Center Backs Law Firms Targeted by Trump Administration
Amicus briefs argue that the administration's orders against law firms threaten the rule of law.
The Center for Reproductive Rights joined 23 other non-governmental organizations (NGOs) last week in filing amicus briefs backing three major U.S. law firms, all facing punitive sanctions for past work viewed as antagonistic by President Trump. The firms—Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, and WilmerHale—are taking legal action against executive orders that place heavy restrictions on their ability to work. In the briefs, the Center and fellow amici contend that the orders set a dangerous precedent, violating the First Amendment and threatening the rule of law.
The retaliatory orders are part of a larger strategy, outlined in a March 22 memorandum, which authorizes Trump to punish law firms that file suits deemed “frivolous,” particularly those against the government. As more firms are targeted, some have evaded sanctions by striking deals with the president and pledging millions in pro bono services to causes he supports.
What is an amicus brief?
An amicus or “friend of the court” brief is a legal document submitted to the court by people or organizations who are not directly involved in a case, but who have an interest in it. The Center serves as legal counsel and signs on to amicus briefs when its voice, original research and analysis, or legal expertise can inform and influence how key issues are understood and decided.
Perkins Coie filed its suit on March 11, arguing that the executive order had significance beyond a single law firm and calling it “an affront to the Constitution and our adversarial system of justice.” The Trump administration quickly moved to disqualify the judge on the case, alleging bias against the president—an effort the judge rejected, calling it a threat to the integrity of the justice system.
The amicus briefs argue that Trump’s executive orders violate the First Amendment in three key ways:
- Freedom to Petition: The orders chill the ability of NGOs to petition the government by targeting law firms that have represented clients challenging the administration—raising the threat of retaliation for future legal action.
- Freedom of Association: By deterring law firms from providing pro bono legal services to organizations like the Center, the orders infringe on the right to associate freely with legal counsel.
- Undermining of the Rule of Law: The orders threaten the independence of lawyers and the ability of the courts to serve as checks on executive power. The legal system depends on attorneys—public and private—being able to represent clients without political interference.
This is an attempt to silence opponents of the Trump administration, and a direct attack on the right to challenge the government. As the battle for reproductive rights plays out across the country, these violations pose a serious threat to the reproductive health of millions.
