Latest news with #SusmanGodfrey
2 hours ago
- Business
Judge rejects another Trump executive order targeting the legal community
WASHINGTON -- A federal judge on Friday struck down another of President Donald Trump's executive orders targeting law firms. U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan ruled that the order against the firm of Susman Godfrey was unconstitutional and must be permanently blocked. The order was the latest ruling to reject Trump's efforts to punish law firms for legal work he does not like and for employing attorneys he perceives as his adversaries. Susman Godfrey suggested that it had drawn Trump's ire at least in part because it represented Dominion Voting Systems in the voting machine company's defamation lawsuit against Fox News over false claims surrounding the 2020 presidential election. The suit ended in a massive settlement. Other judges in recent weeks have blocked similar orders against the firms of Jenner & Block, Perkins Coie and WilmerHale. The orders have sought to impose similar sanctions, including the suspension of security clearances of attorneys and the restriction of access to federal buildings. 'The order was one in a series attacking firms that had taken positions with which President Trump disagreed. In the ensuing months, every court to have considered a challenge to one of these orders has found grave constitutional violations and permanently enjoined enforcement of the order in full," AliKhan wrote. 'Today, this court follows suit, concluding that the order targeting Susman violates the U.S. Constitution and must be permanently enjoined.' In a statement, the firm called the ruling 'a resounding victory for the rule of law and the right of every American to be represented by legal counsel without fear of retaliation.' 'We applaud the Court for declaring the administration's order unconstitutional. Our firm is committed to the rule of law and to protecting the rights of our clients without regard to their political or other beliefs. Susman Godfrey's lawyers and staff live these values every day,' the statement said. Other major firms have sought to avert orders by preemptively reaching settlements that require them, among other things, to collectively dedicate hundreds of millions of dollars in free legal services in support of causes the Trump administration says it supports.
Business Insider
3 hours ago
- Business
- Business Insider
Trump's Big Law executive orders go 0-4 after judge slaps down order against Susman Godfrey
President Donald Trump faced another legal loss on Friday after a District Court judge slapped down his executive order against the Big Law firm Susman Godfrey. In her ruling, Judge Loren AliKhan wrote that the order against Susman Godfrey "was one in a series attacking firms that had taken positions with which President Trump disagreed." "In the ensuing months, every court to have considered a challenge to one of these orders has found grave constitutional violations and permanently enjoined enforcement of the order in full," AliKhan wrote. "Today, this court follows suit, concluding that the order targeting Susman violates the US Constitution and must be permanently enjoined." Three other federal judges have already found similar executive orders against Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, and WilmerHale unconstitutional. AliKhan's ruling in the Susman Godfrey case marks a 0-4 record for the Trump administration in legal challenges regarding his executive orders targeting Big Law firms. Susman Godfrey said in a statement that the court's ruling "is a resounding victory for the rule of law and the right of every American to be represented by legal counsel without fear of retaliation." "We applaud the Court for declaring the administration's order unconstitutional," the firm's statement continued. "Our firm is committed to the rule of law and to protecting the rights of our clients without regard to their political or other beliefs. Susman Godfrey's lawyers and staff live these values every day." Harrison Fields, principal White House deputy press secretary, told Business Insider in a statement that the White House opposes Judge AliKhan's ruling. "The decision to grant any individual access to this nation's secrets is a sensitive judgment call entrusted to the President," Fields said. "Weighing these factors and implementing such decisions are core executive powers, and reviewing the President's clearance decisions falls well outside the judiciary's authority." The federal government can appeal AliKhan's ruling, in which case the proceedings will be heard in the court of appeals. Any subsequent appeal would be heard by the Supreme Court. Fields did not immediately respond to Business Insider when asked if the government would appeal Judge AliKhan's decision. Judge AliKhan's ruling represents a major legal victory for the firms that have challenged the president's executive orders in court. While some other Big Law firms chose instead to strike deals with the administration to avoid or reverse punitive executive actions against them — drawing sharp criticism from industry insiders and a spate of resignations among associates and some partners — Business Insider previously reported that Susman Godfrey's decision to fight back in court took just two hours. In the original April 9 executive order against Susman Godfrey, the Trump administration accused the firm of "efforts to weaponize the American legal system and degrade the quality of American elections." Judge AliKahn had granted the firm a temporary restraining order on April 15, preventing enforcement of the order against Susman Godfrey pending further proceedings. In issuing her order granting the TRO, the judge said she believed "the framers of our constitution would see this as a shocking abuse of power," according to The American Lawyer. Susman Godfrey represented Dominion Voting Systems in its suit against Fox News after the 2020 election, which resulted in a $787.5 million settlement, and The New York Times in the publication's copyright suit against OpenAI and Microsoft, which has not yet reached a conclusion.
Mint
6 hours ago
- Business
- Mint
Fourth Trump Executive Order Against Law Firm Nullified by Judge
A DC federal judge has struck down President Donald Trump's executive order targeting Houston-founded law firm Susman Godfrey, marking the fourth takedown of an executive order targeting a law firm. US District Court Judge Loren AliKhan said Friday the order targeting Susman violates the U.S. Constitution and must be permanently enjoined. Judge AliKhan reasoned that Susman has nearly 20 clients who are government contractors or are affiliated with entities who do business with the government. 'Whether the executive is operating as a sovereign, contractor, landlord, or employer, it must comply with the Constitution,' AliKhan wrote. 'And as Defendants' counsel conceded at argument, the mere fact that the government has the right to exercise discretion does not immunize retaliatory intent.' The judge also wrote 'The court concludes that the Order constitutes unlawful retaliation against Susman for activities that are protected by the First Amendment, including its representation of certain clients, its donations to certain causes, and its expression of its beliefs regarding diversity.' 'The court's ruling is a resounding victory for the rule of law and the right of every American to be represented by legal counsel without fear of retaliation ... We are also deeply appreciative of those who supported us in this lawsuit, including our superb legal team at Munger, Tolles & Olson and the thousands of lawyers, former judges, law professors, and law students who submitted amicus briefs,' Susman said in a statement. The firm sued the Trump administration in April, arguing that the order against the firm is vindictive, retaliatory, and violates the Constitution. Similar to the directives against Perkins Coie, WilmerHale and Jenner & Block, the Susman order instructed agency heads to strip lawyers' security clearances, restrict personnel from accessing federal buildings, and slash federal contracts held by the firm's clients. Susman represented Dominion Voting Systems Inc. in a blockbuster defamation lawsuit against Fox Corp. in which the media company agreed to pay a $787.5 million settlement. The firm is also pursuing a defamation case against Mike Lindell, a well-known Trump advocate and chief executive officer of MyPillow, on behalf of Dominion. Susman is represented by former US solicitor general Donald Verrilli of Munger Tolles & Olson. Nine top law firms, including Paul Weiss, Kirkland & Ellis, Willkie Farr, and Latham & Watkins, reached agreements to collectively provide $940 million in free legal services for President Donald Trump to avoid executive orders. Some of the firms also resolved Equal Employment Opportunity Commission inquiries into their diversity programs. The case is Susman Godfrey v. Executive Office of the President, D.D.C., 1:25-cv- 01107, 6/27/25 To contact the reporters on this story: Tatyana Monnay at tmonnay@ and Justin Henry at jhenry@ To contact the editors responsible for this story: Chris Opfer at copfer@ John Hughes at jhughes@ Alessandra Rafferty at arafferty@ This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
New York Times
6 hours ago
- Politics
- New York Times
Judge Strikes Down Trump Order Targeting Another Top Law Firm
A federal judge in Washington ruled on Friday that an executive order President Trump signed imposing penalties against the law firm Susman Godfrey was unconstitutional, permanently barring the government from enforcing its terms. The decision by Judge Loren L. AliKhan of the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia effectively ended, at least for now, the president's campaign to subjugate several of the nation's top law firms. It also completed a perfect record among those firms that risked fighting the administration in court, notching four decisive rulings from four separate judges, none of which the Trump administration has, so far, tried to appeal. Like three of her colleagues in Washington, Judge AliKhan found that the Trump administration had tried to crush a law firm that had represented groups opposing Mr. Trump. 'The order was one in a series attacking firms that had taken positions with which President Trump disagreed,' she wrote. 'In the ensuing months, every court to have considered a challenge to one of these orders has found grave constitutional violations and permanently enjoined enforcement of the order in full.' Two of the judges who ruled against the Trump administration were nominated by George W. Bush, and the other two by Barack Obama and Joseph R. Biden Jr. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Bloomberg
6 hours ago
- Business
- Bloomberg
Fourth Trump Executive Order Against Law Firm Nullified by Judge
A DC federal judge has struck down President Donald Trump's executive order targeting Houston-founded law firm Susman Godfrey, marking the fourth takedown of an executive order targeting a law firm. US District Court Judge Loren AliKhan said Friday the order targeting Susman violates the U.S. Constitution and must be permanently enjoined.
