Judge issues temporary order preventing Trump from taking action against company that sued Fox News over false election claims.
A federal judge has issued a temporary restraining order on much of Donald Trump’s executive order that prohibits federal agencies from engaging in business with any entities that hire the law firm Susman Godfrey. This ruling marks the fourth occasion on which a judicial authority has concluded that Trump’s efforts to target law firms may infringe upon constitutional rights.
The order, delivered by District Court Judge Loren AliKhan, was prompted by Susman Godfrey’s representation of a voting machine company involved in a high-profile legal battle against Fox News, which culminated in a notable settlement of 7 million. The firm faced scrutiny due to its involvement in election-related litigation, which was cited by Trump as justification for the targeting order. Various other law firms, similarly impacted, have opted for settlements that commit them to providing substantial pro bono legal support for causes aligned with Trump.
Amidst these proceedings, Don Verrilli, counsel for Susman Godfrey, urged the court to uphold the principles of judicial integrity, suggesting that failure to do so could lead to significant erosions of rights. The temporary restraining order is effective for a period of 14 days, yet Judge AliKhan signaled strong reservations about the order’s constitutionality, suggesting that it likely violates the First and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. She emphasized that the government cannot coerce legal representatives into conformity with its political stance.
In a counterargument, Richard Lawson, representing the Department of Justice, posited that the order was in line with past presidential directives concerning federal contracting practices, dating back to the Johnson administration’s non-discrimination policies. Nevertheless, Lawson was unable to persuade the judge to delay her ruling pending further guidance for federal agencies regarding the implications of Trump’s order.
The ruling specifically blocks provisions that would prevent federal contractors from associating with Susman Godfrey and restricts its employees from accessing federal buildings. Notably, the order had been signed just weeks before another significant libel trial related to Trump’s electoral claims, further underscoring the complex interplay between legal proceedings and political maneuvers.
While other law firms have also successfully contested similar targeting orders, governmental responses have varied, with some officials expressing robust support for the president’s stance. The ongoing legal battles highlight the broader implications of executive power as it intersects with civil liberties and legal practice.
Media News Source
