Trump administration seeks to revive executive orders targeting law firms

Reuters//March 9, 2026//

Reuters//March 9, 2026//

Listen to this article

Summary:

The Trump administration appealed to revive executive orders targeting law firms Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, Jenner & Block, and Susman Godfrey.
The orders sought to restrict these firms’ access to federal buildings and end government contracts held by their clients.
Federal judges blocked the orders citing violations of the First and Fifth Amendments.

President Donald Trump’s administration asked a federal appeals court on March 6 to revive his executive orders that sought to punish four major U.S. law firms, arguing that federal judges overstepped their authority by blocking directives that rest within core presidential powers.

The Department of Justice told the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that the four judges “bent over backwards” to invalidate Trump’s orders against the firms Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, Jenner & Block and Susman Godfrey “without considering their plainly constitutional aspects and applications.”

The law firms in lawsuits challenging the directives said the Republican president illegally retaliated against them for representing his political adversaries or clients who challenged his policies in court or had employed lawyers who took part in past government investigations aimed at the president.

Trump’s executive orders sought to restrict access to federal buildings for lawyers working for the firms and to end U.S. government contracts held by clients of the firms.

The judges found that Trump violated the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment protections against government abridgment of free speech and Fifth Amendment promise of due process, and they issued orders permanently blocking the directives.

The administration’s filing with the D.C. circuit court came after the DOJ moved to abandon its appeals of the judicial rulings, then reversed that stance the following day. The filing marked the administration’s first explanation of its legal rationale for seeking to reinstate Trump’s orders.

WilmerHale in a statement on March 6 said “we disagree with the government’s decision to appeal this judicial consensus, and we will proudly continue to defend our clients and our firm.”

Trump had accused the four firms of “weaponizing” the legal system against him and his allies and promoting workplace diversity policies he called discriminatory.

In its March 6 filing, the DOJ said the case is “not about the sanctity of the American law firm” but rather “is about lower courts encroaching on the constitutional power of the president” in the realm of national security and other matters.

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

The D.C. circuit court has not yet set an argument date to weigh the administration’s appeals.

(Reporting by Mike Scarcella; Editing by David Bario and Will Dunham)

Tags: executive orders, susman godfrey, Perkins Coie, Department of Justice, wilmerhale, First Amendment, law firms

Select Region or Brand

Upcoming Event