A federal judge has struck down the executive order targeting WilmerHale, the third time this month a judge has deemed US president Donald Trump's orders against law firms unconstitutional and permanently barred their enforcement.

Senior Judge Richard Leon, who sits on the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and is a Republican appointee, wrote in his exclamation point-laden ruling the executive order was a form of "coercion" to "suppress WilmerHale's representation of disfavored causes and clients."

"I have concluded that this Order must be struck down in its entirety as unconstitutional," Leon wrote. "Indeed, to rule otherwise would be unfaithful to the judgment and vision of the Founding Fathers!"

WilmerHale applauded the ruling.

“The Court’s decision to permanently block the unlawful executive order in its entirety strongly affirms our foundational constitutional rights and those of our clients," the firm said. "We remain proud to defend our firm, our people, and our clients.”

The ruling was broadly similar to those by colleagues Judge John Bates and Judge Beryl Howell that threw out executive orders against Jenner & Block on 23 May and Perkins Coie on 2 May. A final decision for Susman Godfrey, the fourth firm to sue the administration, is pending, though last month a judge granted a temporary restraining order preventing the implementation of Trump's order.

The firms have been targeted by Trump as part of a broader campaign against law firms he maintains have supported efforts to unfairly prosecute him or help his opponents, alongside a broader effort by his administration to challenge diversity, equity and inclusion policies.

The order against WilmerHale cited the firm’s hire of Robert Mueller after he investigated Russian contacts with Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign while US special counsel, which it described as “one of the most partisan investigations in American history”. Mueller retired from the firm in 2021.

It also accused WilmerHale of doing pro bono work to support “destructive” causes related to voting and immigration, and said the firm discriminated against its own employees based on race.

WilmerHale argued the order, which suspended its lawyers’ security clearances, restricted their access to government buildings and threatened the firm and its clients with the loss of their government contracts, had already caused it to lose work.

Leon agreed, writing the administration's attempt to dispute a causal relationship between the order and clients terminating their relationship with WilmerHale was "absurd!".

Mediation

The firm brought 11 counts in its complaint alleging the order violated the First, Fifth and Sixth Amendments, the separation of powers and the Spending Clause.

The judge ruled in its favour on the majority of them, including all four counts relating to the First Amendment that argued the order was retaliation for protected expression, constituted viewpoint discrimination and violated the firm's rights to petition the government and free association.

The order's provisions were “a staggering punishment for the firm’s protected speech!” Leon wrote. “The Order is intended to, and does in fact, impede the firm’s ability to effectively represent its clients!”

The firm was unsuccessful in its argument that the order violated the Spending Clause by imposing unconstitutional conditions on federal contracts. Leon also rejected WilmerHale's claim the order violated its equal protections rights under the Fifth Amendment, saying the firm had failed to address how it could have been "singled out" when it acknowledged multiple other firms had received or been threatened with executive orders.

Harrison Fields, principal deputy press secretary, told Business Insider the White House opposed Leon's ruling.

"The decision to grant any individual access to this nation's secrets is a sensitive judgment call entrusted to the President," Fields said. "Weighing these factors and implementing such decisions are core executive powers, and reviewing the President's clearance decisions falls well outside the judiciary's authority."

Fields did not respond to a Business Insider request for comment as to whether the government would appeal the decision.

WilmerHale hired leading conservative lawyer Paul Clement and his colleague Erin Murphy of Clement & Murphy to represent it in its suit against the administration. Clement served as US solicitor general between 2005 and 2008 and has argued more than 100 cases before the US Supreme Court.

Nine firms, including Kirkland & Ellis, Latham & Watkins, A&O Shearman, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett and Paul Weiss, have pledged a total of $940m in free legal work to avoid action over their DEI policies, or, in the case of Paul Weiss, to forestall an executive order similar to the one issued against Perkins Coie.