A U.S. federal judge has ruled that President Donald Trump’s attempt to punish a major law firm, Jenner & Block, was unconstitutional. The judge, who issued a detailed 52-page decision, said President’s actions went too far and tried to hurt the firm for doing its job defending people and causes the president didn’t like.
The decision came after Trump had signed an executive order trying to take away the firm’s government contracts, block its employees from entering federal buildings, and even cancel their security clearances. The order accused the law firm of going against the “highest ideals” of the legal profession. It also criticized the firm for once employing a lawyer who had investigated Trump during his time as president.
The judge firmly disagreed with Trump’s move, saying it was clear that the law firm was being punished for representing clients and causes the president found politically uncomfortable. He said this kind of retaliation could hurt the legal system and make it harder for lawyers to do their job without fear.
Why It Matters
This is not the first time a judge has rejected Trump’s actions against law firms. Another firm, Perkins Coie, had already won a similar case earlier this month. Jenner & Block, along with three other firms, had sued President in federal court after being targeted with heavy penalties. Judges in all four cases temporarily blocked Trump’s orders while they reviewed them, and now at least two have been permanently struck down.
In this case, the judge said that Trump’s order could seriously damage Jenner & Block by hurting its business and reputation. Taking away their government contracts and access to federal spaces could push clients away and make lawyers quit. Also, suspending employee security clearances without any real national security reason was called out as particularly harmful.
Mexican Cartel Commanders Labeled Terrorists: U.S. Slaps Heavy Sanctions on CDN’s Top Enforcers
Trump’s team argued that the president has the right to control who gets security clearances and that the courts shouldn’t interfere. But the judge said the way Trump went about it—targeting a specific law firm because of the clients it helped—was not just about clearances. It was about punishing people for standing up for the law.
Many in the legal field, including law professors, lawyers, and other firms, supported Jenner & Block and the other firms that challenged Trump. They said lawyers must be free to represent anyone, even if the case is unpopular or controversial. They also worried that if the government could punish firms this way, it would scare lawyers away from defending people against powerful figures.
Reactions and Impact
Jenner & Block celebrated the ruling, saying it was a win for the right of lawyers to represent their clients without interference. They called the court’s decision a strong defense of the rule of law and of legal independence.
Meanwhile, inside other firms that agreed to Trump’s deals rather than fight back in court, some lawyers have quit. They said they couldn’t support their firms making arrangements with someone who was using power to pressure the legal system.
Those firms that struck deals with Trump said they had no choice. Some claimed they were trying to keep their businesses alive and that the agreements wouldn’t change how they worked or who they chose to help. But Trump, in his own comments, suggested otherwise saying that the firms were doing pro bono work for causes he supports, and even mentioning how they might be used for work on things like trade negotiations.
One firm, Paul Weiss, was the first to make a deal with Trump. But even there, the pressure took a toll. On the same day the court ruling was made public, four of the firm’s partners announced they were quitting.
Trump’s crackdown on law firms had sent shockwaves through the legal profession. Big, well-known firms tried to avoid being targeted, and some even offered nearly $1 billion in free legal services as part of deals with the Trump administration. But critics say those deals were made out of fear, not choice.
Despite Trump’s claims that his orders weren’t meant to punish anyone, the judges have been clear in their rulings: the sanctions were retaliatory and broke the rules of fairness and freedom. And that’s why they have now been thrown out.
