By David Thomas
(Reuters) -A U.S. judge in Washington on Friday overturned President Donald Trump’s executive order targeting law firm Jenner & Block, dealing another setback to his administration’s crackdown on prominent firms that represented Trump’s political adversaries or employed lawyers who investigated him in the past.
Trump’s order had suspended security clearances for Jenner’s lawyers and restricted their access to government buildings, officials and federal contracting work.
U.S. District Judge John Bates, an appointee of Republican President George W. Bush, ruled that the directive violated core rights under the U.S. Constitution, mirroring a May 2 ruling that struck down a similar executive order against law firm Perkins Coie.
Trump’s order, Bates wrote, “makes no bones about why it chose its target: it picked Jenner because of the causes Jenner champions, the clients Jenner represents, and a lawyer Jenner once employed.””Going after law firms in this way is doubly violative of the Constitution,” the judge said, finding it infringed Jenner’s rights to free speech and sought to “chill legal representation the administration doesn’t like, thereby insulating the Executive Branch from the judicial check fundamental to the separation of powers.”
White House spokesperson Harrison Fields said in a statement that granting security clearances is “a sensitive judgment call entrusted to the president.” Fields in a separate statement criticized Jenner for representing Harvard University in a lawsuit filed Friday challenging the administration’s decision to revoke the school’s ability to enroll foreign students.
“Jenner & Block’s persistent efforts to undermine the administration, promote antisemitism and radicalism, and represent un-American interests further validate the president’s decision to sever ties with them from the federal government,” Fields said.
Jenner & Block in a statement said it was “pleased with the court’s decision to decisively strike down an unconstitutional attack on our clients’ right to have zealous, independent counsel and our firm’s right to represent our clients fully and without compromise.”
Trump’s order against Jenner accused the firm of engaging in what it described as partisan “lawfare” and taking on cases that undermined U.S. interests.
It referred to the firm’s past employment of Andrew Weissmann, a top federal prosecutor involved in former U.S. Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation that detailed Russian contacts with Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. Trump has called the Russia investigation a “hoax” and a “witch hunt.”
The order also attacked Jenner’s internal diversity policies and its work providing free legal services on matters including transgender rights and protections for immigrants.
Two other firms – WilmerHale and Susman Godfrey – have sued the administration to permanently overturn executive orders he issued against them. Judges are expected to rule soon in those cases, after issuing decisions temporarily blocking Trump’s orders.
Nine law firms, including Paul Weiss, Milbank, Simpson Thacher and Skadden Arps, have pledged nearly $1 billion in free legal services to causes the White House supports and made other concessions to avoid being targeted by Trump.
The Justice Department has defended Trump’s executive orders against Jenner and other law firms as consistent with the broad reach of presidential authority. It can appeal Bates’ order to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
(Reporting by David Thomas in Chicago and Mike Scarcella in Washington; Editing by David Bario, Cynthia Osterman and Alistair Bell)
