Trump administration files appeal to revive executive order against law firm Jenner
The U.S. Justice Department's notice, opens new tab in the federal court in Washington, D.C. did not detail its legal arguments in the appeal. The case will now move to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
The appeal was the second by the Justice Department in four lawsuits from firms that challenged the White House's executive orders against them. The administration in June appealed a judge's order that permanently blocked an executive order against law firm Perkins Coie.
The administration has not yet appealed court rulings that blocked executive orders against law firms WilmerHale and Susman Godfrey.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Jenner in a statement on Monday said "the district court correctly declared that Jenner's clients have a right to independent counsel and that the firm's right to represent clients vigorously and without compromise is sacred."
Trump in March and April issued a series of executive orders against prominent firms that represented his political adversaries or employed lawyers who investigated him in the past.
The orders sought to suspend security clearances for lawyers at the firms and restricted their access to government buildings, officials and federal contracting work.
Four judges appointed by Democratic and Republican presidents struck down the orders, finding they violated free-speech protections and rights in the U.S. Constitution.
Trump's order targeting Jenner cited the firm's past employment of Andrew Weissmann, a prosecutor involved in former U.S. Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation that detailed Russian contacts with Trump's 2016 presidential campaign.
In May, U.S. District Judge John Bates struck down the order and said it "casts a chill over the whole of the legal profession."
The White House has defended the executive orders, which accused firms of "weaponizing" the legal system, as lawful under the president's broad executive powers.
Nine law firms, including Paul Weiss, Skadden Arps, Milbank and Latham, settled with the White House to avoid being targeted by the administration.
Those firms as part of their deals pledged nearly $1 billion in free legal services to causes the White House supports and made other concessions. The firms have been criticized by some lawyers, firms and others over the accords, but have defended them as necessary and consistent with their principles.
Read more:
What Republican, Democratic judges said about Trump's law firm orders
Trump administration appeals blocking of executive order against law firm Perkins Coie
Trump executive order seeks law firms to defend police officers for free
Why target these law firms? For Trump, it's personal
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
7 minutes ago
- The Sun
Donald Trump slams ‘invasion' of migrants ‘killing' Europe & tells leaders ‘get your act together' as he lands in UK
DONALD Trump said the "invasion" of migrants is "killing" Europe as he told the leaders to "get their act together" after landing in the UK. The MAGA prez touched down on Air Force One in Scotland this evening for a four-day visit - his first visit to the UK since his re-election. 4 4 4 He is expected to visit his golf resorts at Turnberry on the Ayrshire coast and Menie in Aberdeenshire over the weekend. The president was greeted by Scottish Secretary Ian Murray before speaking to reporters. But when asked about illegal immigration, Trump said a "horrible invasion" was taking place in Europe which needs to stop. Don said: "On immigration, you better get your act together. 'You're not going to have Europe anymore, you've got to get your act together. 'As you know, last month we had nobody entering our country – nobody, [we] shut it down.' He added: 'You've got to stop this horrible invasion that's happening to Europe.' Trump, who made a crackdown on illegal immigration a major policy in his second term at the White House, boasted: "Last month we had nobody entering our country." Trump's comments come as Sir Keir Starmer faces enormous pressure to tackle illegal immigration in the UK. In Labour's first six months in office, there was a 29 per cent increase in arrivals compared to the previous year. Migrants REFUSING to leave luxury taxpayer-funded hotels forcing Home Office crackdown From election day to the end of 2024, 23,242 migrants arrived to enjoy bed and board on the taxpayer. In 2025 — so far — another 21,117 have crossed, up a staggering 56 per cent compared to 2024 and a shocking 75 per cent higher than in 2023. Labour has vowed to end the use of asylum hotels by the 2029 election, in part by moving migrants to cheaper forms of taxpayer-funded accommodation. But just days ago, Sir Keir sparked uproar by claiming there was plenty of spare housing for both illegal migrants and homeless Brits. Meanwhile, a four-star hotel in London's flash financial district Canary Wharf was set up to receive hundreds of new migrants. The latest batch of small boat migrants who have illegally landed are ready to be hosted in style to the tune of £5.5million a day. Mr Trump also suggested he would be meeting Sir Keir 'tomorrow evening', although it is understood the pair will not meet until Monday. He praised him ahead of a meeting between the two at one of his courses in the coming days, describing him as a 'good man'. 'I like your Prime Minister, he's slightly more liberal than I am – as you probably heard – but he's a good man. He got a trade deal done,' he said. As well as the Prime Minister, European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen is also set to meet Trump. She confirmed on X that she will come to Scotland on Sunday in a bid to hash out a trade deal between the US and Europe. It comes after Trump s lapped Europe with a whopping 30 per cent tariff set to hit the EU from August. But he told journalists today there was a 'good 50/50 chance' of a deal being struck, adding that it would be the 'biggest deal of them all'. The president and Sir Keir are expected to discuss potential changes to the UK-US trade deal which came into force last month. After years watching Channel migrant crisis unfold Brits have just about snapped – and it's killing Starmer Opinion by Jack Elsom, Political Editor CAST your mind back to Christmas 2018 when a few dozen migrants clambered into rickety dinghies off the French coast and headed for Britain. Then-Home Secretary Sajid Javid flew back early from his family holiday to declare a 'major incident', MPs called for the Navy to be deployed and the public rightly demanded action. You don't need me to tell you what happened next: over the next seven years 174,000 more would-be asylum seekers crossed the English Channel. Billions of pounds of taxpayer cash have been ploughed into snapping up hotels for them to live in, with free bed and board. The lives of vulnerable men, women and children have been tragically lost. And families feeling the pinch have watched agog as successive governments throw good money after bad. Yesterday's revelation that thousands of asylum seekers have been gambling with money from taxpayer-funded pre-paid cards was shocking. But in many ways what is more depressing is that nobody is even really surprised any more. Read the full piece here.
