A federal judge has blocked most of former President Donald Trump’s controversial executive order aimed at the law firm Susman Godfrey, calling it a misuse of presidential power and warning that many law firms are giving in to political pressure.
On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan issued a temporary restraining order that stops key parts of Trump’s directive. The order had threatened to cancel federal contracts with the firm’s clients and restrict access by its attorneys to government buildings and officials.
“The government is purely trying to control what private lawyers may do, which I do not think will withstand constitutional scrutiny,” Judge AliKhan said during the hearing.
Susman Godfrey had filed a lawsuit last week, arguing that Trump’s executive order violated constitutional rights, including freedom of speech and due process.
The judge also expressed concern that other firms have been making quiet deals with the government out of fear. “Law firms across the country are entering into agreements with the government out of fear that they will be targeted next,” she said. “This is coercion.”
Trump began targeting certain law firms in February, accusing them of using the legal system to oppose him and his political goals. Susman Godfrey represents Dominion Voting Systems in lawsuits involving false claims that the 2020 election was stolen from Trump. Trump lost the election to Democrat Joe Biden.
In response to Susman Godfrey’s work, Trump issued an executive order that the judge described as a personal attack. “The executive order is based on a personal vendetta against a particular firm,” AliKhan said. “I think the framers of our Constitution would view it as a shocking abuse of power.”
The White House has not responded directly to the ruling. However, a spokesperson said, “American taxpayers should not fund lucrative contracts with law firms whose actions harm national interests.”
Since Trump began targeting legal groups, nine major firms — including Paul Weiss, Skadden Arps, and Simpson Thacher — have reached deals with the administration. These deals often include pledges of free legal work for Trump’s causes and hiring practices based solely on “merit.”
AliKhan warned that these agreements may not offer long-term protection. “There’s nothing stopping the government from returning to target them in the future,” she said.
Susman Godfrey isn’t the only firm fighting back. Other firms like Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, and Jenner & Block have had Trump’s actions against them blocked in court. Judges have said these lawsuits are likely to succeed.
More than 800 law firms have signed court briefs supporting the challenges, saying Trump’s orders are intended to scare others into silence. Former U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, now representing Susman Godfrey, told the court that Trump’s actions were “one of the most brazen unconstitutional exercises of executive power in the history of this nation.”
Verrilli said many firms accepted the government’s demands simply to survive. “That shows just how dangerous these executive orders are and why they must be stopped,” he said.
At Tuesday’s hearing, Justice Department lawyer Richard Lawson argued that the executive order was only the start of a process. He urged the judge not to act so quickly before agencies had developed full guidance.
“This is not a fine. This is not jail time,” Lawson said in defense of the order.
The legal battle is not over. But Judge AliKhan’s ruling has put a temporary stop to what she sees as a dangerous and unconstitutional move by a former president. And for now, it sends a strong message: the courts remain a place where power must answer to the law.
Related topics: