Trump's actions against law firms spark constitutional debate

President Donald Trump's recent executive orders targeting prominent law firms Perkins Coie and Covington & Burling have sent shockwaves through the legal community, raising concerns about potential infringements on legal representation and constitutional rights.

On 6 March 2025, Trump signed an executive order suspending security clearances for employees of Perkins Coie, a firm known for its representation of Democratic entities, including Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign. The order also mandates a review of the firm's federal contracts and diversity practices, alleging involvement in partisan lawsuits and discriminatory hiring. Perkins Coie has denounced the order as "patently unlawful" and plans to challenge it.

This move follows a similar action on 25 February, when Trump revoked security clearances for attorneys at Covington & Burling, citing the firm's pro bono representation of former Special Counsel Jack Smith, who had investigated Trump. These unprecedented measures have created a chilling effect among elite law firms, many of which are now hesitant to engage in litigation against the administration due to fears of retaliation. ​

Legal experts argue that these actions may violate the First and Fifth Amendments, as they appear to punish firms for representing clients opposing the administration, thereby undermining the rule of law.

Critics, including the American Bar Association, warn that such measures could deter law firms from taking on cases against the government, compromising the fundamental principle that everyone deserves legal representation. Advocacy groups and smaller law firms report increased difficulty in recruiting larger firms for cases against the administration, potentially leaving many legal challenges unaddressed.