Trump’s assault on law firms for the crime of representing people Trump doesn’t like is getting pushback in the courts.
Trumps war on America has many sides to it. He’s gone after, among other things, journalists, non-profit organizations, internet users, political opponents, ordinary US citizens, judges, and the overall American economy. The end-goal is pretty obvious, Trump wants all of America to bow down to him in his quest to be king and these autocratic moves are merely steps to make this all happen.
One of the targets in Trump’s overall war on America is, of course, law firms. This is because some law firms had the audacity to represent clients the administration doesn’t personally like. As a result, Trump is using the powers of the executive branch (sometimes, to the point that he’s exercising powers that don’t actually exist) to crack down on any law firm that won’t serve has his own personal legal attack dog. One of the ways in which Trump has been trying to coerce law firms to do his bidding is to reject their access to the court buildings unless they comply with Trump’s demands via executive order.
Now, the overall expectation is that law firms would burst out laughing and challenge this slam dunk case. After all, such demands are blatantly unlawful and law firms have the right to represent clients they choose to take on. I mean, free society and all that jazz. Yet, for some law firms, they were more interested in cowardly surrendering to the wannabe dictator rather than stand up for basic fundamental rights. That’s what made the surrender of Paul Weiss (Paul Wuss?) so shocking and enraging. To be fair, Paul Weiss isn’t the only one that surrendered to the forming dictatorship, but they were one of those law firms that did.
One law firm that didn’t bow down to America’s “dear leader” was Perkins Coie. They, along with 500 law firms, fought back in a fight that was an obvious attempt to roll back basic fundamental rights and freedoms. One of the ideas was that if you choose to pick a fight with one law firm, you pick a fight with all law firms.
In a development that appears to be a rare positive news story, it seems that the judges deciding these cases are siding with the law firms. From the EFF:
“Pernicious.”
“Unprecedented… cringe-worthy.”
“Egregious.”
“Shocking.”
These are just some of the words that federal judges used in recent weeks to describe President Trump’s politically motivated and vindictive executive orders targeting law firms that have employed people or represented clients or causes he doesn’t like.
But our favorite word by far is “unconstitutional.”
EFF was one of the very first legal organizations to publicly come out in support of Perkins Coie when it became the first law firm to challenge the legality of President Trump’s executive order targeting it. Since then, EFF has joined four amicus briefs in support of targeted law firms, and in all four cases, judges from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia have indicated they’re having none of it. Three have issued permanent injunctions deeming the executive orders null and void, and the fourth seems to be headed in that same direction.
As we wrote when we began filing amicus briefs in these cases, an independent legal profession is a cornerstone of democracy and the rule of law. As a nonprofit legal organization that frequently sues the federal government, EFF understands the value of this bedrock principle and how it–and First Amendment rights more broadly–are threatened by President Trump’s executive orders. It is especially important that the whole legal profession speak out against these actions, particularly in light of the silence or capitulation of a few large law firms.
We’re glad the courts agree.
This is great news because, at least on this front for now, the rule of law is winning here.
One thing worth noting in all of this is the fact that the Canadian Bar Association also threw their support behind Perkins Coie. In an article nicely entitled “In the face of rising autocracy, be a Perkins Coie, not a Paul Weiss“, the organization said that they are supporting the Trump challenge:
We are witnessing a “second American revolution” that Project 2025 architects said would be “bloodless if the Left allows it to be.”
The Trump administration is rapidly dismantling democratic institutions, seizing control of independent agencies, erasing history, attacking civil liberties and DEI, and deporting refugees for their tattoos. President Donald Trump has appointed retribution-driven sycophants to head the Department of Justice and FBI, called the media “illegal,” openly defied the Constitution by threatening to defund Columbia University, disobeyed court orders and usurped Congress, plunging the United States into a constitutional crisis.
Trump promised he’d be a dictator for a day. It’s been a very long day indeed. Through executive orders, he’s now attacking lawyers and American law firms he deems to be engaging in “frivolous, unreasonable, and vexatious litigation against the United States.” These orders target Perkins Coie, Paul Weiss, and Big Law generally. Their responses show lawyers can either resist or capitulate in the face of rising autocracy.
Canadian lawyers must stand in solidarity with our American counterparts who uphold the rule of law. We must resist any attempts to intimidate or co-opt us when Trump’s actions inevitably reach across the border.
The administration’s actions bear the hallmarks of rising autocracy, but Trump’s attacks on lawyers should come as no surprise. Lawyers are guardians of the rule of law, critical guardrails against abuses of power, and thorns in the side of tyrants. However, they can also be handmaidens to autocracy when they remain silent or collaborate. After all, lawyers drafted and upheld the laws that enabled the Holocaust, Jim Crow segregation, and the forced assimilation of Indigenous peoples.
While this battle may not be over, it is, nevertheless, hugely important. As the tide of tyranny grows in the US, it is important that there is resistance. The more the dictatorship is fought, the better the chances democracy survives. As Perkins Coie so nicely demonstrates, it is worth it to fight against the dictatorship rather than to just capitulate and cower in the face of it.
