Jenner & Block and WilmerHale have been granted interim relief to challenge the lawfulness of executive orders issued against them by the White House, after both law firms took the Trump administration to court last Friday (28 March). 

The orders, which among other measures threatened the firms and their clients with the loss of their government contracts and suspended their lawyers’ security clearances, were partially frozen by two federal judges in separate rulings late Friday. 

The same day it emerged that another major law firm, Skadden Arps, which has yet to be the subject of any order, had cut a deal with Trump to avoid punitive executive action. 

WilmerHale’s lawsuit, filed in federal district court in Washington DC, claimed the executive order punishes it for hiring Robert Mueller, who investigated Russian contacts with Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign while US special counsel, as well as for litigating on behalf of the Democratic National Committee and suing the administration over its firing of eight inspectors general. 

The firm instructed Paul Clement, a highly-respected litigator who was solicitor general in the George W. Bush administration. 

In his brief to the court, citing US precedent, Clement wrote: “[T]he right to counsel is the foundation for our adversary system,” adding that “one should not be penalised for merely defending or prosecuting a lawsuit”.

The court subsequently issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO), akin to an injunction, blocking the parts of the order that limited WilmerHale’s lawyers’ access to federal buildings and instructed agencies to terminate contracts with the firm and its clients. 

A Republican-appointed judge, US District Judge Richard Leon, ruled on the case. “The retaliatory nature of the executive order at issue here is clear from its face,” he argued. “The injuries to the plaintiff here would be severe and would spill over to its clients and the justice system at large,” the court found, “as the public interest demands protection against harms of this magnitude.”

Jenner & Block’s lawsuit, filed at the same courthouse, called the order targeting it “unconstitutional”. It added that not challenging it “would mean compromising our ability to zealously advocate for all of our clients and capitulating to unconstitutional government coercion, which is simply not in our DNA”. The firm was represented by a Cooley team led by Michael Attanasio. 

US District Judge John Bates ruled in similar terms for Jenner & Block, issuing a TRO that blocked the parts of the executive order relating to access to federal buildings and termination of government contracts. Bates called the order “disturbing” for targeting the firm for its pro bono representation of immigrants and transgender people, adding it “threatens the existence of the firm”.  

The executive orders against WilmerHale and Jenner & Block form part of a wider campaign by Trump to target law firms he maintains have supported efforts to unfairly prosecute him or help his opponents, alongside a broader effort by his administration to challenge diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies. 

The executive orders have been condemned by groups including the American Bar Association and 50 state bar associations, as well as multiple state attorney-generals. 

Five major US law firms have been the subject of executive orders so far, including Covington & Burling, Perkins Coie and Paul Weiss. Perkins Coie sued the administration and won a TRO partially blocking its order earlier this month, while the order targeting Paul Weiss was lifted after the firm struck a deal with Trump that includes giving $40m in pro bono services to support his administration’s initiatives and no longer using any DEI policies. 

Skadden’s deal with Trump, which he characterised as a “settlement”, will see the firm provide at least $100m in pro bono legal services to causes supported by both the firm and the president, including assisting veterans and combatting antisemitism. 

On X, Trump said the firm would also not “engage in illegal DEI discrimination and preferences” and “will not deny representation to clients, such as members of politically disenfranchised groups, who have not historically received legal representation from major national law firms, including in pro bono matters and support of nonprofits, because of the personal political views of individual lawyers”.

Jeremy London, Skadden’s executive partner, said in the X post: “We engaged proactively with the president and his team to work constructively together and reach this agreement. The firm looks forward to continuing our productive relationship with President Trump and his administration. We firmly believe that this outcome is in the best interests of our clients, our people and our firm.”

A Washington DC-based Skadden associate, Breanna Trout Frey, subsequently resigned from the firm, calling the deal a “craven attempt to sacrifice the rule of law for self-preservation”. 

Skadden was contacted for comment.