US Judge Strikes Down Trump-Era Executive Order Targeting Law Firm Jenner & Block

Washington, D.C. — May 24, 2025 – A U.S. federal judge on Thursday struck down a Trump-era executive order that barred prominent law firm Jenner & Block from receiving federal contracts, determining the directive violated constitutional protections and legal precedents governing due process.

The ruling, announced on May 23 by U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, deals a significant blow to efforts by former President Donald Trump’s administration to restrict certain law firms from government work over alleged partisan activity. Legal experts say the decision could have broad ramifications for the boundaries of executive power and the independence of private legal actors engaged with federal agencies.

Executive Order Against Jenner & Block Found Unlawful

In October 2020, the Trump administration issued an executive order that prohibited Jenner & Block—a highly regarded Chicago-based law firm—from securing federal contracts, citing the firm’s representation of controversial clients and involvement in cases challenging Trump administration policies.

Trump officials claimed the firm’s activities represented a “conflict of interest” and “undermined the administration’s objectives.” Jenner & Block, which frequently represents clients on matters of civil liberties, immigration, and government conduct, was specifically cited for its work on cases opposing Trump immigration executive orders and for representing whistleblowers.

The executive order caused immediate controversy in legal and political circles. Legal groups warned it was a dangerous precedent, essentially punishing firms for representing unpopular clients or engaging in litigation against the executive branch.

Judge Mehta: Order Violated Constitutional Safeguards

In his 42-page ruling, Judge Mehta found that the Trump executive order “constituted viewpoint discrimination and violated the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.” He explained, “The Constitution does not permit the government to deny individuals or entities the opportunity to contract for reasons that punish them for engaging in protected legal advocacy.”

Mehta emphasized that while the government retains significant discretion over its contracting processes, such power is not limitless. “There must be guardrails to ensure that the executive does not wield contracting authority as a tool to suppress legitimate legal representation or opposition,” he wrote in the opinion.

Jenner & Block’s attorneys welcomed the decision, calling it a “resounding affirmation of the legal profession’s independence.” Firm partner Susan Levenson said in a statement: “Today’s ruling sends a clear message that lawyers must be free to advocate and defend without fear of political retribution.”

Department of Justice Reviewing Ruling

The U.S. Department of Justice said it is still reviewing the decision and did not immediately indicate whether it plans to appeal. Legal observers note that the Biden administration had largely backed away from enforcing the executive order, but the case continued in the courts as Jenner & Block sought formal rescission and a permanent injunction.

A Justice Department spokesperson said, “We respect the court's opinion and are considering all legal options.”

White House officials did not return requests for comment.

Broader Implications for Law Firms and Federal Policy

The case has drawn attention from legal advocacy organizations and civil liberties groups, many of whom filed amicus briefs warning that weaponizing federal contracting rules to punish legal advocacy could chill crucial representation in politically sensitive cases.

“Lawyers play an essential role in our democracy by holding the government accountable,” said David Cole, national legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). “This decision preserves one of the bedrocks of our legal system: the right to ethical, independent counsel.”

Experts say the ruling could serve as precedent in future conflicts over the government’s ability to limit who may bid for federal contracts, particularly in politically contentious industries.

Jenner & Block Resumes Government Work

Jenner & Block has been unable to participate in federal contracts since the order was issued, according to court filings. The firm—known for civil rights, white-collar defense, and high-profile pro bono work—says it expects to immediately resume seeking government work following Judge Mehta’s ruling.

"Today’s outcome ensures that our lawyers and clients are protected from targeted political interference,” said firm chair Craig Martin.

Background: Legal Sector Pushback

The Trump executive order was roundly criticized by major legal groups, including the American Bar Association and the Federal Bar Council, for targeting lawyers on the basis of who they represent or what cases they pursue. Critics called it a “direct assault on due process and the adversarial system.”

In arguments before Judge Mehta, attorneys for Jenner & Block described the order as “retaliatory and unconstitutional,” while government lawyers contended the administration acted within its contracting authority to protect federal interests.

The decision to bar Jenner & Block was seen as unusual; government blacklisting is typically reserved for firms found guilty of fraud or major misconduct.

Conclusion: Landmark Ruling for Legal Independence

Judge Mehta’s decision to strike down the Trump-era executive order against Jenner & Block restores a key protection for lawyers working in the public interest and reinforces judicial checks on executive power over federal contracting.

Legal analysts say the case could have lasting significance for the legal industry, ensuring firms and attorneys can serve their clients without fear of political retaliation.