**Justice Department Moves to Drop Defense of Trump’s Executive Orders Targeting Law Firms**
*Washington* — The Justice Department announced on Monday that it is moving to drop its legal defense of former President Donald Trump’s executive orders that targeted several high-profile law firms, according to recent court filings.
In papers filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., the Trump administration stated it would voluntarily dismiss appeals of lower court decisions that found the executive orders punishing four law firms unconstitutional. The firms involved are Perkins Coie; Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP (WilmerHale); Susman Godfrey; and Jenner & Block.
A spokesperson for WilmerHale responded to the decision, saying, “The government’s decision to dismiss its appeal is clearly the right one. 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. We are pleased these foundational principles were vindicated.”
CBS News has reached out to the Justice Department and the other three firms for comment.
### Background and Impact
While the Trump administration will no longer defend the executive orders against these four firms, it notably secured hundreds of millions of dollars in free legal services from nine other firms that cut deals with the White House to avoid similar sanctions.
The cases stem from a series of executive orders signed by Mr. Trump in March and April of the previous year. These orders sought to punish certain law firms due to specific hires and legal work they performed.
One such order targeted the firm Paul, Weiss, which was later rescinded after the firm pledged to provide tens of millions of dollars in pro bono work in support of White House initiatives. This directive had singled out Mark Pomerantz, a lawyer who previously worked at Paul, Weiss and oversaw an investigation by the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office into Mr. Trump’s finances before his presidency.
### Firms Targeted and Reasons
Each executive order restricted the law firms’ clients, access to federal buildings and officials, and security clearances held by their employees.
– **Perkins Coie** was targeted due to its representation of Hillary Clinton during the 2016 presidential campaign and its hiring of a research firm that retained former British spy Christopher Steele, who produced the controversial “Steele Dossier.”
– **WilmerHale** and **Jenner & Block** were singled out because they employed lawyers involved in the Justice Department’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Notably, WilmerHale employed Robert Mueller, the special counsel leading the probe, while Jenner & Block hired Andrew Weissmann. Both lawyers have since left their respective firms.
– **Susman Godfrey** represented Domini Fox and was involved in the Dominion settlement, which reached a $787 million agreement in 2023.
### Legal Challenges and Court Rulings
The four firms filed lawsuits against the Trump administration, and in each case, federal judges ruled overwhelmingly in favor of the firms, determining that the executive orders violated the First, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments. None of the orders ever took effect due to ongoing litigation.
In the case involving Perkins Coie, a federal judge remarked that the executive order sent the message that “lawyers must stick to the party line, or else.”
For Susman Godfrey, another judge found that the government “sought to use its immense power to dictate the positions that law firms may or may not take,” which threatens the foundational principles of legal representation in the United States. Judge Loren AliKhan described the executive order as the result of a “personal vendetta” against Susman Godfrey.
Separately, at Covington & Burling, a lawyer who worked on former special counsel Jack Smith’s prosecutions of Mr. Trump had his security clearance targeted. These cases against the president were dropped after Smith was re-elected to a second term.
### Broader Campaign and Legal Community Response
The executive orders were part of a broader campaign by Mr. Trump during his second term to target perceived political enemies. This included revoking security clearances and protective details for officials critical of him and securing federal indictments against figures such as former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. However, those criminal cases were later dropped after a federal judge ruled that the prosecutor who secured the indictments was improperly appointed.
The orders also created divisions within the legal community, as some well-known firms negotiated agreements with the White House to avoid punitive measures.
Beyond the law firms, the Justice Department is currently grappling with over 600 lawsuits challenging various elements of Mr. Trump’s agenda. Government lawyers have withdrawn from several of these cases, including one filed by the American Bar Association (ABA).
In that case, a federal judge ruled in favor of the ABA after the Justice Department cut off grants supporting training and assistance programs for domestic violence and sexual assault survivors. The Trump administration opted not to appeal that decision.
### American Bar Association’s Challenge
In addition to the law firms’ lawsuits, the ABA filed a legal challenge against the executive orders in June. It argued that the White House “used the vast powers of the Executive Branch to coerce lawyers and law firms to abandon clients, causes, and policy positions the President does not like,” thereby violating the First Amendment.
The Justice Department was scheduled to argue for dismissal of the ABA’s suit in federal court in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday.
—
*This development marks a significant retreat by the Justice Department from defending executive actions widely viewed as unconstitutional and underscores the ongoing legal battles surrounding former President Trump’s agenda and tactics.*
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/justice-department-drop-defense-trumps-executive-orders-targeting-law-firms/
