Four executive orders stripped security clearances, barred federal contracting and restricted building access for four law firms because of clients and causes they represented. Four D.D.C. judges struck the orders down as unconstitutional in 2025. The government appealed, briefly abandoned its defense in March 2026, then reversed course and argued for revival.
LATEST DEVELOPMENT · MAY 14, 2026
The D.C. Circuit heard argument on 14 May 2026. The panel appeared skeptical of the government’s position that clearance decisions are unreviewable. No decision had issued as of mid September 2026 and the injunctions remain in force.
BACKGROUND
In the first months of the second Trump administration, the President signed a series of executive orders targeting major law firms over their past representations of his perceived political opponents or causes his administration disfavored. The orders against Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, WilmerHale and Susman Godfrey directed federal agencies to suspend the firms’ lawyers’ security clearances, terminate government contracts touching the firms or their clients, and bar firm personnel from federal buildings. Several other firms, including Paul Weiss, Skadden and Covington, faced similar pressure but chose to settle or reach accommodations with the White House rather than litigate.
Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, WilmerHale and Susman Godfrey instead sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, arguing the orders were unconstitutional retaliation for protected speech and association, violated due process, and interfered with clients’ Sixth Amendment right to counsel of their choosing. Each case was assigned to a different D.D.C. judge, and each judge issued a temporary restraining order followed months later by a permanent injunction striking down the relevant executive order in full, in rulings issued between May and June 2025.
The government appealed all four rulings to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, where the cases were consolidated and argued together with a related case, Zaid v. Executive Office of the President. According to the record, the government’s litigating position wavered in early 2026, briefly appearing to abandon the defense of the orders before reversing course and arguing for their revival. The D.C. Circuit panel heard oral argument in May 2026 and, as of this writing, had not yet ruled, leaving the district court injunctions in effect.
The case is closely watched because it tests whether a President can use the machinery of the executive branch, including security clearances and federal contracting, to punish law firms for the clients and causes they represent, and whether such retaliatory uses of executive power are subject to judicial review at all.
TIMELINE
-
MAY 14, 2026HEARINGD.C. Circuit hears consolidated oral argumentThe panel of Chief Judge Srinivasan and Judges Pillard and Rao heard argument in the consolidated appeals alongside the related Zaid v. Executive Office of the President case, with Paul Clement arguing for the firms and Abhishek Kambli for the government.
-
APR 3, 2026FILINGAmicus briefs filed supporting law firmsOutside groups including the Washington Legal Foundation and civil liberties and NGO coalitions filed amicus briefs urging the D.C. Circuit to affirm the injunctions against the executive orders.
-
MAR 27, 2026FILINGPerkins Coie and co-appellees file consolidated appellee briefsPerkins Coie, Jenner & Block, WilmerHale and Susman Godfrey filed their responses defending the district court injunctions and calling the government’s reversal on appeal indefensible.
-
MAR 16, 2026PROCEDURALD.C. Circuit grants DOJ’s motion to keep appeals aliveThe court of appeals formally allowed the government to continue its appeals after the dismiss-then-undismiss episode and set the matter for full briefing and argument.
-
MAR 3, 2026PROCEDURALDOJ reverses course and withdraws dismissal motionA day after moving to dismiss, the Department of Justice asked to withdraw that motion and stated it intended to continue pursuing the appeals, with no explanation given for the reversal.
-
MAR 2, 2026PROCEDURALDOJ moves to voluntarily dismiss its own appealsThe Justice Department told the D.C. Circuit it would drop its defense of the executive orders and abandon its appeals of the four district court injunctions.
-
JUN 27, 2025JUDGMENTCourt rules Susman Godfrey order unconstitutionalThe district court found the executive order punishing Susman Godfrey unconstitutional and entered a permanent injunction.
-
MAY 27, 2025JUDGMENTJudge Leon permanently enjoins WilmerHale orderJudge Leon struck down the executive order targeting WilmerHale, calling parts of the government’s justification “absurd.”
-
MAY 23, 2025JUDGMENTJudge Bates permanently enjoins Jenner & Block orderJudge Bates granted summary judgment for Jenner & Block, holding the executive order was unconstitutional retaliation and viewpoint discrimination.
-
MAY 2, 2025JUDGMENTJudge Howell permanently enjoins Perkins Coie orderIn a 102-page opinion, Judge Howell ruled the order violated the First, Fifth and Sixth Amendments and permanently blocked its enforcement.
-
APR 15, 2025PROCEDURALJudge blocks executive order against Susman GodfreyA federal judge issued a restraining order halting enforcement of the executive order targeting Susman Godfrey.
-
MAR 31, 2025PROCEDURALJudges Bates and Leon each grant a TROJudge John D. Bates granted a temporary restraining order in the Jenner & Block case and Judge Richard J. Leon granted one in the WilmerHale case.
-
MAR 28, 2025FILINGJenner & Block and WilmerHale file suitBoth firms sued the same day, each asking the court to declare its executive order unconstitutional and to enjoin enforcement.
-
MAR 27, 2025OTHERTrump signs executive order targeting WilmerHaleA similar order targeted WilmerHale over its past employment of former Special Counsel Robert Mueller.
-
MAR 25, 2025OTHERTrump signs executive order targeting Jenner & BlockExecutive Order 14246 singled out Jenner & Block over its ties to former partner Andrew Weissmann, a member of the Mueller investigation team.
-
MAR 12, 2025PROCEDURALJudge Howell grants partial temporary restraining orderJudge Beryl Howell temporarily blocked major parts of the executive order pending further proceedings.
-
MAR 11, 2025FILINGPerkins Coie sues DOJ over executive orderPerkins Coie filed suit in the D.D.C. and sought a temporary restraining order, calling the order “an affront to the Constitution and our adversarial system of justice.”
-
MAR 6, 2025OTHERTrump signs executive order targeting Perkins CoieExecutive Order 14230, “Addressing Risks from Perkins Coie LLP,” directed suspension of security clearances, termination of federal contracts, and building-access restrictions tied to the firm’s work for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign.