Law firms Jenner & Block and WilmerHale sued to challenge President Donald Trump’s orders against them, while counterpart Skadden avoided action by the administration with a promise to do $100 million in pro bono work.

The separate Jenner and WilmerHale suits filed in US District Court for the District of Columbia ask a judge to declare unconstitutional the orders, which threaten government contracts with the firm’s clients, revoke lawyers’ security clearances, and limit access to federal buildings. Trump is targeting major law firms for their ties to his perceived opponents and pro bono work he says undermines US interests.

The orders are an “undisguised form of retaliation for representing clients and causes he disfavors, or employing lawyers he dislikes,” WilmerHale said.

Hours after the two suits were filed, Trump announced in the Oval Office he reached an agreement with Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom to avoid issuing an order against the firm. Skadden committed to provide at least $100 million in pro bono legal work for Trump administration priorities, the president said.

“This was essentially a settlement—we appreciate Skadden’s coming to the table,” Trump said.

The firms’ different approaches were in response to Trump’s orders meant to penalize them for their ties to what he calls “weaponization” of the legal system against him. Perkins Coie this month sued Trump for an order targeting the firm, while Paul Weiss agreed to settle and spend $40 million in pro bono services for causes Trump supports.

“Firms differ in how committed they are to the rule of law principals—WilmerHale has a deep commitment there,” said Leslie Levin, a professor at the University of Connecticut School of Law. “Skadden doesn’t have a deep history of being concerned with the role of lawyers in society. Even though they have some pro-bono, they have always been about making money.”

Skadden didn’t immediately respond to a voice-mail and an email seeking comment.

The president has gone after five law firms with ties to lawyers that he views as enemies. The orders revoke lawyer security clearances at federal buildings and direct US agencies to cut government contracts for firms and their clients.

Jenner said in its lawsuit that the order targeting the firm aims to hamper the ability of clients to have the lawyer of their choice. “It is intended to coerce law firms and lawyers into renouncing the administration’s critics and ceasing certain representations adverse to the government,” the firm said in its complaint .

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the lawsuits.

Painful Orders

The orders cut deeply into some core functions of the legal operations. Jenner has about 540 matters before federal courts and numerous others before agencies that require access to buildings, the firm said in its complaint. More than 40% of Jenner’s revenue over the past five years comes from clients who who are government contractors, subcontractors, or affiliates, it said.

With so much at risk, the firms have brought in top legal muscle. WilmerHale’s lawyer is Paul Clement , one of the premiere US Supreme Court litigators. The former Antonin Scalia clerk has argued more than 100 cases before the country’s highest court.

WilmerHale’s managing partner Anjan Sahni and deputy managing partner Joel Green said that the firm was “ready for this moment” in an internal email viewed by Bloomberg Law and sent late Thursday after the executive order was announced.

“We will pursue all appropriate remedies to ensure that this unlawful order does not prevent our attorneys from doing their jobs,” Sahni and Green said. “Our top priority is protecting our ability to effectively represent our clients.”

Jenner & Block has turned to Cooley’s Michael Attanasio, a veteran trial lawyer and former federal prosecutor who defended baseball’s Roger Clemens on obstruction of Congress and perjury charges over the use of performance-enhancing drugs.

Trump adviser Elon Musk has clashed with Silicon Valley-founded Cooley, which had represented Tesla Inc., after the firm refused his directive to fire an associate attorney. Musk in a 2022 post on X called Cooley and Perkins Coie “white-shoe lawyers” who “thrive on corruption.”


The Jenner and WilmerHale cases were initially directly assigned to Judge Beryl A. Howell, an Obama appointee who has already temporarily barred the Trump administration from enforcing an executive order targeting Perkins Coie.

Howell subsequently issued an order holding that the direct assignments were a mistake because the new suits aren’t adequately related to the Perkins Coie litigation. The cases were then randomly reassigned, each drawing judges appointed by President George W. Bush.

Targeted Firms

Trump on March 25 issued the executive order against Jenner & Block because of its ties to former partner Andrew Weissmann, an ex-Justice Department official who was a top member of Robert Mueller’s special counsel team. Weissmann, whom Trump referred to as “scum” in a March 14 speech, had a key role in securing the convictions of campaign officials Paul Manafort and Rick Gates.

Two days later, Trump issued the WilmerHale order—the fifth and most recent Big Law firm he has attacked with such directives. The president targeted WilmerHale over its past employment of Mueller, saying the former FBI director’s Russia investigation “epitomizes the weaponization of government.”

The president’s first target was Covington & Burling, for advising Special Counsel Jack Smith, and Trump later took aim at Perkins Coie because a former partner at the firm, Marc Elias, was involved with opposition research that also alleged Russian influence. A federal judge on March 12 temporarily blocked most of the Perkins Coie executive order.

The Trump administration also targeted Manhattan-founded firm Paul Weiss Rifkind Wharton & Garrison. The Wall Street law powerhouse brokered a deal , including pledging $40 million in pro bono legal services and a review of its DEI policies, in exchange for the withdrawal of the executive order.