WASHINGTON, May 14 – The Trump administration will present arguments Thursday before a federal appeals court seeking to restore executive orders that target four prominent U.S. law firms, in a case that examines the boundaries of presidential authority after lower court judges decisively struck down the directives as illegal.
The proceeding at the Washington, D.C.-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit scheduled for 9:30 a.m. Eastern will feature a three-judge panel consisting of two Democratic-appointed and one Republican-appointed jurists, a makeup that may indicate challenging prospects for the government’s position.
The law firms in question — Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, WilmerHale and Susman Godfrey — each secured comprehensive wins in lower federal court proceedings, where four judges appointed by both Democratic and Republican presidents ruled separately last year that the executive orders breached free-speech protections and additional constitutional safeguards.
The presidential directives referenced the firms’ previous legal representation, diversity practices and political connections. These orders formed part of a wider initiative spearheaded by the president following the beginning of his second term that focused on targeting those he views as adversaries.
The directives aimed to prevent attorneys from these four firms from entering federal facilities and to cancel government contracts maintained by their clients. The firms have rejected any allegations of misconduct.
The administration pursued an appeal following the firms’ success in obtaining permanent injunctions against the measures. Former Republican-appointed U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement will present arguments on behalf of the law firms, going up against Justice Department attorney Abhishek Kambli.
In court documents, the Justice Department informed the D.C. Circuit that judges struck down the executive orders “without considering their plainly constitutional aspects and applications.”
The Justice Department stated the litigation concerns “not about the sanctity of the American law firm” but instead “about lower courts encroaching on the constitutional power of the president” regarding national security and other areas.
The four firms along with numerous legal organizations including the American Bar Association have pressed the D.C. Circuit to deny the administration’s appeals.
In legal filings, Jenner & Block stated, “Lawyers cannot be effective advocates for their clients if they face sweeping sanctions for their protected speech and associations.”
Nine additional firms, including Paul Weiss and Skadden Arps, reached settlements with the administration to prevent similar directives against them.
The same appeals court panel will also hear later that day the administration’s challenge to a decision that prevented it from removing prominent Washington attorney Mark Zaid’s special government security clearance.
The D.C. Circuit’s final decisions in both matters may be challenged before the U.S. Supreme Court.
