August 25, 2025


Trump Continues Battle Against Biglaw Firms Despite Multiple Court Defeats

In a relentless pursuit to uphold his controversial executive orders targeting several prominent law firms, Donald Trump has once again taken to the courts, appealing a series of losses that declared his actions unconstitutional. This latest legal maneuver targets the firm Susman Godfrey, following previous appeals involving Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, and WilmerHale.

These executive orders, which have been uniformly struck down by district court judges across the political spectrum, were criticized for violating constitutional principles and undermining the public's right to legal representation without fear of government interference. The administration's persistence in defending these orders has sparked significant controversy and legal debate.

A spokesperson for Susman Godfrey responded forcefully to the appeal, affirming the firm’s commitment to the rule of law and its intention to vigorously oppose what it views as an unwarranted challenge by the administration. "The courts have spoken clearly and decisively: the administration’s executive orders targeting law firms violate the Constitution and undermine Americans’ right to choose a lawyer without fear," stated the spokesperson.

However, the path to a final resolution remains uncertain. The Supreme Court’s recent tendencies suggest a willingness to depart from established legal norms, potentially favoring Trump’s position as the cases ascend through the judicial hierarchy. This judicial unpredictability adds another layer of complexity to what many legal experts believe should be a straightforward rejection of the executive orders based on constitutional grounds.

As these cases potentially make their way to the Supreme Court, all eyes will be on the justices, whose decisions could have far-reaching implications for the separation of powers and the independence of the legal profession in the United States. The legal community and observers nationwide await with bated breath, hoping the Court upholds foundational legal principles over partisan interests.