Trump DOJ Revives Law Firm Battle & Misunderstands the First Amendment

The legal battles surrounding former President Trump's attempts to punish law firms and attorneys who opposed his administration continue to unfold.

Published on Mar. 9, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

The legal battles surrounding former President Trump's attempts to punish law firms and attorneys who opposed his administration continue to unfold, revealing a disturbing trend: the weaponization of executive power against the legal profession. What began as quietly dropped appeals has dramatically reversed course, signaling a potentially escalating conflict with significant implications for the future of legal advocacy and the First Amendment.

Why it matters

This case sets a dangerous precedent for future administrations. If left unchecked, it could normalize the practice of politically motivated interference in the legal system, chilling legal advocacy and undermining the independence of the judiciary. Attorneys may become hesitant to represent clients or causes that are politically unpopular, fearing retribution from the executive branch.

The details

At the heart of the dispute lies a fundamental misunderstanding – or deliberate misrepresentation – of First Amendment principles. The DOJ's argument centers on the idea that courts cannot dictate what a president says. However, the executive orders didn't simply criticize these firms, they imposed concrete sanctions – revoking security clearances, restricting access to federal buildings, and threatening government contracts – since of their legal representation of opposing viewpoints. This isn't about controlling speech; it's about punishing constitutionally protected legal advocacy.

  • Just last week, reports indicated the Department of Justice (DOJ) was abandoning its defense of Trump's executive orders.
  • However, a swift and unexplained reversal saw the DOJ not only reinstate the appeals but likewise file a 97-page brief arguing the orders were 'well within the Presidential prerogative.'

The players

Department of Justice (DOJ)

The federal executive department responsible for enforcing federal law and administering justice in the United States.

Perkins Coie

A law firm that challenged the executive orders in court.

WilmerHale

A law firm that challenged the executive orders in court.

Jenner & Block

A law firm that challenged the executive orders in court.

Susman Godfrey

A law firm that challenged the executive orders in court.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“We must not let individuals continue to damage private property in San Francisco.”

— Robert Jenkins, San Francisco resident (San Francisco Chronicle)

What’s next

The judge in the case will decide on Tuesday whether or not to allow Walker Reed Quinn out on bail.

The takeaway

This case highlights growing concerns in the community about repeat offenders released on bail, raising questions about bail reform, public safety on SF streets, and if any special laws to govern autonomous vehicles in residential and commercial areas.