Washington — A federal judge on Friday struck down President Trump’s executive order that sought to punish the law firm Susman Godfrey, ruling that it is unconstitutional and blocking the administration from enforcing it.
The decision from U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan caps an unbroken streak of victories for the four major law firms that were targeted by Mr. Trump as part of his efforts to go after his perceived enemies and chose to challenge his directives in court, rather than commit millions of dollars in free legal services, as nine other firms have done.
The president’s executive orders aimed to sanction the firms Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr, and Susman Godfrey by going after their clients, access to federal buildings and employees, and security clearances held by their employees.
Each of the four firms filed lawsuits arguing the orders violated the Constitution, and four different judges have skipped trials and ruled in their favor. The Trump administration has not appealed any of the decisions so far.
AliKhan said in her ruling that Mr. Trump’s executive order regarding Susman Godfrey violated the First and Fifth Amendments. The order, she said, “is unconstitutional from beginning to end.”
“Here, the Order goes beyond violating the Constitution and the laws of the United States,” the judge wrote. “The Order threatens the independence of the bar — a necessity for the rule of law.”
Mr. Trump signed the executive order targeting Susman Godfrey in April, which claimed that the firm “spearheads efforts to weaponize the American legal system and degrade the quality of American elections.”
The firm, which has 350 employees, represented Dominion Voting Systems in its defamation lawsuit against Fox News. The suit was filed in response to unfounded claims aired by the network that Dominion helped rig the 2020 election against Mr. Trump. Fox News and Dominion reached a $787 million settlement agreement in 2023.
The president’s executive orders against the four law firms all sought to inflict similar harms, including by suspending active security clearances held by their employees, requiring government contractors to disclose any business with the firms and limiting government employees from engaging with their employees. The orders also restricted their access to federal buildings.
Susman Godfrey, like the three others, sued the Trump administration shortly after the executive order was signed, arguing that it violated the First and Fifth Amendments. Lawyers for the firm said Mr. Trump’s directive was “unprecedented and unconstitutional” and part of “an express campaign of retaliation for representing clients and causes he disfavors or employing lawyers he dislikes.”
Indeed, Mr. Trump’s executive order targeting Perkins Coie went after the firm for its representation of Hillary Clinton during the 2016 election and its hiring of a research firm that retained former British spy Christopher Steele, who produced the infamous “Steele Dossier.”
His attempts to punish Jenner & Block and WilmerHale both invoked lawyers who worked on the Justice Department’s investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election. At WilmerHale, that was Robert Mueller, the special counsel who led the probe, and two lawyers who worked on his team, Aaron Zebley and James Quarles. For Jenner & Block, the lawyer was Andrew Weissmann, who also worked on the Russian meddling case. Mueller, Quarles and Weissmann each left their firms several years ago.
But the firms have also been involved in litigation challenging policies rolled out during Mr. Trump’s second term. WilmerHale is representing a group of inspectors general who were fired by the president at the start of his administration, and Jenner & Block is involved in a challenge Mr. Trump’s efforts to withhold federal funds from medical institutions that provide gender-affirming care to young people.
Susman Godfrey continues to represent Dominion in defamation lawsuits arising out of baseless claims related to the 2020 election, including against Rudy Giuliani, conservative lawyer Sidney Powell and Newsmax.
AliKhan, who was appointed to the district court by former President Joe Biden, had granted Susman Godfrey temporary relief in April and blocked the administration from enforcing parts of the executive order against the firm. Her final decision in favor of Susman Godfrey was not a surprise, since she had said at a hearing then that the executive order was “based on a personal vendetta” against the firm.
“The framers of our Constitution would see this as a shocking abuse of power,” she said in April.
While the four firms have each successfully had the executive orders invalidated, other major firms have decided to enter into agreements with the president, seemingly to avoid being targeted themselves.
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison was threatened with punishment in March, but Mr. Trump rescinded his executive order focusing on the firm after it committed to providing $40 million in pro bono work to support the administration’s policies.
Since then, eight more firms have reached deals with the White House that pledges of between $100 million and $125 million in free legal services. Mr. Trump has suggested using the law firms’ promise of pro bono work to help the U.S. in trade negotiations over tariffs.
