Law firms hire former Tesla lawyer and top conservative litigator for Trump fight
(Reuters) - As the Trump administration strikes at U.S. law firms with a wave of executive orders, three firms challenging those orders have retained a former Tesla general counsel, a longtime conservative litigator and other top lawyers to represent them.
Veteran conservative and U.S. Supreme Court attorney Paul Clement is representing law firm WilmerHale, and Silicon Valley-founded firm Cooley is representing Jenner & Block in their lawsuits against the administration of President Donald Trump, court papers show.
Fourteen partners at law firm Williams & Connolly signed a lawsuit filed by Perkins Coie on March 11, the first such case against the Trump White House in its crackdown targeting large firms and their client work. The Williams & Connolly team includes Dane Butswinkas, who was briefly the top lawyer at Elon Musk's electric vehicle maker Tesla.
There is a growing rift in the legal profession over whether and how to fight back against the administration in its pursuit of firms for their work for Trump's Democratic adversaries and their internal diversity policies.
Many large law firms with significant corporate client bases have not made public statements, but thousands of individual lawyers, the American Bar Association and other legal groups have been openly critical.
Two prominent Wall Street law firms — Paul Weiss and Skadden Arps — cut deals with the White House to avoid similar directives against them. The White House rescinded its order against Paul Weiss, and Skadden reached a deal before one was issued.
Clement in a statement on Friday said WilmerHale's lawsuit was "absolutely critical to vindicating the First Amendment, our adversarial system of justice, and the rule of law."
Perkins Coie, WilmerHale and Jenner & Block have told U.S. judges that the executive orders are retaliatory and unlawful, violating provisions in the U.S. Constitution that protect speech and due process.
Law firms and attorneys defending Jenner, WilmerHale and Perkins Coie did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Tesla, Paul Weiss and Skadden also did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
RESTRICTING ACCESS
Trump's orders have sought to cancel federal contracts held by the firms' clients and to restrict access by their lawyers to federal buildings and officials.
Perkins Coie in its lawsuit said it had lost a major government contractor as a client, and others were considering leaving the firm. The firms each predicted harm to their reputations, hurting revenue and the ability to recruit and retain employees.
The White House on Monday in a statement said Trump's executive orders against law firms "are lawful directives to ensure that the President's agenda is implemented and that law firms comply with the law."
Clement, who served as U.S. solicitor general during the administration of George W. Bush, a Republican, has argued more than 100 cases before the high court.
Clement started a small firm — Clement & Murphy — in 2022 after splitting with law firm Kirkland & Ellis over its decision to no longer represent clients in gun-rights litigation.
Cooley's legal team for Chicago-founded Jenner & Block includes longtime trial lawyer Michael Attanasio, who was a lead trial lawyer for pro baseball star Roger Clemens in 2012 when he defeated federal charges that he lied about performance-enhancing drug use.
Musk in 2022 in a post on the platform then known as Twitter singled out Cooley and Perkins Coie, saying they were made up of "white-shoe lawyers" who "thrive on corruption."
Butswinkas of Williams & Connolly served as Tesla general counsel for several months, returning to the firm in 2019.
WilmerHale, Jenner & Block and Perkins Coie did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Monday.
