In a rebuke echoing from the bench in Washington, a federal judge has dismantled a Trump-era executive order that sought to punish law firm WilmerHale for its past ties to former special counsel Robert Mueller. The order, part of a broader campaign targeting firms connected to perceived political foes, was found to trample on the U.S. Constitution.
The ruling came from U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, a Republican-appointed judge who didn’t mince words in his 73-page opinion. He declared the order “a staggering punishment for the firm’s protected speech” and struck it down entirely. Leon wrote that upholding the directive would betray the intent of the Constitution’s architects.
The executive order had attempted to revoke security clearances, bar WilmerHale attorneys from federal buildings, and cut off clients from government contracts. The firm—whose hiring of Mueller years ago still bristles Trump—called the order a “flagrant” violation of free speech, due process, and equal protection. Represented by conservative heavyweight Paul Clement, WilmerHale argued that its ability to advocate for clients was being unjustly weaponized.
The White House, through spokesman Harrison Fields, defended the order as within presidential power, arguing that clearance decisions sit firmly outside judicial review.
But Judge Leon wasn’t swayed. He enjoined federal agencies from enforcing the March 27 directive, shielding WilmerHale and its 1,200 lawyers across the country.
This is the third federal court to reject Trump’s attempts to sideline firms linked to his political narrative. Earlier this month, judges overturned similar executive orders against Perkins Coie and Jenner & Block. A fourth lawsuit from Susman Godfrey remains pending.
Trump has painted the legal profession as complicit in a campaign against him, accusing certain firms of “weaponizing” justice. But his crackdown didn’t spare even powerhouse firms. Nine others—including Paul Weiss and Skadden Arps—sidestepped punitive orders by agreeing to provide nearly $1 billion in free legal services for causes Trump favors. Critics within the legal community say those deals represent surrender to pressure, not principle.
Whether the Justice Department will appeal Judge Leon’s ruling to the D.C. Circuit remains to be seen. For now, however, the judiciary has sent a clear message: retaliation against protected expression won’t stand, even if it comes cloaked in executive authority.
