Latest news with #JennerAndBlock
Yahoo
24-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Judge Slaps Down Trump's Attempt to Punish the Legal System
A federal judge has blocked an executive order by President Donald Trump targeting Jenner & Block, a law firm known for its work on progressive issues and its ties to Special Counsel Robert Muller's Russia probe. U.S. District Judge John Bates—a Republican appointee—found that the March order violated the Constitution, ruling that it was motivated Mueller bias against the firm's clients and values, Reuters reported. 'It picked Jenner because of the causes Jenner champions, the clients Jenner represents, and a lawyer once employed,' Bates wrote, calling it a 'doubly violative' breach of constitutional protections, including the First Amendment right to free speech. Trump's March 25 executive order accused Jenner of engaging in 'lawfare' and attacked its internal diversity policies, pro bono work for immigrants and transgender people, and its former employment of prosecutor Andrew Weissmann. Weissmann played a key role in the Mueller investigation, which Trump has repeatedly derided as a 'hoax.' 'My administration is committed to addressing the significant risks associated with law firms... that engage in conduct detrimental to critical American interests,' the order read. 'Jenner & Block LLP (Jenner) is yet another law firm that has abandoned the profession's highest ideals, condoned partisan 'lawfare,' and abused its pro bono practice to engage in activities that undermine justice and the interests of the United States.' The order was designed to 'chill legal representation the administration doesn't like, thereby insulating the Executive Branch from the judicial check fundamental to the separation of powers,' Bates argued. The Friday ruling mirrors an earlier May 2 decision that struck down similar orders against the international law firm Perkins Coie. Jenner sued to block the order, arguing it limited free speech and due process rights by punishing legal advocacy the administration dislikes. The move speaks to a wider fracturing of the legal profession as firms pick sides amid the Trump administration's attacks. At least four firms—Jenner, Perkins, WilmerHale, and Susan Godfrey—have filed suits to block Trump's executive orders. At the same time, several others, including Skadden Arps and Simpson Thatcher, have pledged free legal support for causes endorsed by the White House in an effort to avoid being targeted. The Justice Department, helmed by Pam Bondi, which has defended the orders as legitimate exercises of presidential authority, has not yet publicly commented on the ruling and has been contacted for a response. The White House has also so far remained silent on the ruling. The Trump administration is expected to appeal to the D.C. Circuit.
New York Times
23-05-2025
- Business
- New York Times
Trump's Order Targeting Jenner & Block Was Unconstitutional, Judge Rules
A federal judge on Friday struck down an executive order signed by President Trump that threatened penalties against the law firm Jenner & Block, which once employed a top attorney who helped investigate the president alongside the team run by Robert S. Mueller III, who was then the special counsel. It was the second time a federal judge found one of Mr. Trump's orders targeting elite law firms unconstitutional, after another judge ruled earlier in May that an essentially identical order targeting the firm Perkins Coie appeared retributive and designed to strong-arm the firm into serving the White House. Two other firms — WilmerHale and Susman Godfrey — have asked for similarly decisive rulings in lawsuits they brought. In March, after a string of similar orders that openly detailed the president's political grievances and furthered his campaign of retribution, Mr. Trump released an order targeting Jenner & Block, citing its past decision to hire Andrew Weissmann after the special counsel's investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election. Mr. Weissman left the firm in 2021. The order leveraged the full force of the federal government to curtail Jenner & Block's business. In an opinion on Friday, Judge John D. Bates wrote that the orders were 'doubly violative of the Constitution.' Not only did they violate the First Amendment by seeking to muzzle a perceived critic of the president, he wrote, they also had the effect of intimidating all other lawyers whose work 'protects against governmental viewpoint becoming government-imposed orthodoxy.' 'This case arises from one of a series of executive orders targeting law firms that, in one way or another, did not bow to the current presidential administration's political orthodoxy,' he wrote. 'Like the others in the series, this order — which takes aim at the global law firm Jenner & Block — makes no bones about why it chose its target: it picked Jenner because of the causes Jenner champions, the clients Jenner represents, and a lawyer Jenner once employed.' The order had directed federal agencies to identify and cancel contracts with the firm, suspend security clearances held by its lawyers and bar its staff from federal buildings, all in the name of 'national security and other interests of the United States.' Around the same time that Mr. Trump began releasing the orders, a cluster of other top firms rushed to pre-emptively head off retaliation by offering millions of dollars of pro bono work on areas of common ground, where they said the values of the firm and the White House appeared to align. Between white shoe firms such as Paul Weiss, Skadden, Latham & Watkins and half a dozen others, the White House secured pledges approaching $1 billion worth of free work. But a minority of firms, including Jenner & Block, Susman Godfrey and WilmerHale, went in the opposite direction and sued to stop the orders, arguing that they were clearly coercive. In court, lawyers pointed out that the moment other firms cut deals, the grave national security concerns cited in the executive orders abruptly vanished. With Judge Bates's order on Friday, federal judges have so far agreed. Permanently barring the government from enforcing the order, Judge Bates noted that the larger legal profession now faced a 'forward-looking censorship scheme,' in which the threat of punishment could be trotted out repeatedly, any time any firm appeared to be resisting Mr. Trump's political agenda. 'The administration has shown a repeated willingness to haggle, sending the message loud and clear that Jenner can spare itself — if it compromises its speech,' Judge Bates wrote. 'So whereas retaliation usually punishes once and moves along, the retaliation here is ongoing and avoidable.' Last week, Jenner & Block's lawyers notified the court that despite the lawsuit challenging the terms of the executive order, several of its lawyers had since received letters informing them that their security clearances were being suspended anyway. At the same time, firms that reached a deal have seen the scope of their agreements broaden, as Mr. Trump has reportedly mused about deploying those firms toward political causes such as renegotiating trade deals. While Jenner & Block had asked Judge Bates to go beyond striking down the executive order and also block any future actions that could arise from the president's attacks, Judge Bates declined to do so. Noting that he was 'very sympathetic' and even found it plausible that the government would retaliate again given its continual hounding of the firm during the litigation, he wrote that it was beyond the court's power to halt 'hypothetical future actions,' even if they were likely unconstitutional follow-up attacks.
