News June 19, 2025

Donald Trump is intensifying his campaign against the legal profession. In a series of executive orders, public speeches, and backchannel pressures, his administration has targeted specific law firms—including Jenner & Block and WilmerHale—for their clients and policy positions. In response, attorneys at firms such as Kirkland & Ellis and Latham & Watkins are resigning, accusing their employers of capitulating to unconstitutional demands. This all-out assault on legal institutions is shifting the dynamics of attorney loyalty, firm reputation, and public trust in the rule of law.

---

Trump’s Executive Orders Targeting Law Firms

The Trump administration has issued executive orders aimed at law firms whose clients or practices run counter to its political agenda. Among the first to be targeted:

• Jenner & Block, a firm known for its public interest and pro bono litigation, including challenges to government overreach.
• WilmerHale, a key player in high-profile investigations and regulatory defense.

These orders allegedly penalize firms that represent immigrant clients, advocate for environmental regulation, or participate in DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) programs. The retaliation includes:

• Loss of government contracts or clearance privileges.
• Investigations tied to employment and diversity practices.
• Public blacklisting or targeted communications from the executive branch.

These actions circumvent traditional legal and ethical boundaries, raising significant constitutional concerns, including First Amendment violations and executive power abuse.

---

Why Associates Are Quitting Top Firms

Associates at Kirkland & Ellis and Latham & Watkins have reportedly resigned in protest over their firms’ responses to the Trump administration’s pressure. According to reports:

• Both firms agreed to provide hundreds of millions in pro bono services to causes aligned with the administration in exchange for protection from sanctions.
• Internal dissent grew as many attorneys viewed these concessions as cowardly, unconstitutional, or in direct opposition to the values the firms previously claimed to uphold.

Some departures include rising stars in appellate and regulatory practices, further exposing a rift between firm leadership and the younger generation of attorneys who expect moral clarity and institutional integrity.

---

Trump’s Rhetoric Against Lawyers: The Bigger Picture

Beyond executive orders, Trump has escalated his rhetorical attacks on the legal profession:

• Framing lawyers as obstacles to political progress or national strength.
• Accusing law firms of being part of a “deep state” apparatus undermining American values.
• Suggesting that firms defending certain rights or populations are “un-American.”

This rhetoric is designed not just to intimidate legal professionals—but to erode public confidence in law itself. By painting lawyers as villains, Trump seeks to delegitimize lawsuits, investigations, and court rulings that conflict with his political objectives.

---

Impact on the Legal Profession

The consequences of these attacks are severe and wide-ranging:

• Talent Drain: Top associates are leaving firms perceived to have compromised their ethics.
• Internal Polarization: Firms are struggling to manage ideological divides among their attorneys.
• Client Trust Issues: Clients question whether their firms can stand firm under pressure or defend controversial positions without retaliation.
• Erosion of Professional Norms: The legal profession’s role as a check on government abuse is at risk.

---

What Law Firms Should Do Now

Firms must act decisively to protect their people, their values, and the profession:

1. Issue a Clear Public Position

Refuse to accept executive interference in client representation or hiring practices. Public statements matter.

2. Support Internal Dissent

Create confidential reporting mechanisms and spaces for associate concerns to be addressed without retribution.

3. Reevaluate Government Contracts

Weigh the ethical cost of doing business with an administration hostile to legal independence.

4. Coordinate With Bar Associations

Join collective responses led by the American Bar Association and other institutional defenders of legal norms.

5. Invest in Constitutional Litigation

Support lawsuits challenging the legality of retaliatory executive actions.

---

FAQs: Trump’s Attacks on Lawyers and Legal Firms

Why are Jenner & Block and WilmerHale being targeted?

Both firms have represented clients or taken positions that conflict with Trump’s political agenda. They are among several firms allegedly penalized via executive order and federal contract exclusions.

Did Kirkland & Latham really make deals with the administration?

Reports indicate that these firms agreed to provide pro bono services aligned with Trump initiatives to avoid being targeted. This has sparked internal resignations and public criticism.

What’s the legal basis for executive orders targeting firms?

Many legal scholars argue there is no valid constitutional basis for these orders. They likely violate the First Amendment, separation of powers, and basic principles of due process.

How does this affect law students or early-career lawyers?

It may influence where they choose to work—and whether their values align with the firm’s response to political threats. Firms’ reputations are now more closely tied to their resistance (or submission) to executive pressure.

What should law firms be doing right now?

They should prioritize transparency, protect associate voices, take a principled stance, and collaborate with other firms and legal institutions to challenge retaliatory actions.

---

Final Thoughts

Donald Trump’s open hostility toward lawyers, legal institutions, and law firms is not a political strategy—it is a direct threat to constitutional order and the rule of law. For attorneys, the time to act is now. Whether you’re a BigLaw associate, managing partner, or law student, this moment demands clarity, courage, and collective resistance.

The legal profession has long been the safeguard of democratic principles. To preserve that role, firms must rise above intimidation—and prove, in action, that they are built to uphold justice, not simply to survive power.