Three U.S. judges in the lawsuits have blocked key parts of the executive orders while the litigation is pending.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Guggenheim Reiterates Sell on Tesla (TSLA) Despite FSD and Robotaxi Updates
Tesla, Inc. (NASDAQ:TSLA) is one the On August 12, Guggenheim analyst Ronald Jewsikow reiterated a Sell rating on the stock with a $175.00 price target. The firm said that it is sticking with its sell rating and that it is cautious on the company's full self-driving. CEO Elon Musk unveiled some important updates around both the Robotaxi operations in Austin and the upcoming FSD model. The updates were made in a series of posts on X over the weekend. While Tesla shares 'somewhat paradoxically' rallied on the news, names like Uber and Lyft who were previously sensitive to Tesla autonomy, did too. The firm considers this as 'mixed signals from the market.' Hadrian / 'On the Robotaxi operations in Austin, CEO Musk indicated it would be open to the public next month, which we believe is earlier than investor expectations and a sign of confidence in the service and feedback from the invite-only riders to date. We believe the expanded FSD model has positive implications for bulls focused on the potential for TSLAs fleet eventually becoming Robotaxis (positive read on inference compute), and the opening of the Austin Robotaxi experience to the public is a key step on the growth path of inviting a potentially more critical set of consumers. While safety drivers will remain, and no timeline has been provided for their removal, bulls have been willing to overlook the optics of safety drivers in TSLA vehicles, and we see no reason why that would change now.' Tesla, Inc. (NASDAQ:TSLA) is an automotive and clean energy company that leverages advanced artificial intelligence in its autonomous driving technology and robotics initiatives. While we acknowledge the potential of TSLA as an investment, we believe certain AI stocks offer greater upside potential and carry less downside risk. If you're looking for an extremely undervalued AI stock that also stands to benefit significantly from Trump-era tariffs and the onshoring trend, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock. READ NEXT: and Disclosure: None. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
New York Post
16 minutes ago
- New York Post
Little Sisters of the Poor are still fighting ObamaCare— as states force nuns to violate their faith
It's enraging. More than a decade after the Obama administration first tried to force the Little Sisters of the Poor to buy contraception including abortifacient drugs for employees, states are still hounding the nuns in court. At its heart, ObamaCare was a massive welfare program meant to redistribute health-care costs to the middle class. But it was also a social engineering project aimed at coercing religious organizations and businesses to adopt progressive values. The Affordable Care Act mandated employers, including nonprofits such as the Little Sisters of the Poor, to pay for contraceptives in their worker-provided health insurance as an 'essential health benefit' under the euphemistic category of 'preventative and wellness services.' There was no 'religious exemption.' It's worth taking a step back and thinking about that term: The very idea that an American citizen should be impelled to ask the state for an 'exemption' to practice their faith is an assault on the fundamental idea of liberty. Imagine having to ask the state for an exemption to exercise your free speech? What makes the case even more unsettling, of course, is that the state is demanding citizens engage in activity that is explicitly against their faith. Now, there may well be numerous theological disputes within the Catholic Church. The use of contraception and abortion aren't among them. There is absolutely no question that nuns hold genuine, long-standing religious convictions. And there is no question that liberals want to smash them. Nevertheless, the Little Sisters spent years in court, working their way up to the Supreme Court and winning protections against the federal government (twice). In 2017, the Trump administration exempted religious groups like the Little Sisters from the ObamaCare mandate entirely. The government, however, bolstered with unlimited taxpayer funds, can hunt its prey in perpetuity. So states such as New Jersey and Pennsylvania began their own lawsuits against the Little Sisters. This week, in a nationwide ruling, Judge Wendy Beetlestone, chief judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, found that the Trump administration's expansion of religious exemptions from the contraception mandate was 'arbitrary and capricious.' Religious nonprofit groups and businesses will again have to ask for special accommodations from the Department of Health and Human Services to avoid buying abortifacients. Even if the Trump administration grants every one of them, one day there will be authoritarians in charge who won't — and nonprofit employees will still be guaranteed contraception through health plans paid for by employers. Beetlestone, incidentally, was the same judge who issued a nationwide injunction against the contraception exemption back in 2017, arguing it was 'difficult' to think of any rule that 'intrudes more into the lives of women.' The Supreme Court overturned it in 2020 by a 7-2 majority. Because no one has a right to free condoms. Indeed, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act holds that the state must have a 'compelling interest' and use the least restrictive means when burdening religious practice. Free birth control isn't a compelling interest. And fining religious organizations millions of dollars to pressure them into abandoning their beliefs is perhaps the most restrictive means of action, short of throwing nuns in prison. You'd think attacking a group of nuns who offer end-of-life care for the elderly would be a public relations nightmare for Democrats. Yet they've never really shied away from it. Because the point is to intimidate others. In many ways, the Little Sisters' struggle is reminiscent of the travails of Jack Phillips, the Colorado baker who refuses to create unique message cakes for gay