Updated March 28, 2025 at 15:43 PM ET
Federal judges in two separate cases have temporarily blocked a White House effort to punish the law firms Jenner & Block and WilmerHale, with one judge calling the effort "disturbing" and the second calling it a "constitutional harm."
In the case of Jenner & Block, Judge John Bates with the federal district court in Washington, D.C., issued a temporary restraining order against the Trump administration, citing violations of the free speech guarantees of the First Amendment and an unconstitutional interference with the rights of its clients to select lawyers of their choosing.
In the second case, Judge Richard Leon temporarily blocked a separate executive order against WilmerHale.
"There is no doubt this retaliatory action chills speech and legal advocacy, or that it qualifies as a constitutional harm," Leon wrote. "The injuries to plaintiff here would be severe and would spill over to its clients and the justice system at large," he said.
The back-to-back rulings came after both firms took the Trump administration to court on Friday, seeking to block executive orders that the firms say target them for zealous representation of clients and their hearty pro bono work.
The lawsuit by the Jenner & Block firm, filed in federal district court in Washington, D.C., alleges violations of the First Amendment guarantees to free speech and free association. It also alleges the order violates the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment by hurting the firm's ability to practice law; and violates the Sixth Amendment, for undermining the relationship between attorneys and their clients, and clients' right to lawyers of their choosing.
In its lawsuit, WilmerHale said the executive action Trump took on Thursday punishes the firm for employing former special counsel Robert Mueller and other public servants who worked alongside him.
WilmerHale's lawsuit said the White House is retaliating against it for representing the Democratic National Committee, the campaigns of Democratic politicians Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, and for suing the administration this year over its firing of several inspectors general.
The lawsuits come after President Trump signed executive orders this week, which attempted to restrict both firms' access to federal buildings, yank any active security clearances held by its personnel, and direct government employees not to meet with the firm or its members.
"For more than 100 years, Jenner has tirelessly advocated for its clients against all adversaries, including against unlawful government action," the lawsuit said. "With this suit, the Firm takes up that charge once again. To do anything else would mean compromising Jenner's ability to zealously advocate for its clients and capitulating to unconstitutional government coercion."
Jenner, which employs about 500 lawyers, has one of the nation's strongest pro bono programs, which represents immigrants and LGBTQ people, among other clients.
Trump referred to some of that work in his March 25 executive order. And he blasted the firm for once employing Andrew Weissmann, a member of the special counsel team that investigated Trump. Weissmann has not worked at Jenner for years but he remains a critic of the president.
"These law firms don't need or deserve taxpayer-subsidized access to national security secrets," a Justice Department spokesman said via email in response to the firms' lawsuits.
Jenner sought to have its case heard by Judge Beryl Howell, who recently blocked enforcement of a similar executive order against the law firm Perkins Coie. The Justice Department has attempted to disqualify Howell, but the judge cast that effort as an attempt to intimidate the independent judiciary.
Jenner's case was instead assigned to Judge Bates, while WilmerHale's case went to Leon, both of whom were confirmed under the George W. Bush administration.
Trump accused of attacking legal system
Trump moved against WilmerHale only hours before that firm went to court Friday morning.
"The Executive Order targeting our firm is a plainly unlawful attack on the bedrock principles of our nation's legal system—our clients' right to counsel and the First Amendment," a firm spokesman said in a written statement. "The terms of a nearly identical Executive Order have already been enjoined by a federal judge and today we have filed for immediate relief to protect the rights of our clients."
Wilmer is represented by former solicitor general Paul Clement, a major figure in the conservative legal movement.
Clement said in court papers that the executive order against the firm flouts the fundamental separation of powers and that Trump has no authority to sanction a law firm "for representing his political opponents or handling lawsuits that he perceives to be contrary to his interests or those of the United States."
Two other law firms have sought to reach settlements with the White House after Trump targeted them in executive orders. But in a statement, Jenner said "capitulating to unconstitutional government coercion" is not in its DNA.
Trump announced on Friday what he called a settlement with the Skadden Arps firm, which calls for the law firm to perform a substantial amount of pro bono work and take other steps on priorities of the White House.
"We appreciated Skadden coming to the table," Trump said.
Copyright 2025 NPR
