DOJ Drops Bid to Revive Executive Orders Targeting Law Firms

By Aldgra Fredly
Aldgra Fredly
Aldgra Fredly
Aldgra Fredly is a freelance writer covering U.S. and Asia Pacific news for The Epoch Times.
March 3, 2026Updated: March 3, 2026

The Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a motion on March 2 seeking to drop its appeals of lower court decisions that struck down President Donald Trump’s executive orders sanctioning four law firms.

In its motion to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, the DOJ said it decided to “voluntarily dismiss” its appeals of rulings that sided with law firms Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, Susman Godfrey, and Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr (WilmerHale).

The DOJ did not provide any explanation for the decision in its filing.

Trump issued the orders in March 2025. They stated that the firms abused their pro bono practice “to engage in activities that undermine justice and the interests of the United States,” citing alleged “partisan representations” and other factors.

The orders directed all executive departments and agencies to suspend security clearances of individuals at the law firms while those clearances were being reviewed to see whether they aligned with the national interest, terminate any contracts with the law firms, and limit their employees’ access to government buildings.

The four law firms filed lawsuits challenging Trump’s orders, arguing that the orders were unconstitutional and violated their First Amendment rights. Federal judges handling the cases subsequently ruled in favor of the firms and struck down the orders last year.

The Trump administration reached deals with nine other law firms targeted by Trump’s orders, which agreed to provide pro bono legal services to the White House and to uphold “fairness in the justice system.”

In response to the DOJ’s latest filing, Jenner & Block said the decision “makes permanent the rulings” of four federal judges who found the president’s executive orders were unconstitutional.

“Our partnership is proud to have stood firm on behalf of its clients, and we look forward to continuing to serve them—guided by these bedrock values—for many decades to come,” the firm said in a March 2 statement.

Susman Godfrey said the filing indicates the government is no longer trying to defend what the firm deemed an “indefensible executive order” by Trump.

“The Government has capitulated, which is a fitting end to its plainly unconstitutional attack on Susman Godfrey and the rule of law,” Susman Godfrey said in a statement. “And we won.”

Perkins Coie said the DOJ’s dismissal of its appeal “means the district court’s decision stands as a final order, protecting core constitutional freedoms such as free speech, due process, and the right to select counsel without fear of retribution.”

WilmerHale said in a statement that it was pleased with the government’s decision.

“As we said from the outset, our challenge to the unlawful Executive Order was about ⁠defending our clients’ constitutional right to retain the counsel of their choosing and defending the rule of law,” it said.

Reuters contributed to this report.