Major win for outfits that fought back
The US Justice Department has dropped its appeals against rulings that found a series of executive orders targeting major law firms violated their constitutional rights.
The orders imposed a range of sanctions on prominent US players and their lawyers, including revoking security clearances, restricting access to federal buildings and barring them from undertaking government-related legal work.
A number of firms chose to strike deals with the administration rather than challenge the orders. Paul Weiss, which was hit by an executive order in March 2025, reached an agreement with Trump last March, while a host of big names — including A&O Shearman, Kirkland & Ellis, Latham & Watkins and Willkie Farr & Gallagher — agreed pre-emptive deals before any executive order had been issued against them. The arrangements included commitments of close to $1 billion in pro bono legal services, alongside promises not to engage in diversity, equity and inclusion programmes.
US firms Jenner & Block, Perkins Coie, Susman Godfrey and WilmerHale were also among those targeted over past legal work for political rivals and their diversity policies. Each of the four firms sued the Trump administration, and between May and June last year, judges struck down the executive orders against them, ruling that they violated free speech rights and other protections under the US Constitution.
The administration had previously made clear its intention to appeal those decisions and faced a deadline this Friday to set out its arguments in each case. In a court filing on Monday, however, the Justice Department asked for its appeals to be dismissed.
The move was welcomed by the firms involved and marks a significant retreat for the Trump administration. It also highlights the awkward position of the firms that opted to cut deals rather than challenge the orders in court.
In a press release published on its website, 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. In doing so, it has abandoned any attempt to defend the indefensible executive order against our firm.”
It continued: “We fought for ourselves, but we fought for bigger things, too: for a Constitution that protects our freedoms; for a legal profession that depends on equal justice under the law; and for the people across this country who refuse to back down in the face of an Administration that seeks to silence and intimidate them — lawyers and non-lawyers alike. We did not seek this fight, but neither did we run from it. And we won…”