Trump Admin Appeals Court Rulings That Blocked Orders Against Major Law Firms

The Trump administration is asking a federal appeals court to restore executive orders targeting four prominent law firms. Lower court judges had permanently blocked the directives, ruling they violated constitutional protections for free speech and due process.

The Trump administration filed an appeal Friday with a federal court, seeking to restore executive orders that targeted four prominent law firms after lower courts blocked the controversial directives.

In documents submitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, the Justice Department argued that four federal judges exceeded their judicial authority when they struck down the orders. The department claimed the judges “bent over backwards” to invalidate Trump’s directives against Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, Jenner & Block and Susman Godfrey “without considering their plainly constitutional aspects and applications.”

The targeted law firms had filed legal challenges, claiming the Republican president was illegally retaliating against them. They argued the punishment came because they represented Trump’s political opponents, clients who sued over his policies, or employed attorneys who participated in previous government investigations involving the president.

The executive orders Trump issued would have prevented lawyers from these firms from entering federal buildings and terminated government contracts with the firms’ clients.

Federal judges determined Trump’s actions breached First Amendment free speech protections and Fifth Amendment due process guarantees, leading them to issue permanent injunctions against the directives.

The Justice Department’s appeal came after an unusual sequence of events earlier this week. On Monday, the department moved to drop its appeals of the court decisions, only to reverse course the next day. Friday’s filing represents the first time the administration has detailed its legal reasoning for wanting to reinstate the orders.

WilmerHale responded Friday with a statement saying “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 criticized the four law firms for what he called “weaponizing” the court system against him and his supporters, while also condemning their workplace diversity initiatives as discriminatory.

In the appeal filing, the Justice Department framed the dispute as being “not about the sanctity of the American law firm” but rather “about lower courts encroaching on the constitutional power of the president” regarding national security and related issues.

Nine additional major law firms, including Paul Weiss, Skadden Arps, Latham & Watkins and Kirkland & Ellis, avoided similar targeting by reaching agreements with Trump last year. These settlements required the firms to commit nearly $1 billion in pro bono legal services supporting causes Trump endorses.

Friday marked the deadline for the administration to submit its initial appeal documents. The D.C. Circuit has not announced when it will schedule oral arguments on the matter.