Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free
Your guide to what the 2024 US election means for Washington and the world
None of the top 20 law firms in the US have so far offered their “unconditional support” to an effort by Perkins Coie to fight sanctions imposed by the Trump administration.
Organisers of an amicus brief in support of Perkins Coie’s lawsuit are struggling to convince America’s most powerful law firms to sign up amid concerns they will face retaliation by the Trump administration, according to emails seen by the Financial Times.
Eric Green, a well-known mediator, has been circulating a draft of the brief and tallying daily numbers of those law firms willing to add their names to the document. The brief is being prepared by the Los Angeles firm Munger, Tolles & Olson.
According to an email sent on Saturday afternoon by Green’s firm, Resolutions LLC, which was seen by the FT, 173 of 248 law firms that have responded to the survey are offering “unconditional support”.
However, among the top 100 law firms by revenue, as ranked by The American Lawyer magazine, only three have offered “unconditional support” with none coming from the top 20.
The brief is supposed to be submitted to the court in the next few days in conjunction with the formal court papers Perkins Coie files to challenge the executive order against the firm, with Munger, Tolles & Olson trying to rally law firms behind the effort before that deadline.
Eight firms in the top 100 have offered their support with conditions, including that their closest peers also sign the brief, according to one person involved in the process. As such, nearly all of the full-throated support so far for the amicus brief originates from small and medium-sized firms.
“So the numbers are great, but not from the largest firms,” wrote Green in the email, which said the responses of law firms would remain anonymous in the current feedback phase.
According to Trump’s executive order, Perkins Coie would be banned from federal government work and have any security clearances revoked. A federal judge in Washington has issued a temporary injunction to halt the implementation of the order while Perkins Coie pursues its appeal in court.
Since the Perkins Coie order, the Trump administration has imposed sanctions on several top law firms tied to the Democratic party or who have hired investigators who previously targeted President Donald Trump.
Law firms have been struggling with the question of whether to publicly confront Trump’s campaign against the legal community or seek a détente in order to avoid the business disruptions that the executive orders could bring.
After facing a similar executive order, Paul, Weiss cut a deal with Trump to cancel the sanctions in exchange for $40mn of pro bono legal services dedicated in part to causes Trump supports. Another large firm, Skadden, said it would offer $100mn to support similar legal services to avoid facing its own order.
Two other firms, WilmerHale and Jenner & Block, have vowed court fights to contest their sanctions and had their own orders temporarily blocked in federal court on Friday.
Perkins Coie and Eric Green, the mediator, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The three-page draft brief seen by the FT sets out legal arguments that challenge the constitutionality of the executive orders.
It concludes: “Like every lawyer, the members of the amicus law firms have sworn an oath to uphold the constitution . . . that oath obligates all of us, no matter our political views, to be faithful custodians of our Nation’s commitment to the rule of law . . . we therefore feel a special responsibility to stand up now to the unprecedented threat posed by the Executive Order.”
