U.S. President Donald Trump sits in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., March 7, 2025. REUTERS/Leah Millis/File Photo
President Donald Trump has issued a series of executive orders targeting several prominent U.S. law firms, citing their affiliations with attorneys he perceives as having acted against him personally. These actions have sparked concerns within the legal community, with critics arguing that the orders threaten the independence of the legal profession and the broader justice system.
Targeted Law Firms and Associated Attorneys
Jenner & Block and Andrew Weissmann
One of Trump’s latest executive orders focuses on Jenner & Block, a law firm that previously employed Andrew Weissmann, a lead prosecutor on Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team. Mueller’s investigation examined Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and potential ties to Trump’s campaign. While signing the order at the White House, Trump described Weissmann as “a bad guy.”
Paul Weiss and Mark Pomerantz
Another order targeted Paul Weiss, a firm that had employed Mark Pomerantz, a former Manhattan prosecutor who investigated Trump’s business dealings. This order was later withdrawn as part of an agreement between the firm and the Trump administration.
Perkins Coie and Fusion GPS
A previous order against Perkins Coie referenced its work for the 2016 presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton, Trump’s Democratic opponent. The firm had hired Fusion GPS, which in turn commissioned a dossier by a former British intelligence officer detailing alleged financial and personal ties between Trump’s campaign and Russia.
Covington & Burling and Jack Smith
Trump also issued an order against Covington & Burling, citing its representation of Jack Smith, the special counsel responsible for prosecuting Trump on federal charges related to classified documents and alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.
Legal and Professional Consequences
The executive orders against these law firms have imposed significant restrictions, including:
- Suspension of security clearances for attorneys associated with the firms.
- Limitations on access to government buildings and officials.
- Potential cancellation of federal contracts held by their clients.
Jenner & Block has announced plans to challenge Trump’s order, while other firms are reportedly assessing their legal options.
Response from the Legal Community
Concerns About Judicial Independence
A group of 20 Democratic state attorneys general issued an open letter condemning Trump’s actions, calling them a “clear threat to our system of justice and our profession.” The letter criticized Trump for targeting individual attorneys based on their legal work against him and warned of a chilling effect on the legal profession.
Richard Primus, a constitutional law professor at the University of Michigan and a former Jenner & Block attorney, described the orders as a form of political retaliation. “They are a revenge program, in part,” Primus stated, adding that Trump appears to view legal opposition as inherently illegitimate.
Political and Administrative Justifications
White House spokesperson Harrison Fields defended Trump’s actions, stating that major law firms have used their influence to make the country “dangerous and less free.” Fields also referenced Trump’s broader claim that law firms had been “weaponized” against him during both his first term and President Joe Biden’s administration.
Trump has signaled that additional law firms may be targeted, stating in a recent Fox News interview that his administration is preparing to act against firms that have brought lawsuits against the federal government in recent years.
Potential Broader Implications
Trump’s executive orders highlight a growing conflict between his administration and legal institutions that have been involved in high-profile investigations and lawsuits against him. Some legal experts fear that these actions could set a precedent for using government power to penalize legal professionals engaged in politically sensitive cases.
Marc Elias, a former Perkins Coie attorney also named in one of Trump’s orders, dismissed the attacks as an intimidation tactic. “I wear his scorn like a badge of honor,” Elias wrote on social media.
Several prominent law firms, including WilmerHale—where Mueller was previously a partner—have also been involved in litigation against Trump’s policies. While Mueller has retired, concerns remain that additional firms could be subjected to similar executive actions.
COMMENTS