&w=3840&q=100)
American Bar Association sues Trump admin for threatening lawyers' freedom
The American Bar Association sued the US President Donald Trump's administration on Monday (local time) to stop him from using executive orders to pressure and punish law firms.
The American Bar Association, or ABA, a voluntary organisation for lawyers, accused Trump of threatening the independence of lawyers and attempting to intimidate them from challenging him in court, The Washington Post reported. The group's lawsuit said, 'Never before has there been as urgent a need for the ABA to defend its members, their profession, and the rule of law itself.'
This comes after Trump, in a series of executive orders, rattled the legal profession and punished some law firms. ABA, in its lawsuit, alleged that the executive orders Trump signed and the agreements it made with several law firms to ease federal sanctions have cast a 'blizzard-like chill' across the legal industry, Politico reported. The group in its lawsuit added, 'Since taking office earlier this year, President Trump has used the vast powers of the Executive Branch to coerce lawyers and law firms to abandon clients, causes, and policy positions the President does not like.'
Top law firms challenge Trump orders
The major law firms that have been impacted the most by Trump's executive orders include Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. Four firms sued to challenge the Trump administration. Calling them unconstitutional, a federal court in Washington struck down three of those orders. A ruling in the fourth lawsuit, which has been filed by the firm Susman Godfrey, is pending, though the judge hearing that case has temporarily blocked most of Trump's punishments.
Trump's executive orders and memos sought to freeze the federal caseload and restricted lawyers from entering the government buildings.
Allegations of legal intimidation tactics
The ABA's lawsuit details how President Trump and his administration have adopted and implemented this Law Firm Intimidation Policy on an ongoing basis. The administration has targeted firms who have engaged in disfavoured conduct. It has issued sanctions designed to cripple their businesses and limit their ability to freely represent clients.
The intimidation tactics include:
Terminating security clearances
Cancelling government contracts held by the law firms or their clients
Restricting access to federal buildings.
Refusing to hire employees from these firms for federal government jobs.
White House dismisses ABA lawsuit
Reacting to the lawsuit, the White House spokesperson Harrison Fields termed them 'completely frivolous'. He added, 'The President has always had discretion over which contracts the government enters into and who receives security clearances. His exercise of these core executive functions cannot be dictated by the ABA, a private organisation, or the courts. The Administration looks forward to ultimate victory on this issue.'
Tensions have escalated after the Justice Department officials accused the ABA group of bias and blocking its staff from attending the events.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time of India
26 minutes ago
- Time of India
Federal judge slams Trump-era grant cancellations, citing racial bias and abuse of power
Washington, June 17 (IANS) A federal judge in US city of Boston ruled that the Trump's administration's decision to terminate funding for diversity-related research at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) was illegal, accusing the administration of discriminating against minority groups. A dramatic federal courtroom scene has reignited a national reckoning over science, equity, and political interference. In a landmark ruling on Monday, US District Judge William Young condemned the Trump administration's abrupt termination of hundreds of federally funded research grants, many centered on diversity, equity, inclusion (DEI), and gender identity, as a breach of legal procedure and a veiled act of racial and LGBTQ+ discrimination. The verdict, delivered during a high-stakes hearing in Massachusetts, may reshape how governments are allowed to exercise discretion over scientific funding, and how far political ideology can intrude on public health research. A judicial blow to executive overreach Judge Young, appointed by President Ronald Reagan and widely respected for his legal gravitas, pulled no punches in his remarks. Describing the Trump administration's actions as 'arbitrary and capricious,' he rebuked federal officials for violating long-standing procedural norms in canceling research projects tied to DEI initiatives. 'It is palpably clear that what is behind this is racial discrimination and discrimination against America's LGBTQ community,' Young declared in court. 'After 40 years on the bench, I've never seen government racial discrimination like this. Have we no shame?' The ruling came in response to two lawsuits, now consolidated, filed earlier this year by 16 state attorneys general, advocacy groups, and several scientists whose research was defunded. