Two federal judges issued temporary blocks on Friday against President Trump’s executive orders targeting the prominent law firms Jenner & Block and WilmerHale, dealing a blow to the administration’s ongoing efforts to penalize legal entities seen as aligned with political opponents.
The orders come amid a broader push by Trump’s team to crack down on law firms perceived to have ties to his critics, including individuals involved in past investigations into the former president. The executive actions sought to restrict such firms from obtaining federal contracts, entering government buildings, and retaining security clearances for their attorneys.
One of the rulings came from Judge John D. Bates, a George W. Bush appointee, who temporarily blocked most of the March 25 executive order that targeted Jenner & Block, a firm that once employed Andrew Weissmann, a former federal prosecutor and a key figure in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team.
Bates’s ruling specifically halts enforcement of Sections 3 and 5, as well as relevant language in Section 1 of the executive order. In his opinion, he expressed deep concern about the administration’s approach, calling it “disturbing” and “troubling” especially its attempt to punish the law firm for engaging in pro bono legal work, which is offered free of charge to individuals who cannot afford legal representation.
The judge ordered Attorney General Pam Bondi and OMB Director Russell Vought to issue immediate guidance to all federal agencies to suspend and rescind any enforcement or implementation of the targeted sections of the order. The ruling temporarily halts the administration’s attempt to weaponize access to federal services against firms involved in legal work that has run afoul of Trump’s political agenda.
Bates also mandated that the Department of Justice file a status report by noon on Monday, detailing what steps have been taken to comply with the court’s decision.
Legal analysts say the ruling is a clear rebuke of the Trump administration’s increasingly aggressive use of executive authority to punish perceived enemies and critics, particularly within the legal system. Critics argue that targeting law firms based on past employees or pro bono cases undermines the independence of the legal profession and opens the door to politically motivated blacklists.
The case is far from over, but the initial injunction signals that federal courts may not be willing to stand by as the administration pushes into uncharted legal territory. For now, Jenner & Block and WilmerHale are shielded from enforcement of the executive orders but the litigation ahead could have sweeping implications for the relationship between the presidency and private legal institutions.