UJ
—
The administration under Trump is engaging in a confrontation with the legal community across the United States, with a growing list of targets emerging each day.
So far, Executive Orders from President Donald Trump have specifically targeted two law firms seen as adversaries, while also challenging firms and law schools allegedly infringing upon presidential mandates regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion.
Trump’s executive order limiting Perkins Coie’s access to classified data and federal facilities, thereby undermining its capability to serve specific clients, has reverberated throughout the legal landscape across the nation.
“No President has ever issued a specific order targeting a law firm,” remarked Ellen Podgor, a legal ethics professor at Stetson University, in a statement to UJ.
“This undermines an attorney’s ability to perform their role effectively,” Podgor continued. “The order essentially strips away our fundamental right to counsel, posing a significant threat to our Constitution.”
The White House’s aggressive actions represent a politically charged retaliation against a cadre of lawyers and firms that remain largely obscure outside of Washington. However, the consequences could be significant, as Trump’s administration positions itself in outright defiance of critical institutions, leveraging its authority to stifle the expertise of established and influential attorneys.
These measures also infringe upon what the legal profession sees as a basic right for individuals seeking legal representation—the freedom to choose their legal counsel—something that Trump himself had when he was a defendant facing prosecution by the Justice Department.
The directive regarding Perkins Coie suspends the national security clearances for its attorneys, as it was involved in producing the controversial Russia dossier concerning Trump and his associates during the 2016 election. According to the White House, it may further restrict the firm’s lawyers from entering federal buildings and has cautioned government agencies against hiring employees from that firm.
Perkins Coie has announced its intention to legally challenge the order and has secured representation from another prominent law firm.
An aide from the White House indicated on Thursday that the administration plans to scrutinize additional law firms, suggesting that further punitive actions might be forthcoming. Trump’s order on Perkins Coie included a directive for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to investigate other “large, influential, or industry-leading law firms” for potentially biased hiring practices based on race.
Collectively, the actions taken by the administration have created a “chilling” atmosphere within the legal sector, according to Cari Brunelle, head of a legal advisory firm collaborating with several prominent U.S. law firms.
“What we’re witnessing is unprecedented in our country. … It sends a clear message: Tread carefully,” she remarked.
In contemporary history, the closest parallel to the Trump White House’s blacklisting in the legal field may be drawn to then-President Richard Nixon’s “enemies list,” Brunelle noted.
Presently, law firms are reacting from a place of apprehension, Brunelle explained. Many are striving to evade becoming a target, while others are reassessing and revising their websites, particularly in relation to their diversity, equity, and inclusion statements, which the administration claims to be reviewing as part of its consideration to take further actions against additional firms.
Additional lawyers also had their security clearances revoked in recent weeks due to White House directives, including those from Covington & Burling, the largest private firm in Washington, D.C., which has represented former Special Counsel Jack Smith, who is currently a private citizen.
“Traditionally, American law firms have represented interests before the U.S. government without fearing repercussions or consequences, but that has changed,” Brunelle commented. “This has fostered an immense level of trepidation.” (It’s noteworthy that Brunelle’s firm doesn’t represent Perkins Coie or Covington & Burling.)
Brunelle suggested that there might be strength in unity if numerous leaders from major law firms, legal academia, and other sectors of the legal field vocally opposed Trump’s methods. However, the reactions from law firms have thus far been largely subdued.
Marc Elias, a Democratic attorney who served as Perkins Coie’s lead political law consultant until 2021, criticized the absence of significant law firms supporting those who lost their security clearances in an email newsletter sent Monday. “That has not occurred,” he stated.
Law schools and independent organizations representing the legal fraternity have been more vocal in their opposition.
For example, Georgetown University Law Center responded to a letter from the interim U.S. attorney for Washington, D.C., which threatened to withhold jobs from its students unless the school aligned its curriculum with Trump’s DEI policies.
“The First Amendment guarantees that the government cannot dictate the curriculum Georgetown and its faculty adhere to,” stated William Treanor, Dean of Georgetown Law, in a letter to Ed Martin last week.
Numerous prominent national organizations have deemed the Trump administration’s actions detrimental to the rule of law in the U.S.
The American College of Trial Lawyers has condemned recent comments from Trump ally Elon Musk, which called for the impeachment of certain judges.
“We urge our Fellows, along with all lawyers, judges, lawmakers, executive officials, historians, political scientists, and citizens who cherish our democracy, to denounce threats to impeach judges based on disagreements with their lawful decisions,” the organization stated.
The prestigious, invitation-only group also reacted to the executive measures against Perkins Coie and Covington & Burling, deeming them as “escalating” threats that undermine the integrity of the justice system.
“Lawyers across the nation should come together in unequivocally condemning these actions,” the organization urged.
The American Bar Association, a significant voluntary organization comprising many legal practitioners in the U.S., has also expressed strong concern regarding the administration’s recent actions, with President William Bay calling them an assault on the rule of law.
This organization has faced criticism from conservatives for years. Bay pointed out that the Federal Trade Commission last month prohibited its political appointees from taking leadership roles in the ABA or from participating in its activities, with FTC Chair Andrew Ferguson labeling the group as “beholden to Big Tech interests” and a “radical left-wing” organization aligned with Democratic Party principles.
In a similarly impactful development, more than two dozen employees from the Justice Department who were scheduled to address the ABA’s White Collar conference in Miami withdrew from participation, as reported by conference organizer Raymond Banoun to UJ.
During the ethics panel discussion at the conference on Friday, very few Justice Department staff members were present to hear about some of the administration’s most politicized actions.
