President Trump, on March 6, 2025, signed executive orders in the Oval Office at the White House. The move targeted law firms, particularly those categorized as “Big Law,” surprising many observers who anticipated a focus on his adversaries.
In a memorandum dated March 22, Trump emphasized the need to hold lawyers and law firms accountable for actions that violate U.S. laws or rules governing attorney conduct. The American Bar Association, responsible for overseeing academic standards and ethical codes for lawyers in the U.S., challenged the notion that the President’s actions against specific firms were related to professional conduct.
ABA President William R. Bay asserted that lawyers should be able to represent clients and uphold their ethical obligations without fear of reprisal. He criticized the government for reportedly targeting a prominent D.C. law firm due to its representation of a party the administration disapproved of, warning that more law firms could face similar actions.
Despite pushback from the ABA, Trump continued to target law firms through a series of executive actions. These actions included revoking national security clearances, which could hinder the firms’ operations.
One of the firms affected was Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP (WilmerHale), which Trump directed federal agencies to cease collaborating with, suspend security clearances, terminate contracts, and restrict access to government buildings. The President criticized WilmerHale for hiring former special counsel Robert Mueller, linking the move to what he deemed a partisan investigation. The firm rejected the order as unlawful and vowed to challenge it through legal means.
Another firm, Jenner & Block, faced a similar executive order on March 25, prompting a legal response against Trump’s actions.
Jenner & Block: Following an executive order issued by President Trump, security clearances for employees of the law firm Jenner & Block were suspended, and the firm’s access to federal buildings and contracting work was restricted. The order specifically mentioned Andrew Weissmann, a former deputy of Mueller and key prosecutor in the Russia investigation, who Trump alleged Jenner & Block was pleased to re-hire. In response, a spokesperson for the firm emphasized their commitment to serving clients’ interests with integrity and expertise, expressing intentions to pursue appropriate remedies. They noted similarities between the executive order and another previously deemed unconstitutional by a federal judge. Jenner & Block filed a lawsuit challenging Trump’s order, resulting in a federal judge halting certain aspects of the order targeting the firm.
Paul, Weiss: Trump extended similar restrictions on security clearances and access to government buildings to the law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP. The order referenced the firm’s former lawyer, Mark Pomerantz, who investigated Trump for the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office. Despite Pomerantz’s belief in sufficient evidence against Trump, he resigned when charges were not pursued. Trump later rescinded the order against Paul, Weiss after the firm acknowledged wrongdoing by Pomerantz and committed to policy changes, including providing pro bono legal services and supporting causes aligned with the Trump Administration. This move drew criticism from other law firms and lawyers, with some describing the response as capitulating to Trump while others defended the agreement as necessary for the firm’s survival.
Perkins Coie: President Trump targeted Perkins Coie LLP, suspending security clearances and directing federal agencies to cease business with the Seattle-based law firm due to perceived dishonest and dangerous activities. The firm’s association with the Democratic Party, including conducting research on Trump’s ties to Russia for Hillary Clinton’s campaign, was cited as problematic. Perkins Coie challenged the constitutionality of Trump’s order, alleging it was aimed at intimidating those who advocate opposing views. A federal judge temporarily blocked a portion of Trump’s order following the firm’s legal challenge.
On February 25, President Trump signed an executive order to review all federal government contracts with Covington & Burling LLP, the largest law firm in Washington D.C., and directed the revocation of security clearances for at least one of its employees. The order specifically mentions Peter Koski, a partner at the firm who had represented former special counsel Jack Smith. Smith had initiated two criminal cases against the President, which were dropped following Trump’s election win in November. The memo instructs the suspension of security clearances for Koski and any other members, partners, or employees of Covington who had assisted Smith during his tenure as special counsel.
According to Politico, Smith had received $140,000 in pro bono legal services from Covington before resigning in January. A spokesperson for Covington stated to ABC News that the firm started representing Smith when it became apparent that he would be the subject of a government investigation. They clarified that the firm is providing defense counsel to Smith in his personal capacity and expressed readiness to defend his interests, emphasizing the trust Smith placed in them.
