawyers cannot be effective advocates for their clients if they face sweeping sanctions for their protected speech and associations," Jenner said in its brief.

The White House had no immediate comment on Friday. The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The D.C. Circuit has scheduled oral arguments on May 14. The court has not named the three-judge panel that will hear the case.

The Trump administration filed its arguments in the appeal this month, asking the D.C. Circuit to reinstate the executive orders against the four firms.

The Justice Department said ​the dispute over the orders is "not about ⁠the sanctity of the American law firm" but rather "about lower courts encroaching on the constitutional power of the president" concerning national security and other ​matters.

Perkins Coie in its filing on Friday called Trump's executive orders "shocking abuses of power that trample the constitutional rights of the law firms and their clients."

"These egregious First Amendment violations pose a severe threat to the legal profession and the rule of law," WilmerHale's brief said.

Nine other prominent law firms, including Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton and Garrison; Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom; Latham & Watkins; and Kirkland & ​Ellis, reached settlements with ⁠Trump last year to rescind or avoid similar executive orders against them, and collectively pledged nearly $1 billion in free legal work to causes that he supports.

The consolidated case is Perkins Coie v. U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, No. 25-5241.

For Perkins Coie: Dane Butswinkas of Williams & Connolly

For Jenner: Elizabeth Prelogar of Cooley

For WilmerHale: Paul Clement of Clement & Murphy

For Susman Godfrey: Donald Verrilli Jr of Munger, Tolles & Olson

For the Justice Department: Abhishek Kambli

Read more:

How Trump’s crackdown on law firms is undermining legal defenses for the vulnerable

Ex-DOJ leader, WilmerHale partner takes on Trump cases in new nonprofit role

Trump administration seeks to revive executive orders targeting law firms

Trump administration asks judge to dismiss ABA lawsuit over law firm orders

Some law firms that cut deals with Trump take cases opposing his administration