A high-stakes courtroom battle unfolded in Washington as law firm Jenner & Block urged a federal judge to permanently dismantle an executive order issued by former President Donald Trump — one that the firm claims unfairly punishes them for past affiliations and advocacy work.
At the center of the clash is a March directive targeting Jenner for its ties to Andrew Weissmann, a former federal prosecutor who played a key role in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference during the 2016 election. Trump, who has repeatedly slammed the investigation as a “witch hunt,” accused Jenner and several other firms of “weaponizing” the legal system against him and his allies.
During a tense two-hour hearing, U.S. District Judge John Bates — a Republican appointee — grappled with the breadth and constitutionality of Trump’s executive action. He openly questioned the administration’s rationale, noting, “Everything in this executive order is intended to provide a burden on Jenner.”
Representing the firm, attorney Michael Attanasio didn’t mince words, describing Trump’s order as one that “reeks of unconstitutionality.” He warned the judge that the situation has worsened, with nine powerful law firms making undisclosed compromises with the administration to avoid similar targeting.
Trump’s order not only sought to bar Jenner lawyers from federal buildings and officials but also threatened to cancel government contracts held by the firm’s clients. The move also criticized Jenner’s pro bono efforts supporting transgender rights and immigrant protections — causes that the administration often attacked during Trump’s term.
Jenner’s lawsuit argues that the executive action violates First Amendment rights to free speech and the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of due process. Three other firms — Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, and Susman Godfrey — have launched similar challenges, resulting in judges temporarily blocking major parts of the contested orders.
Meanwhile, nine other firms, including industry heavyweights like Paul Weiss, Milbank, and Skadden Arps, have pledged nearly $1 billion in pro bono services to causes endorsed by Trump’s White House, allegedly to sidestep administrative retribution.
As the legal battles mount, Jenner remains one of over a dozen law firms actively suing the former administration over efforts to curtail transgender protections and freeze federal funding at numerous agencies.
Judge Bates did not immediately rule, leaving the future of the controversial executive order — and the broader fight over presidential overreach — hanging in the balance.
