A new report by The New York Times reveals that although courts have blocked several of President Trump’s executive orders targeting law firms, the administration may still be achieving its broader goals. Four prominent firms—Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, WilmerHale, and Susman Godfrey—fought back and won in court. But nine other firms, facing pressure and threats from the administration, settled and pledged nearly $1 billion in pro bono work for causes favored by Trump.
Legal experts argue this was the administration’s goal all along: to intimidate and chill dissent, not to win in court. Despite losing all cases, Trump’s team hasn’t appealed—suggesting these lawsuits were strategic moves to discourage firms from representing clients or causes disfavored by the administration. Some deals were so informal they were allegedly based on Trump’s social media posts.
Legal scholars are calling on firms that settled to reject these coerced agreements and reassert their independence in selecting clients. The controversy raises serious concerns about government overreach and the independence of the legal profession.