This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.
The original was posted on /r/keep_track by /u/rusticgorilla on 2025-04-02 11:09:59+00:00.
If you are in the position to support my work, I have a patreon, venmo, and a paypal set up. Just three dollars a month makes a huge difference! These posts will never be paywalled.
Subscribe to Keep Track’s Substack (RSS link) or monthly digest. Also on Bluesky.
A note on executive orders: It is important to remember that an executive order is essentially a memo, an instruction from the president to executive branch agencies and staff, on how to exercise the executive’s existing powers. Executive orders that impinge on constitutional rights, stray into the realm of legislative authority, or otherwise exceed the president’s power can be struck down by the courts.
Law firms
Over the last month, Trump has signed four executive orders (EOs) imposing penalties on law firms with a history of filing lawsuits opposing his policies and hiring lawyers who investigated his conduct. Already, these EOs are having their intended effect, dissuading and intimidating lawyers from representing people seeking to defend their rights in the face of the administration’s authoritarian actions.
Biden-era officials said they’re having trouble finding lawyers willing to defend them. The volunteers and small nonprofits forming the ground troops of the legal resistance to Trump administration actions say that the well-resourced law firms that once would have backed them are now steering clear. The result is an extraordinary threat to the fundamental constitutional rights of due process and legal representation, they said — and a far weaker effort to challenge Trump’s actions in court than during his first term.
March 6: Trump signed an EO targeting Perkins Coie, a law firm that represented Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, successfully defended against Trump’s legal assault on the 2020 election, and represented the Democratic National Committee in last year’s election. The EO directs agency heads to terminate government contracts with Perkins Coie clients, deny all Perkins Coie employees access to federal buildings and federal employees, and suspend security clearances for all Perkins Coie employees.
March 14: Trump signed an EO targeting Paul Weiss, a law firm that represented detainees held at Guantanamo (under Bush/Obama), offered free legal services to people seeking and providing abortions post-Dobbs, and worked pro bono to reunite the families of immigrants who were separated at the southern border during Trump’s first term. Critically, for Trump’s purposes, lawyers who at some point worked for Paul Weiss have connections to Robert Mueller, filed lawsuits relating to the January 6 insurrection, and investigated Trump’s finances.
March 25: Trump signed an EO targeting Jenner & Block, one of the leading pro bono law firms in the country, which is representing transgender clients challenging Trump’s ban on gender-affirming healthcare for minors. The EO cites this legal challenge, saying Jenner & Block “supports attacks against women and children based on a refusal to accept the biological reality of sex,” as well as the law firm’s work with Mueller prosecutor Andrew Weissmann.
March 27: Trump signed an EO targeting WilmerHale, a law firm that represented Guantanamo detainees (under Bush/Obama) and brought legal challenges against Georgia’s gerrymandered voting maps. WilmerHale also hired two prosecutors who worked with Mueller (who was himself a partner at the firm in the mid-2010s).
Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, and WilmerHale filed lawsuits contesting the constitutionality of Trump’s EOs, and all three quickly secured temporary restraining orders. In Perkins Coie’s case, District Judge Beryl Howell found that the firm is likely to succeed on its First Amendment argument that the EO is unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination, its 5th Amendment argument that the EO violates due process, and its Sixth Amendment argument that the EO interferes with the right to counsel. Yet, even with court orders blocking Trump’s sanctions in place, none of the top 20 law firms in the U.S. have agreed to sign on to an amicus brief defending Perkins Coie out of concern “they will face retaliation by the Trump administration.”
Paul Weiss, apparently not willing to stand up for themselves, their clients, or the rule of law, did not challenge the EO against their firm. Instead, they bent the knee and kissed Trump’s ring. According to the White House, the law firm pledged to abandon its diversity, equality, and inclusion initiatives, promised $40 million in pro bono work to advance Trump’s initiatives, and “acknowledged the wrongdoing” of former partner Mark Pomerantz, who investigated Trump’s businesses as part of the New York District Attorney’s office.
Emboldened by Paul Weiss’s submission, Elon Musk took to Twitter the following day to attack Skadden Arps for “engaging in systematic lawfare” against Dinesh D’Souza’s “2000 Mules,” a debunked election denialism film that contained defamatory statements about a Georgia voter. Within days, Skadden executives were preemptively groveling at Trump’s feet. To avoid an EO targeting their firm, Skadden Arps agreed to provide $100 million worth of free legal services for Trump’s causes and abandon its diversity initiatives. “This was essentially a settlement,” Trump said. “We appreciate Skadden coming to the table… It’s a shame what’s going on, it’s a shame, but we very much appreciate their coming to the table.”
Days later, reports surfaced that Trump was preparing to issue an EO targeting Willkie Farr, a law firm that employs two January 6 investigators and former Second Gentleman, Doug Emhoff. Within less than 24 hours, Wilkie submitted to Trump’s demands and agreed to provide $100 million worth of free legal services for his causes.
Paul’s surrender, and Skadden’s and Farr’s anticipatory obedience, will only fuel more and larger attacks on the democratic apparatuses that protect the people’s constitutional rights. As history professor Timothy Snyder writes in “On Tyranny,” “most of the power of authoritarianism is freely given.” Obeying in advance “is teaching power what it can do.” Securing the submission of BigLaw firms, which pull in trillions of dollars a year and are best positioned to mount an opposition, will encourage the administration to expand its authoritarian conquest to oppressing law clinics and nonprofits that often challenge its policies. Then, without representation, our rights become meaningless and the courts useless.
Further reading:
- The White House directed federal law enforcement officials to seek sanctions against attorneys or law firms that challenge the administration in court. “The memo told Bondi to consider taking actions against law firm partners for perceived misconduct by junior attorneys and to review cases against the government from the past eight years to look for ‘misconduct that may warrant additional action.’”
- Trump signed an EO directing the Department of Justice to “ask judges to require plaintiffs to pay the government’s costs and damages if it is forced to hold off on implementing a policy that is ultimately found to be lawful.” The plan, if accepted by the courts, would preclude the most vulnerable people (e.g., immigrants), who often rely on pro …
Content cut off. Read original on https://old.reddit.com/r/Keep_Track/comments/1jply2j/trumps_attacks_on_universities_and_law_firms/