Listen to this article
Estimated 4 minutes
The audio version of this article is generated by AI-based technology. Mispronunciations can occur. We are working with our partners to continually review and improve the results.
The U.S. Justice Department has dropped a legal bid to revive President Donald Trump’s executive orders targeting four prominent law firms over their past legal work, diversity policies and political ties.
In a court filing on Monday, the Justice Department asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to dismiss its appeals of federal judges’s rulings that said the executive orders violated the law firms’ rights under the U.S. Constitution.
The Trump administration faced a Friday deadline to outline its appeals in the cases brought by law firms Jenner & Block, WilmerHale, Perkins Coie and Susman Godfrey. The filing did not say why the appeals were being dropped.
“As we said from the outset, our challenge to the unlawful executive order was about defending our clients’ constitutional right to retain the counsel of their choosing and defending the rule of law,” WilmerHale said in a statement.
Jenner & Block said the government’s move cements the courts’ determinations that Trump’s orders were unconstitutional. “Our partnership is proud to have stood firm on behalf of its clients,” the firm said.
The decision to drop the appeals marks a significant courtroom retreat for Trump, whose orders punishing the firms roiled the legal industry and sparked cries that the president sought to chill attorney independence and neuter potential legal challenges to his agenda by the private bar.
The administration has argued that the executive orders were lawful under the president’s broad executive powers.
Susman Godfrey said “the government has capitulated, which is a fitting end to its plainly unconstitutional attack on Susman Godfrey and the rule of law.”
Perkins Coie said its lower court victory had protected “core constitutional freedoms such as free speech, due process and the right to select counsel without fear of retribution.”
“In a cringe-worthy twist on the theatrical phrase ‘Let’s kill all the lawyers, [Executive Order] 14230 takes the approach of ‘Let’s kill the lawyers I don’t like,’ sending the clear message: lawyers must stick to the party line, or else,” Judge Beryl Howell, a Barack Obama appointee, wrote last year while ruling for Perkins Coie.
The White House referred a request for comment on the status of the appeal to the Justice Department, which did not immediately respond.
Front Burner26:24Trump’s campaign of legal revenge
Targeted diversity, political work
Trump issued the executive orders early last year, accusing the law firms of engaging in workplace discrimination in the name of diversity and of “weaponizing” the justice system against him and his allies.
The orders sought to restrict the firms’ access to federal buildings and to end government contracts held by their clients, citing the firms’ connections to his legal and political enemies.
Four federal judges — appointed by both Democratic and Republican presidents — struck down the orders last year, finding they violated the firms’ free speech rights and other protections under the Constitution.
“It casts a chill over the whole of the legal profession, leaving lawyers around the country weighing the necessity of vigorous representation against the peril of crossing the federal government,” Judge John Bates, a George W. Bush appointee, wrote in the ruling in the Jenner & Block case.
Rep. Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on the House’s judiciary committee, in a statement called the withdrawal of the government’s appeal “a significant victory for the rule of law over Trump’s reign of lawlessness, and a reminder that those who fight back against authoritarianism are winning.”
Nine prominent law firms, including Paul Weiss, Skadden Arps, Latham & Watkins and Kirkland & Ellis, settled with the White House last year to rescind or avoid similar actions against them by the administration.
The firms as part of those deals cumulatively pledged nearly $1 billion in free legal services to mutually agreed causes with the White House.
They have defended agreements as being aligned with their principles.
