Law firms fighting Trump executive orders get backing from fellow firms

By Mike Scarcella

WASHINGTON, April 6 (Reuters) - Hundreds of law firms, law firm partners, corporate legal leaders and U.S. law students are urging a U.S. appeals court not to revive President Donald Trump's executive orders targeting four prominent law firms, arguing that a win for Trump would undermine the independence of the legal profession.

More than 800 firms submitted a friend-of-the-court brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on Friday supporting Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, Jenner & Block and Susman Godfrey. The court is hearing the government's appeal next month after judges struck down executive orders against the four firms last year, finding that Trump's directives violated protections for free speech and due process under the U.S. Constitution.

The signatories on the law firm brief include Dunn Isaacson Rhee, whose leaders left Paul Weiss in May 2025 after that firm struck a deal with Trump to lift a similar executive order against it. Kellogg, Hansen, Todd, Figel & Frederick, a longtime outside law firm for Meta, and Arnold & Porter, which has filed an array of lawsuits against the Trump administration, also signed the brief.

Trump's executive orders accused law firms of “weaponizing” the legal system against him and his allies and of promoting workplace diversity policies he described as discriminatory. The orders sought to bar the four firms’ lawyers from accessing federal buildings and to terminate U.S. government contracts held by their clients.

Dozens of current and former corporate legal department leaders also submitted an amicus brief in the D.C. Circuit on Friday, including Stephen Cutler, the former general counsel of JPMorgan Chase. They said Trump's orders undermined companies’ ability to freely choose outside counsel. Other signatories included Dorian Daley, former general counsel of Oracle, and Robert Chesnut, who previously led Airbnb’s legal team.

A group of current and former partners at major U.S. law firms filed a separate brief under the name Law Firm Partners United. The group, which did not identify its members, said the consequences of being singled out by the president were severe. “The stigma of being named by the President as a law firm acting against critical American interests cannot be overstated,” the brief said.

Support for the firms also came from more than 1,200 law students and 50 law student organizations, who said in an amicus brief that Trump’s actions harmed those seeking to enter the profession.

Five conservative groups, including the Gun Owners Foundation, filed a brief backing the administration. The groups argued that the district court judges who struck down the executive orders did not adequately address the basis for Trump's actions.

The D.C. Circuit, which includes seven active judges appointed by Democratic presidents and four appointed by Republicans, is scheduled to hear arguments on May 14. It has not yet named the three-judge panel that will hear the case.

Read more:

Trump administration must face ABA lawsuit over law firm orders, judge rules

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

FTC crackdown on law firm DEI efforts tests antitrust limits

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