weddings. Phillips is now embroiled in his umpteenth court case over his crimes. The message: Dissent from those who practice their faith will be punished. Take the Catholic Charities adoption agencies, which shuttered in numerous states due to laws and policies compelling them to place children with same-sex couples. The attacks will continue until the Supreme Court upholds the clear language and intent of the First Amendment and religious liberty. It's already punted once: In Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, a 7-2 Supreme Court decision in favor of Jack Phillips, the court barred the state's attacks only if state officials openly demeaned their target's faith — a ruling so narrow as to be largely useless. But it shouldn't matter why the state is steamrolling the religious liberty of nuns, or anyone else for that matter. The problem is that the ObamaCare mandate is authoritarian and unconstitutional. And the only way to fix that problem is to overturn it. David Harsanyi is a senior writer at the Washington Examiner. Twitter @davidharsanyi
Chicago Tribune
16 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
California pushes partisan plan for new Democratic districts to counter Texas in fight for US House
LOS ANGELES — California Gov. Gavin Newsom said Thursday his state will hold a Nov. 4 special election to seek approval of redrawn districts intended to give Democrats five more U.S. House seats in the fight for control of Congress. The move is a direct response to a similar Republican-led effort in Texas, pushed by President Donald Trump as his party seeks to maintain its slim House majority in the midterm elections. The nation's two most populous states have emerged as the center of a partisan turf war in the House that could spiral into other states — as well as the courts — in what amounts to a proxy war ahead of the 2026 elections. Texas lawmakers are considering a new map that could help them send five more Republicans to Washington. Democrats who so far have halted a vote by leaving the state announced Thursday that they will return home if Texas Republicans end their current special session and California releases its own recast map proposal. Both were expected to happen Friday. However, Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott is expected to call another special session to push through new maps. Texas House Democrats planning their departure from Illinois and back to AustinIn Los Angeles, Newsom staged what amounted to a campaign kickoff rally for the as-yet unreleased new maps with the state's Democratic leadership in a downtown auditorium packed with union members, legislators and abortion rights supporters. Newsom and other speakers veered from discussing the technical grist of reshaping districts — known as redistricting — and instead depicted the looming battle as a conflict with all things Trump, tying it explicitly to the fate of American democracy. 'We can't stand back and watch this democracy disappear district by district all across the country,' Newsom said. 'We are not bystanders in this world. We can shape the future.' An overarching theme was the willingness to stand up to Trump, a cheer-inducing line for Democrats as the party looks to regroup from its 2024 losses. 'Donald Trump, you have poked the bear and we will punch back,' said Newsom, a possible 2028 presidential contender. Thursday's announcement marks the first time any state beyond Texas has officially waded into the mid-decade redistricting fight. The Texas plan was stalled when minority Democrats fled to Illinois, New York and Massachusetts on Aug. 3 to stop the Legislature from passing any bills. Elsewhere, leaders from red Florida to blue New York are threatening to write new maps. In Missouri, a document obtained by The Associated Press shows the state Senate received a $46,000 invoice to activate six redistricting software licenses and provide training for up to 10 staff members. In California, lawmakers must officially declare the special election, which they plan to do next week after voting on the new maps. Democrats hold supermajorities in both chambers — enough to act without any Republican votes — and Newsom said he's not worried about winning the required support from two-thirds of lawmakers to advance the maps. Newsom encouraged other Democratic-led states to get involved. 'We need to stand up — not just California. Other blue states need to stand up,' Newsom said. Republicans hold a 219-212 majority in the U.S. House, with four vacancies. New maps are typically drawn once a decade after the census is conducted. Many states, including Texas, give legislators the power to draw maps. California is among states that rely on an independent commission that is supposed to be nonpartisan. The California map would take effect only if a Republican state moves forward, and it would remain through the 2030 elections. After that, Democrats say they would return mapmaking power to the independent commission approved by voters more than a decade ago. Some people already have said they would sue to block the effort, and influential voices including former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger may campaign against it. 'Gavin Newsom's latest stunt has nothing to do with Californians and everything to do with consolidating radical Democrat power, silencing California voters, and propping up his pathetic 2028 presidential pipe dream,' National Republican Congressional Committee spokesperson Christian Martinez said in a statement. 'Newsom's made it clear: he'll shred California's Constitution and trample over democracy — running a cynical, self-serving playbook where Californians are an afterthought and power is the only priority.' California Democrats hold 43 of the state's 52 House seats, and the state has some of the most competitive House seats. Outside Newsom's news conference Thursday, U.S. Border Patrol agents conducted patrols, drawing condemnation from the governor and others. 'We're here making Los Angeles a safer place since we don't have politicians that will do that,' Gregory Bovino, chief of the patrol's El Centro, California, sector, told a reporter with KTTV in Los Angeles. He said he didn't know Newsom was inside nearby.