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Order New Blinds Online & Get $199 Home Installation Learn More Undo These lawsuits allege that the government terminated projects not on scientific grounds but because they explored politically disfavored themes such as racial health disparities, sexual orientation, and social determinants of disease. The scope of the cancellations While Monday's ruling addresses only a subset of the cancelled grants, it sheds light on the breadth of the administration's actions. The terminated projects, many of them backed by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), ranged from studies on Alzheimer's in Black communities and depression among LGBTQ+ youth to trials examining how medications respond differently in individuals from diverse genetic backgrounds. In court documents, plaintiffs argued that universities received impersonal, template-style termination notices that offered no detailed justification. Some of the research was already midstream, with patient data collected and lives potentially impacted by halted clinical trials. Government's defense meets judicial skepticism Despite mounting criticism, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which oversees the NIH, stood by the cuts. In a written statement, HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon said to Associated Press: 'HHS stands by its decision to end funding for research that prioritized ideological agendas over scientific rigor and meaningful outcomes for the American people.' Yet during the hearing, government attorneys failed to provide a working definition of DEI—an omission Judge Young seized upon. He questioned how the NIH could justify grant cancellations on ideological grounds without articulating what exactly was objectionable. Justice Department lawyer Thomas Ports Jr. cited 13 minority health grants that were renewed or left intact to demonstrate the agency's commitment to diversity. He also claimed some cancellations were due to inadequate scientific value. However, Judge Young countered that such arguments masked a more troubling motive. Consequences and next steps Though Judge Young's remarks were forceful, the written order restoring the funding is pending and may still face appeals. The Trump administration has signaled it is 'exploring all legal options,' including asking for a stay or taking the case to a higher court. The implications are far-reaching. Legal scholars argue that this case may become a bellwether for how federal agencies define 'ideological' research and whether the government can be held accountable for politicizing science. It also raises deeper constitutional concerns over equal protection and viewpoint discrimination. Meanwhile, the ruling represents a partial but significant victory for scientists, public health advocates, and universities that have accused the federal government of undermining research in vulnerable populations. Is your child ready for the careers of tomorrow? Enroll now and take advantage of our early bird offer! Spaces are limited.

Mint
33 minutes ago
- Mint
Israel claims Iran's military leadership ‘on the run'; strikes damage Tehran's underground nuclear site
Israel on Tuesday said that it had launched strikes on dozens of targets linked to the nuclear and ballistic missile programmes of Israel, which has resulted in Tehran's military leadership be 'on the run'. As per an Israeli military official quoted by Reuters, Tel Aviv has not yet targeted Iran's underground Fordow nuclear facility. However, that might still happen, the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said. He further revealed that Israel was taking precautions to ensure that a nuclear disaster does not get triggered. Iran has till now launched around 400 ballistic missiles and hundreds of drones at Israel that have targeted both military and civilian sites, the official was quoted as saying by Reuters. He said an overnight fall-off in the number of missiles fired showed that Israel had succeeded in damaging Iran's ability to launch missiles. The International Atomic Energy Agency said on Tuesday that it believes Israeli airstrikes have caused 'direct impacts' on Iran's Natanz nuclear site. The agency said that the facility's underground centrifuge halls were impacted due to the attack. 'Based on continued analysis of high-resolution satellite imagery collected after Friday's attacks, the IAEA has identified additional elements that indicate direct impacts on the underground enrichment halls at Natanz,' the agency said. This is the first time that the UN's nuclear watchdog has made an assessment of damage from the strikes in the underground parts of Natanz, which is the main enrichment facility of Iran's nuclear programme. IAEA said there was "no change to report" at Iran's two other major nuclear sites, Isfahan and Fordow. Israel continued to strike Iran on Tuesday, while US President Donald Trump posted an ominous message warning residents of Tehran. 'IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON,' Trump wrote Monday night before returning to Washington early from a Group of Seven summit in Canada. 'Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran!' he added. Asked why he had urged for the evacuation of Tehran, he said: 'I just want people to be safe.' Before leaving the summit in Canada, Trump joined the other leaders in a joint statement saying Iran 'can never have a nuclear weapon' and calling for a 'de-escalation of hostilities in the Middle East, including a ceasefire in Gaza.'


India Today
34 minutes ago
- India Today
Aviation body calls urgent meeting with Air India, Air India Express officials
4:20 Global leaders are calling for de-escalation in the Iran-Israel crisis. Trump has rejected French President Macron's claim that the US offered to mediate a truce.