Donald Trump arriving at the Jones Day law firm in Washington, D.C. in March 2016, Lorie Shaull
President Donald Trump’s attempt to strip several progressive law firms and individual lawyers of security clearances and federal contracts is over.
The Wall Street Journal is reporting that the Trump administration is abandoning its defense of the president’s executive orders issued last year. Those actions sanctioned several law firms and individuals for their associations with Trump rivals and causes that he didn’t favor.
Subsequent trial court rulings in four instances struck down the Trump executive actions. On Monday, the Justice Department told the WSJ that it will drop its appeals of the trial court rulings.
Trump’s executive orders would have prevented firms and individual lawyers from entering federal buildings, eliminated federal contracts with the firms and their clients and removed any security clearances. Now, that threat is ended.
Law firms Jenner & Block, WilmerHale, Perkins Coie and Susman Godfrey were among those affected. But the impact of Trump’s actions sent a broader chill. Several other large law firms cut deals with the president, providing more than $1 billion in pro bono work on causes Trump favored.
Trump cited the sanctioned parties for their connections to his political rivals. He also noted their diversity initiatives and pro bono work for immigrants, transgender rights and voting protections in his executive orders.
The affected firms and individuals called the actions unconstitutional retaliation and an abuse of executive power. In one trial court decision, Judge Richard Leon, appointed by Republican President George W. Bush, said blocking the sanctions would preserve an “independent bar willing to tackle unpopular cases, however daunting.”
The Trump administration countered in its appeals and defenses that a president has leeway to act when it comes to firms that work with the federal government.
MSNBC journalist Sam Stein said the decision by DOJ to end its defense would be particularly “humiliating” for firms that preemptively settled.
