Trump loses third Big Law battle as court strikes down WilmerHale order

Donald Trump has suffered a third defeat over his executive orders targeting major law firms, after a US judge struck down his executive order targeting WilmerHale on Tuesday (27 May), ruling it unconstitutional.

The 27 March order had barred the firm’s lawyers from federal buildings, revoked their security clearances, and instructed agencies to terminate government contracts - measures the court found to be retaliatory and unlawful.

The judge said  the order was invalid on multiple constitutional grounds. "Taken together, the provisions constitute a staggering punishment for the firm’s protected speech", he wrote in a summary judgment, adding that the order’s real goal was to "drive clients away from WilmerHale."

Another legal blow to Trump's firm-by-firm crackdown

The decision marks the third legal defeat for the Trump administration over its executive orders targeting law firms. Courts have already ruled in favour of Perkins Coie and Jenner & Block, with similar orders declared unconstitutional earlier in May.

While Trump has tried to justify the orders on national security grounds, judges have framed them as politically motivated efforts to punish firms involved in investigations or litigation related to the former president.

Tuesday's judge was particularly blunt. In a 73-page opinion using 27 exclamation marks, he compared the executive order to a bowl of "gumbo" (that's a popular type of stew for all our non-US readers) giving the court "heartburn".

Susman Godfrey’s challenge - the last of the four lawsuits filed against the orders - has not yet been heard although a temporary injunction against the order was granted in April.