President Donald Trump’s executive orders aimed at prestigious U.S. law firms have a common thread: his belief that a lawyer associated with the firm has wronged him personally. In his most recent order, Trump took on Jenner & Block and its former partner, Andrew Weissmann, who was a key prosecutor for former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team investigating connections between Trump’s campaign and Russia prior to the 2016 election. Trump criticized Weissmann as he signed the order at the White House, calling him “a bad guy.”
Another order targeted Paul Weiss due to its employment of Mark Pomerantz, a former partner who previously investigated Trump and his business practices as a Manhattan prosecutor. While the order was later withdrawn as part of a deal with the firm, it highlighted Trump’s grievances against law firms, including Perkins Coie, for their involvement in matters such as the Fusion GPS dossier related to Trump’s campaign in 2016.
Trump’s actions have drawn criticism from Democratic attorneys general, who view his attacks on law firms as a threat to the legal system. They argue that singling out attorneys who represent clients challenging the president’s actions undermines the rule of law. The acquiescence of Paul Weiss to Trump’s order is seen as a troubling example of the impact of such directives on the legal profession.
The executive orders against Jenner & Block, Paul Weiss, and Perkins Coie suspended security clearances for their lawyers, limited their access to government facilities, and jeopardized federal contracts held by their clients. Trump’s administration defended these measures, accusing major law firms of using their influence to undermine national security and freedom. Trump has vowed to target more law firms that he believes have exploited the justice system against him and his allies.
In a recent memorandum, Trump broadened his scrutiny to include lawyers and law firms that have brought cases against the federal government over the past eight years. The memo specifically called out Marc Elias, a Democratic lawyer and former Perkins Coie partner, accusing him of unethical behavior.
In connection with the development of the Trump-Russia dossier, Elias did not respond immediately to a request for comment on Wednesday. In a social media post on Tuesday, Elias stated that Trump’s criticisms of lawyers were part of an intimidation scheme. “I proudly wear his scorn as a mark of distinction,” Elias wrote. Covington & Burling recently faced a more specific order that referenced the firm’s representation of Jack Smith, the special counsel who initiated two federal criminal cases against Trump for mishandling classified documents and attempting unlawful actions to overturn his 2020 election loss to Biden.
Other law firms are on high alert, as confirmed by a senior partner at a major firm knowledgeable about discussions among firm leaders. Attorneys who have been involved in Trump-related prosecutions are spread across various law firms, as are lawyers who assisted in drafting articles of impeachment against the former president in the House of Representatives.
Robert Mueller, a former FBI director appointed in 2017 by the Republican Justice Department leadership during Trump’s first term to oversee the investigation into Russian election interference, was a longtime attorney in Washington at WilmerHale. Attempts to contact Mueller, who has since retired from the legal profession, were unsuccessful. A spokesperson for WilmerHale did not respond immediately to a request for comment.
Jenner & Block, Perkins Coie, Covington, and WilmerHale are among more than a dozen prominent law firms representing clients in lawsuits challenging key policies of the Trump administration. Trump’s order against Jenner & Block criticized the firm’s legal work in support of rights for transgender individuals and immigrants, accusing them of pursuing “partisan objectives.”
Richard Primus, a constitutional law professor at the University of Michigan who previously worked at Jenner & Block, indicated that Trump’s directives aim to show that lawyers will face consequences if they oppose the president’s agenda. “They are retaliatory measures, in part,” Primus explained. “The administration is targeting law firms that the president views as having been adversarial towards him personally.”
Primus added that Trump prioritizes his own power and interests over the proper functioning of the broader system. “He does not acknowledge the concept of legitimate opposition,” Primus noted. “If you oppose me, your actions are considered illegitimate, and you should be ostracized, penalized, and prosecuted.”