The Guardian
23-05-2025
- Business
- The Guardian
US judge overturns Trump order targeting major law firm Jenner & Block
A US judge on Friday overturned Donald Trump's executive order targeting Jenner & Block, a big law firm that employed a lawyer who investigated him. Trump's executive order, called Addressing Risks from Jenner & Block, suspended security clearances for the firm's lawyers and restricted their access to government buildings, officials and federal contracting work. Trump accused the law firm of engaging in activities that 'undermine justice and the interests of the United States', claiming that it participated in politically driven legal actions. In the executive order, Trump specifically criticized the firm for hiring Andrew Weissmann, an attorney who worked on Robert Mueller's investigation into allegations of Russian influence in Trump's 2016 campaign. The firm sued to block Trump's order, arguing it violated the constitution's first and fifth amendments. US district judge John D Bates ruled on Friday that Trump's directive violated core rights under the US constitution, mirroring a 2 May ruling that struck down a similar executive order against law firm Perkins Coie. Bates did not mince words when calling a Trump executive order unconstitutional, which sought to target Jenner & Block. Trump's order, Bates wrote, 'makes no bones about why it chose its target: it picked Jenner because of the causes Jenner champions, the clients Jenner represents, and a lawyer Jenner once employed'. 'Going after law firms in this way is doubly violative of the constitution,' Bates said. The justice department and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The administration can appeal Bates' order to the US court of appeals for the District of Columbia circuit. Trump signed an executive order in March, targeting Jenner & Block by suspending security clearances and restricting their access to government buildings, officials and federal contracting work. This was, Trump claimed, because of politically motivated 'lawfare' the firm engaged in. By attempting to push forward this executive order, Trump attempted to 'chill legal representation the administration doesn't like, thereby insulating the executive branch from the judicial check fundamental to the separation of powers'. Bates added that the Trump executive orders against law firms 'follow the same recipe: other than personalized touches in their first sections, they generally direct the same adverse actions towards each firm and decry the threat each firm poses to national security and the national interest'. Bates was appointed to the District of Columbia in 2001 by George W Bush. He blocked Trump's executive order completely. Apart from Jenner and Perkins Coie, two other firms – WilmerHale and Susman Godfrey – have sued the Trump administration to permanently block executive orders he issued against them. Nine law firms, including Paul Weiss, Milbank, Simpson Thacher and Skadden Arps, have pledged nearly $1bn in free legal services to causes the White House supports and made other concessions to avoid being targeted by Trump. The justice department has defended Trump's executive orders against Jenner and other law firms as consistent with the broad reach of presidential authority. Reuters contributed reporting
Associated Press
23-05-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
Judge blocks another Trump executive order targeting a major law firm
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge on Friday permanently blocked another of President Donald Trump's executive orders targeting a major law firm, calling it unconstitutional retaliation designed to punish lawyers for their legal work that the White House does not like. The ruling from U.S. District Judge John Bates marks the second time this month that a judge has struck down a Trump executive order against a prominent firm. The decision in favor of Jenner & Block follows a similar opinion that blocked the enforcement of a decree against a different firm, Perkins Coie. 'Like the others in the series, this order — which takes aim at the global law firm Jenner & Block — makes no bones about why it chose its target: it picked Jenner because of the causes Jenner champions, the clients Jenner represents, and a lawyer Jenner once employed,' Bates wrote. The spate of executive orders announced by Trump sought to impose the same consequences against the targeted firms, including suspending security clearances of attorneys and barring employees from federal buildings. The orders have been part of a broader effort by the president to reshape American civil society by targeting perceived adversaries in hopes of extracting concessions from them and bending them to his will. Several of the firms singled out for sanctions have either done legal work that Trump has opposed, or currently have or previously had associations with prosecutors who at one point investigated the president. In the case of Jenner & Block, the firm previously employed Andrew Weissmann, who served as a prosecutor on special counsel Robert Mueller's team that investigated ties between Trump's 2016 campaign and Russia. Bates had previously halted enforcement of multiple provisions of the executive order against Jenner & Block and appeared deeply skeptical of its legality during a hearing last month. In his ruling Friday, he said he was troubled that the orders retaliated against the firms for the 'views embodied in their legal work' and seek 'to chill legal representation the administration doesn't like, thereby insulating the Executive Branch from the judicial check fundamental to the separation of powers.' Two other firms, WilmerHale and Susman Godfrey, have also asked judges to permanently halt orders against them. Other major firms have sought to avert orders by preemptively reaching settlements that require them, among other things, to collectively dedicate hundreds of millions of dollars in free legal services in support of causes the Trump administration says it supports.
