Jenner & Block has welcomed the overturning by a federal judge of US president Donald Trump’s executive order against it, pledging to continue to “fiercely advocate for our clients under all circumstances”.

US District Judge John Bates, who sits on the US District Court for the District of Columbia and is a Republican appointee, struck out the order on Friday, deploying broadly similar arguments to those set out by colleague Judge Beryl A. Howell in throwing out a similar order against Perkins Coie on 3 May.

The order against Jenner, which had been suspended prior to the ruling, rescinded security clearances for its lawyers and barred them from accessing federal buildings or working on federal contracts.

It alleged that the firm’s advocacy and prior representation – including former partner Andrew Weissmann’s work for special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election – posed a threat to national interests.

In his judgment, Bates said: “[The order] makes no bones about why it chose its target: it picked Jenner because of the causes Jenner champions, the clients Jenner represents and a lawyer Jenner once employed.”

Bates added: “Going after law firms in this way is doubly violative of the Constitution.”

He noted that it sought to “chill legal representation the administration doesn’t like, thereby insulating the Executive Branch from the judicial check fundamental to the separation of powers”.

He added that the message the order sent to lawyers “whose unalloyed advocacy protects against governmental viewpoint becoming government-imposed orthodoxy” was “subtle yet perhaps more pernicious”.

He stated: “Most obviously, retaliating against firms for the views embodied in their legal work – and thereby seeking to muzzle them going forward – violates the First Amendment’s central command.”

Bates was particularly concerned about the order’s focus on pro bono work, which he described as “uniquely harmful”, stating: “When law firms volunteer to represent vulnerable individuals and groups without pay, they embody the best of the profession.”

Reuters reported that White House spokesperson Harrison Fields said granting security clearances was “a sensitive judgement call entrusted to the president”.

“Our decision to fight the executive order in court is rooted in Jenner & Block’s history and values: we fiercely advocate for our clients under all circumstances,” it said. “This ruling demonstrates the importance of lawyers standing firm on behalf of clients and for the law. That is what Jenner will continue to do for our clients – paying and pro bono – as we look to put this matter behind us.”

Two other firms are also challenging executive orders levelled against them – Wilmer Hale and Susman Godfrey – while another group of leading firms have taken a different path, striking deals with Trump in order to head off further action.

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.

Meanwhile, four former Paul Weiss litigators, all partners, are leaving the firm to form a new boutique. They include prominent Democratic Party lawyer Karen Dunn.

Two other prominent lawyers at Paul Weiss, Jeh Johnson, a former Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security under the Obama Administration, and Steven Banks, the firm’s pro bono practice leader, have also announced their departures.