A Federal Judge Lists 8 Ways That Trump Violated the Constitution by Punishing a Disfavored Law Firm
After President Donald Trump began penalizing major law firms that had offended him in one way or another last February, nine of them chose to surrender rather than fight. They agreed to humiliating concessions that included pro bono work, totaling nearly $1 billion, for causes favored by the president. But a handful of firms stood their ground, arguing that Trump’s executive orders targeting them violated the First Amendment and undermined the Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
So far the latter approach has proven to be pragmatic as well as principled. Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, Susman Godfrey, and WilmerHale have obtained court orders barring Trump from abusing his authority to punish law firms for representing his political opponents, supporting causes he does not like, or employing attorneys who have crossed him. The latest example, a permanent injunction that a federal judge in Washington, D.C., issued on Tuesday, underlines the threat posed by Trump’s petty vindictiveness. In an opinion peppered with exclamation points, U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon says Trump’s order against WilmerHale defies the First Amendment in four ways, violates the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of due process in two ways, unconstitutionally interferes with the right to legal representation, and flouts the separation of powers.
“The cornerstone of the American system of justice is an independent judiciary and
an independent bar willing to tackle unpopular cases, however daunting,” Leon writes. “In the nearly 250 years since the Constitution was adopted no Executive Order has been issued challenging these fundamental rights. Now, however, several Executive Orders have been issued directly challenging these rights and that independence. One of these Orders is the subject of this case. For the reasons set forth below, I have concluded that this Order must be struck down in its entirety as unconstitutional.”
In his March 27 order targeting WilmerHale, Trump complained that the firm had “engage[d] in obvious partisan representations to achieve political ends.” He was alluding to WilmerHale’s work for the Democratic National Committee, state-level Democratic organizations, and the presidential campaigns of two Democrats: Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. Trump said WilmerHale was “bent on employing lawyers who weaponize the prosecutorial power to upend the democratic process and distort justice,” mentioning former Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who investigated Trump, and two of “his colleagues.”
WilmerHale had engaged in “egregious conduct” by “support[ing] efforts to discriminate on the basis of race,” Trump averred, referring to the firm’s defense of Harvard University’s affirmative action practices against a successful challenge by Students for Fair Admissions. He also accused WilmerHale of supporting “the obstruction of efforts to prevent illegal aliens from committing horrific crimes and trafficking deadly drugs within our borders,” by which he meant that the firm had challenged some of his immigration policies during his first term. He added that WilmerHale “furthers the degradation of the quality of American elections, including by supporting efforts designed to enable noncitizens to vote.” That was a reference to the firm’s involvement in challenges to state voter identification and registration laws.
As Leon notes, WilmerHale also has irked Trump by representing “inspectors general
alleging that President Trump improperly fired them” and the House Ways and Means Committee in “litigation resulting in President Trump’s disclosure of his personal tax returns.” And the firm challenged a fantasy close to Trump’s heart by opposing his lawsuits “challenging the results of the 2020 presidential election.”
Because WilmerHale had engaged in “conduct detrimental to critical American interests,” Trump said, it was appropriate to “suspend any active security clearances” held by lawyers at the firm and restrict their access to federal buildings and government officials. He also ordered the termination of federal contr
Article from Reason.com
The Reason Magazine website is a go-to destination for libertarians seeking cogent analysis, investigative reporting, and thought-provoking commentary. Championing the principles of individual freedom, limited government, and free markets, the site offers a diverse range of articles, videos, and podcasts that challenge conventional wisdom and advocate for libertarian solutions. Whether you’re interested in politics, culture, or technology, Reason provides a unique lens that prioritizes liberty and rational discourse. It’s an essential resource for those who value critical thinking and nuanced debate in the pursuit of a freer society.
