A federal judge has struck down an executive order issued by former President Donald Trump that attempted to block employees of the law firm WilmerHale from working with the federal government. The judge ruled that the order was unconstitutional, stating it violated the First Amendment rights to free speech and association, as well as the right to petition the government.
What Was Trump’s Executive Order About?
On March 27, 2025, Trump signed an executive order titled “Addressing Risks from WilmerHale.” In it, he accused the law firm of harming U.S. interests and barred its employees from working with the government. The order claimed that WilmerHale, a high-profile Los Angeles-based law firm, was politically biased and had represented causes Trump disliked, including immigration and election-related lawsuits. It also criticized the firm for hiring former special counsel Robert Mueller.
WilmerHale’s Legal Fight
WilmerHale filed a 64-page lawsuit immediately after the order, calling it unconstitutional. The firm argued that it was being punished for taking on certain legal cases and hiring Mueller, who led the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The court case moved quickly, with both sides filing motions. In the end, U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon ruled in WilmerHale’s favor, stating the order was “plainly motivated by the President’s desire to retaliate against WilmerHale for its protected activity.”
What the Judge Said
Judge Leon, appointed by President George W. Bush, did not hold back. In his 73-page ruling, he used 27 exclamation points to emphasize the seriousness of the constitutional violations he believed Trump’s order committed.
He began by highlighting the importance of lawyers in American democracy:
“The cornerstone of the American system of justice is an independent judiciary and an independent bar willing to tackle unpopular cases, however daunting.”
Leon said that Trump’s order attacked WilmerHale simply because it had supported causes and clients Trump disagreed with. This, he ruled, was “viewpoint discrimination,” which is strictly prohibited under the First Amendment.
He also noted that preventing the firm’s access to government buildings and revoking security clearances had no proven link to national security threats — despite the government’s claims. The judge dismissed those claims as unsupported and politically motivated.
The Key Constitutional Violations
Judge Leon found the executive order unconstitutional on several grounds:
Violation of Free Speech:
The order punished WilmerHale for past lawsuits and public statements, especially about Mueller.
Violation of Right to Petition the Government:
WilmerHale was punished for filing lawsuits — a protected form of free petition under the First Amendment.
Violation of Freedom of Association:
The order tried to force government contractors to cut ties with WilmerHale or disclose their connection, threatening the firm’s business and its partnerships.
Why This Matters
This ruling marks the second time in two weeks that one of Trump’s executive orders targeting law firms has been struck down. A similar order targeting the Chicago-based law firm Jenner & Block was also recently ruled unconstitutional.
The court’s decision is a strong statement that political retaliation against legal firms — simply because they take cases or hire individuals a president disapproves of — goes against the Constitution.
Final Words from the Judge
In a powerful conclusion, Judge Leon wrote:
“To rule otherwise would be unfaithful to the judgment and vision of the Founding Fathers!”
He also made it clear that blocking this order was in the public’s best interest:
“The enforcement of an unconstitutional law is always contrary to the public interest.”
This case reinforces the legal boundaries placed on presidential powers and protects the independence of law firms from political retaliation. It also emphasizes the continued importance of the First Amendment in safeguarding free speech, legal representation, and fair access to government resources.