CBS News
23-05-2025
- Business
- CBS News
Judge strikes down Trump order targeting law firm Jenner & Block, calling parts of it a "screed"
A federal judge ruled Friday that President Trump's executive order targeting the law firm Jenner & Block is unconstitutional and permanently blocked the administration from enforcing it — a second setback in Mr. Trump's push to punish certain law firms. U.S. District Judge John Bates, who was appointed by President George W. Bush and is based in Washington, D.C., said the executive order is "violative of the Constitution" and found that the order infringes on the First, Fifth and Sixth amendments. "This order, like the others, seeks to chill legal representation the administration doesn't like, thereby insulating the Executive Branch from the judicial check fundamental to the separation of powers. It thus violates the Constitution and the Court will enjoin its operation in full," Bates wrote. Bates continued that parts of the order resemble "something of a screed airing the President's grievances with Jenner" and display a "great deal of animosity" towards the firm. Earlier this month, another judge who sits on the U.S. district court in Washington, D.C., also made a summary ruling against the administration's executive order against Perkins Coie, another firm that sued after it was targeted. Some other law firms have struck deals with the Trump administration to avoid punishment from the federal government. In March, Mr. Trump issued an executive order that targeted the Chicago-based firm Jenner & Block, which has been active in legal challenges against his wide-ranging swath of executive orders. In a statement posted online, Jenner & Block said that the firm was "pleased with the court's decision to decisively strike down an unconstitutional attack on our clients' right to have zealous, independent counsel and our firm's right to represent our clients fully and without compromise." The Justice Department and White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The executive order against Jenner & Block instructed officials to review and revoke firm members' security clearances, identify any goods, property, material and services provided by the federal government and stop providing them, terminate any government contracts that may exist with the law firm, and not hire any employees of the firm for any future federal jobs. It specifically singled out Andrew Weissmann, who worked on Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and worked at the firm until 2021. The executive order, Bates wrote, "makes no bones about why it chose its target: it picked Jenner because of the causes Jenner champions, the clients Jenner represents, and a lawyer Jenner once employed." Bates previously issued a temporary restraining order blocking the executive order's implementation. Following Bates' earlier decision, Attorney General Pam Bondi criticized him in a court filing after Bates said that the Justice Department was required to inform him of the steps it had taken to comply with findings. In a memo from Bondi to all department and agency heads, which was included in the filing, the attorney general informed them of the injunction against provisions of Mr. Trump's order and said Bates had "mandated" she "personally send" the notification. "On March 28, 2025, an unelected district court yet again invaded the policy-making and free speech prerogatives of the executive branch, including by requiring the Attorney General and the OMB Director to pen a letter to the head of every executive department and agency," Bondi wrote. "Local district judges lack this authority, and the Supreme Court should swiftly constrain these judges' blatant overstepping of the judicial power." She went on to attack Jenner & Block as purportedly "committed to the weaponization of justice, discrimination on the basis of race, radical gender ideology and other anti-American pursuits." Jacob Rosen Jake Rosen is a reporter covering the Department of Justice. He was previously a campaign digital reporter covering President Trump's 2024 campaign and also served as an associate producer for "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan," where he worked with Brennan for two years on the broadcast. Rosen has been a producer for several CBS News podcasts, including "The Takeout," "The Debrief" and "Agent of Betrayal: The Double Life of Robert Hanssen." contributed to this report.