Reuters
7 minutes ago
- Reuters
US agencies pause effort to block immigrant social services in states that sued
NEW YORK, July 25 (Reuters) - President Donald Trump's administration agreed on Friday to pause efforts to block immigrants who are living in the U.S. illegally from accessing certain federally funded social services in 20 Democratic-led states that sued over the policy changes. The U.S. Departments of Justice, Health and Human Services, Education, and Labor agreed to wait until at least September 3 to enforce the changes that affect programs providing early childhood education, food and healthcare. The agencies also agreed not to enforce the changes retroactively in New York, California, Illinois, or the other states that sued, according to an agreement filed in Rhode Island federal court, where the states had filed their lawsuit. New York Attorney General Letitia James said the agreement preserves social services "that millions of New Yorkers rely on to survive." "These policy changes threaten essential lifelines like health care, education, and nutrition assistance programs for hardworking families in New York and nationwide," James said in a statement. "My office will continue to fight for these programs and services on behalf of all who need them." The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. More than 20 Democratic attorneys general had sued on Monday arguing that the policies, which implement an immigration-focused executive order from Trump, are unconstitutional and that the Republican president issued them without following the required federal rulemaking process. The policy changes require programs to check participants' immigration status before giving access to essential public services like Head Start, Meals on Wheels, child welfare programs, domestic violence shelters, housing assistance, mental health treatment, food banks, and community health centers. The states said the directives threatened to pull federal funding from states and could force some programs to shutter altogether. The requirements went into effect almost immediately after the directives were issued, leaving the programs scrambling to find ways to comply so they can stay open, the states said. States have always needed to verify a person's lawful immigration status before allowing them to access certain federal programs, like Medicaid. But federal agencies have previously taken the position that states did not have to verify immigration status for some programs, like soup kitchens, homeless shelters, and crisis counseling centers, that received federal funding but were intended to be "open to all," according to the lawsuit.
Reuters
7 minutes ago
- Reuters
Kennedy to oust care task force, WSJ reports; HHS says no decision yet
WASHINGTON, July 25 (Reuters) - U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is planning to remove all the members of an advisory panel that determines what cancer screenings and other preventive health measures insurers must cover, the Wall Street Journal reported on Friday, citing people familiar with the matter. A Department of Health and Human Services spokesperson said on Friday that Kennedy had not yet made a decision regarding the 16-member U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. "No final decision has been made on how the USPSTF can better support HHS' mandate to Make America Healthy Again," the HHS spokesperson said. The Journal said Kennedy planned to dismiss all 16 panel members in what would be the latest in a series of far-reaching actions by Kennedy, a long-time vaccine skeptic, to reshape U.S. regulation of vaccines, food and medicine. In June he fired all 17 members of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, a panel of vaccine experts, replacing them with seven handpicked members, including known vaccine skeptics. The USPSTF includes medical experts serving staggered four-year terms on a volunteer basis. Its role in choosing what services will be covered by insurers was established under the 2010 Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. The 40-year-old group, whose recommendations provide guidance to doctors, looks at everything from routine breast cancer screening to drugs to prevent HIV infection. The U.S. Supreme Court in June upheld the constitution of the task force and ruled in favor of its recommendation to cover preventive care. Though made up of an independent group of volunteer experts, members are selected by the health secretary without Senate confirmation and it relies on support from the department's Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. A group of 104 health organizations, opens new tab, including the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics, in early July sent a letter to Congressional health committees, urging them "to protect the integrity" of the task force. The task force has been criticized by some conservatives, opens new tab as too left-leaning.
