There are at least two baseball metaphors to apply to President Trump's failed attempts to punish law firms for representing clients and causes that displease him. The two that come immediately to mind are "three strikes and you're out;" and three outs end an inning. The point is, the President is 0 for 3 in the United States Courts. I seem to recall a campaign promise from him about "getting tired of winning." Did I miss something?
President Trump's most recent whiff comes in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, where Judge Richard J. Leon (a George W. Bush appointee) struck down an Executive Order the administration had issued against the WilmerHale law firm. The WilmerHale Executive Order shared the attributes of other Orders issued by President Trump. As the Court noted, "[i]n addition to vilifying the firm in § 1, it suspends WilmerHale employees' security clearances, with a looming threat of full revocation of those clearances, . . .; coerces the firm's federal contractor clients to end their engagements with the firm or face cancellation of their contracts, . . .; targets the firm for investigation into supposed racial discrimination, . . .; threatens to bar its employees from entering federal buildings or engaging with federal employees, . . . and prohibits agencies from hiring firm employees absent a waiver from the relevant agency heads."
Judge Leon also explained the impact the executive order would have on WilmerHale's business: "[a]ny one of those sanctions would cause clients to strongly reconsider their engagements with WilmerHale. Taken together, the provisions constitute a staggering punishment for the firm's protected speech! The Order is intended to, and does in fact, impede the firm's ability to effectively represent its clients! For example, WilmerHale attorneys may not be able to enter federal courthouses for trial, meet with federal regulators, or access classified materials necessary for working on national security matters. . . . The Order also pressures the firm's federal contractor clients to either end their relationships with WilmerHale or face possible cancellation of their contracts." The Court explained the impact in real world terms: "[t]his, in turn, has severe economic consequences for the firm. . . . The ability to effectively serve clients is the heart of the firm's business model. . . . Clients have already begun ending or curtailing their relationships with WilmerHale. . . . The impact of losing federal contractor clients would be staggering, as '[a]t least 21 of WilmerHale's 25 largest clients in 2024 have contracts with federal agencies. These 21 clients accounted for more than 30% of the Firm's revenue in 2024—nearly $500 million.'"
Once Judge Leon turned to the law, the analysis wasn't complicated. He noted that the First Amendment prohibits government retaliation for protected speech. And he found conclusively that the Executive Order constituted retaliation for WilmerHale's protected speech. The Court's ruling also ruled that the Executive Order "targets the firm for its disfavored viewpoints and punishes it for expressing those viewpoints. . . . The Court finds that WilmerHale has both alleged and shown this First Amendment violation."
Based on these findings, the Court awarded summary judgment in favor of WilmerHale, and enjoined enforcement of the Executive Order. This ruling follows the lead of Courts that have issued summary judgments in favor of Perkins, Coie and Jenner & Block. The Susman & Godfrey law firm has a summary judgment motion pending in the DC Federal Court. The smart money says President Trump is about to go 0 for four. That's a sweep, if we want to stick with the baseball metaphors. And it's a lopsided victory for democracy.
