Another of President Donald Trump’s executive orders targeting a Big Law firm has been struck down after a US District Judge on Friday said the action against Jenner & Block was unconstitutional.
The entire order, which revoked the security clearances of the firm’s attorneys and required a review of its government contracts, was invalidated by the judge’s ruling, representing a major win for Jenner & Block.
“The order raises constitutional eyebrows many times over. It punishes and seeks to silence speech ‘at the very center of the First Amendment,'” US District Judge John Bates, of the District Court of DC wrote in his ruling, adding that Trump’s order did so “via the most ‘egregious form of content discrimination — viewpoint discrimination,'” and “in an unacceptable attempt to ‘insulate the Government’s laws from judicial inquiry.'”
A spokesperson for Jenner & Block directed Business Insider to their public statement following the ruling, which said that the firm is “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.”
“Our decision to fight the executive order in court is rooted in Jenner & Block’s history and values: we fiercely advocate for our clients under all circumstances,” the firm’s statement continued. “This ruling demonstrates the importance of lawyers standing firm on behalf of clients and for the law. That is what Jenner will continue to do for our clients — paying and pro bono — as we look to put this matter behind us.”
Representatives for the White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.
The decision from US District Judge John Bates, an appointee of former President George W. Bush, is the second order striking down an executive order from Trump targeting a law firm.
Earlier this month, another judge blocked an order targeting Perkins Coie, ruling that Trump’s use of federal power “an overt attempt to suppress and punish certain viewpoints.”
Judges have also temporarily paused executive orders targeting the law firms Susman Godfrey and Wilmer Hale, pending decisions on whether to permanently block them.
At an April hearing for Jenner & Block’s case, Bates snapped at the Justice Department lawyer, Richard Lawson, who argued Trump’s executive order should stand.
“Give me a break,” Bates said, as Lawson argued federal agencies should follow Trump’s command because Jenner & Block engaged in “racial discrimination.”
In the now-blocked executive order, Trump specifically singled out attorney Andrew Weissmann, a Jenner employee who served as a lead prosecutor in Robert Mueller’s special counsel’s office, which investigated Trump’s ties to Russia in 2016. The order described Weissmann’s career as “rooted in weaponized government and abuse of power.”
Judge Bates’s ruling described Trump’s order and the subsequent legal battle over its legality as “no run-of-the-mill retaliation case,” adding that the president “has displayed a great deal of animosity toward Jenner.”
“Further adverse actions would not be shocking — and could very well offend the Constitution as plainly as Executive Order 14246 does,” Bates wrote. “But Article III requires this Court to place its faith in future courts to prevent harm from befalling Jenner if and when that occurs.”
