The American Bar Association appears to have found the backbone that the Surrender Firms couldn’t locate. Today, the national professional guild filed suit against Trump — and eight more pages of caption — over the administration’s threats against law firms to agree to give him diversity concessions and dedicated pro bono work for causes he believes in — or that he dictates, depending on who you ask.
Some law firms already sued the administration over these threats and won easily. The others just sat back and watched partners and business walk out the door while giving the media their best impression of the this is fine dog.
Susman Godfrey, who you might remember as one of the law firms Trump tried to mess with but they decided to mercilessly kick his ass in court instead, represents the ABA.
The ABA had already sued the administration over cuts to numerous programs that would be arbitrary and capricious were they not so retaliatory. Now it’s taking action on behalf of lawyers who haven’t been able to stand up for themselves.
Citing ABA members whose firms fit the standard that Trump has set for punitive executive orders who reasonable expect retaliation from the White House, as well as harm to the ABA itself as an entity that relies on pro bono representation. The ABA alleges that these efforts have already resulted in a firm saying they would no longer represent the organization in light of Trump’s orders.
Because everyone in the legal industry is concerned that they’re going to be the next one that has to drag Trump into court as while he’s wildly throwing around his executive authority like a Dumb John Wick if “killing his dog” was “hiring lawyers who prosecuted guys for rubbing feces outside Nancy Pelosi’s office.”
The complaint alleges multiple theories of First Amendment violation based on the idea that governments punishing lawyers for representing clients is… we don’t need to elaborate, right? I mean, we all get how governments can’t punish people for opinions. It also asserts a separation of powers claim, the sort of issue the Supreme Court is designed to adjudicate but won’t because that would require a much different Court than the one we’re working with. Separation of powers is a subject this Court will rail about at length when it bears little connection to the case, but will run away like they’re Paul Weiss faced with minor temporary adversity if actually asked to make a ruling on it.
For that matter, this is exactly the Supreme Court that’s going to use this as a springboard to strike down associational standing except for astroturfed religious organizations trying to declare gay people illegal in Amarillo. But, hey, it’s the thought and basic commitment to rule of law that counts, ABA!
(Complaint on the next page…)
Trump Sued Over ‘Intimidation’ Campaign Against Law Firms [Bloomberg Law News]
Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter or Bluesky if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.
