While some firms caved to Trump’s demands, a handful were vindicated with quick legal victories.

Truthout is a vital news source and a living history of political struggle. If you think our work is valuable, support us with a donation of any size.

Congressman Jamie Raskin said the US Department of Justice’s decision Monday to abandon its legal cases against law firms that refused to capitulate to President Donald Trump should serve as “a reminder that those who fight back against authoritarianism are winning.”

The DOJ asked the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to dismiss its cases against law firms including Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, Susman Godfrey, and Jenner & Block, which won legal challenges they filed last year after Trump issued executive orders saying they should lose government contracts and their employees should be blocked from government buildings.

Those executive orders were signed because the firms represented and employed high-profile Democrats and other opponents of Trump.

Other law firms, including Skadden Arps and Paul Weiss, angered lawyers within their ranks and the larger legal community when they signed deals with Trump; the latter firm agreed to end its internal diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives and provide $40 million in free legal work for the president and causes he supports.

The Trump administration’s decision on Monday proved, said Raskin (D-Md.), that “there’s no safety in appeasement.”

“When the Trump administration tried to bully and silence law firms by banning them from federal buildings, courthouses and contracts, a handful — like Susman Godfrey, Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, and WilmerHale — fought back,” said Raskin. “Today, those firms forced Trump to back down and abandon his blatantly unconstitutional effort to punish lawyers, clients, and causes because Trump disagrees with their speech. Meanwhile, the firms that chose to roll over saddled their associates and partners with doing billions of dollars-worth of free legal work for Trump, his twisted administration and his MAGA allies.”

While other firms caved to Trump’s demands last year, the companies that didn’t quickly won legal victories, with one federal judge saying the executive order targeting Jenner & Block was “doubly violative of the Constitution” because it targeted the clients it represents as well as a lawyer it once employed — Andrew Weissman, who was part of former special counsel Robert Mueller’s team that investigated Trump.

“This order, like the others, seeks to chill legal representation the administration doesn’t like, thereby insulating the executive branch from the judicial check fundamental to the separation of powers,” US District Judge John Bates wrote last May. “It thus violates the Constitution and the court will enjoin its operation in full.”