On Monday, March 2, the Department of Justice (DOJ) dropped a legal fight over President Donald Trump’s executive orders targeting certain firms that did not align with his politics. Federal judges on the case unanimously ruled that Trump’s orders essentially violated the Constitution and therefore the suits had to be dropped.
Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, Susman Godfrey and Jenner & Block are among the firms that were targeted by the Trump administration. The president reportedly had a problem with these firms because of their hiring and clientele.
Therefore, he signed executive orders that targeted these firms’ government contracts, security clearances and access to various government buildings. However, the firms did not bow down to the pressure and fought back, forcing the government to drop the suits.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton happens to be one of Perkins Coie’s clients. Former special counsel Robert Mueller, who had previously investigated Trump, was hired by WilmerHale, and Andrew Weissmann, who was in Mueller’s team, was hired by Jenner & Block.
Government retaliation against law firms over the clients or causes they represent is fundamentally at odds with our commitment to justice and individual rights. Fighting back against the president’s unconstitutional bullying was the right decision.
It always is. https://t.co/5FdKaWR2cP
— FIRE (@TheFIREorg) March 2, 2026
Trump’s grudges against these firms, therefore, may have come from personal spaces of disliking, which should not be a valid legal ground to sue law firms that are doing their jobs.
On March 2, a WilmerHale spokesperson said as a part of a statement, “As we said from the outset, our challenge to the unlawful Executive Order was about defending our clients’ constitutional right to retain the counsel of their choosing and defending the rule of law. We are pleased these foundational principles were vindicated.”
It should be noted here that not all firms held their grounds after the executive orders from Trump were issued. For instance, Paul Weiss decided to negotiate with the administration and agreed to eliminate their diversity, equity and inclusion policies. Moreover, the firm also agreed to give tens of millions of dollars for pro bono work for causes regarding Trump’s supporters.
Skadden Arps also behaved in a similar manner, which led to significant backlash among the legal community. A Skadden alumni also issued a letter slamming the move. The letter mentioned, “As attorneys, we all took an oath. As one of the country’s most powerful and most profitable law firms, Skadden’s influence over the legal profession cannot be understated.”
View this post on Instagram
It further added, “In light of Skadden’s position, it is outrageous and self-interested that rather than fulfilling the legal profession’s oath and standing in solidarity with fellow law firms that were fighting to uphold the Constitution, Skadden caved to bullying tactics instead.”
Vanita Gupta, the third-highest official at the DOJ during the Biden administration, slammed the firms that quickly gave in. In a statement on March 2, Gupta said, “This episode will be remembered as demonstrating the difference between institutions that had the ethical courage to uphold the Constitution and fight bullying and then won, and those that compromised their ethics and gained nothing.”
She further added, “Let’s hope that media companies, universities and other organizations pay heed.” With the judiciary doing what is right, Trump and his administration’s reaction on the same remains to be seen.
