More than a dozen legal groups representing corporate general counsel, smaller law firms, former judges and law professors filed amicus briefs Friday with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit supporting Susman Godfrey and three other corporate law firms that are the targets of punishing executive orders by President Donald Trump.
The briefs signed by 20 law professors at Texas law schools, 23 small-firm lawyers in Texas and several prominent Texas firms asked the appellate court judges to uphold four lower court rulings that declared the presidential executive orders unconstitutional.
General Counsels United, which represents 800 current and former corporate chief legal officers, states in an amicus brief filed Friday that the executive orders against Susman Godfrey, Perkins Coie, WilmerHale and Jenner & Block are “inflicting concrete and present harm” to U.S. businesses in their dealings with their own lawyers.
The brief states that President Trump’s EOs are “impacting their ability to hire or retain the targeted law firms” and impeding “the willingness of other companies and law firms to challenge or defend against federal action.”
“Current general counsels face a significant constraint that makes public commentary difficult: speaking publicly about the orders’ impact on their companies risks inviting the very federal retaliation they are describing,” GCs United argues.
At least 10 Texas-based law firms — Aldous Law, Carrington Coleman, Crain Brogdon, Gibbs & Bruns, Graves Dougherty, Lynn Pinker, Nachawati Law Group, Waters Kraus, Yetter Coleman and Sommerman, McCaffity, Quesada & Geisler — joined a separate amicus brief filed on behalf of 842 law firms stating that the executive orders are an “undisguised retaliation for representations that the firms, or former partners of the firms, have undertaken or may be planning to undertake.”
“Make no mistake, these executive orders seek to intimidate every firm, large and small, into submission,” the brief argues. “The executive orders subject the four targeted firms, as well as their clients and personnel, to draconian collective punishment — including the potential loss of clients that contract with the United States, denial of access to federal buildings and facilities, and the revocation of their attorneys’ security clearances.”
The law firms state that the EOs have “caused swift harm.”
“Federal officials canceled meetings; attorneys were unsure whether they could access courthouses; and in cases involving classified information, lawyers were to be stripped of the clearances necessary to review essential evidence, making meaningful representation impossible,” the brief states. “Clients also terminated engagements with the law firms or were forced to reconsider continued representation, particularly where association might endanger important government contracts.”
“Worse yet, since these executive orders were issued, fewer of the country’s largest law firms have been willing to challenge government action, and both civil-rights groups and indigent clients have had difficulty finding counsel,” the brief states.
President Trump issued a two-page EO against Susman Godfrey and the three firms last spring. The Eos claim that Susman and the clients they represent have “weaponized the American legal system and degrade the quality of American elections.”
“Susman also funds groups that engage in dangerous efforts to undermine the effectiveness of the United States military through the injection of political and radical ideology,” the U.S. Justice Department argues in court documents.
Susman and the other law firms sued the Trump administration in federal court. Last June, U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan of Washington, D.C., ruled that the president’s executive order targeting Susman Godfrey was an illegal act of retaliation and violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
The DOJ appealed the lower court decisions. Oral argument in the litigation is scheduled next month.
A group of 595 law professors — 23 of them at Texas law schools — signed an amicus brief stating that President Trump’s EOs “contradict centuries of precedent safeguarding free speech, the right of association and the right to petition.
The brief was signed by seven professors at the University of Houston Law Center, six professors at the University of North Texas College of Law, three SMU Dedman School of Law professors, two South Texas College of Law Houston and one professor at both the Texas A&M School of Law and the University of Texas School of Law.
Another amicus brief was filed by 76 former partners at large corporate law firms, but none were from Texas firms. On Thursday, 59 students at Texas law schools signed on to a brief with 1,224 other students.
Many of the briefs make a point of stating that those joining as amici fear becoming targets because of their stance.
Twenty-three Texas lawyers were among 813 attorneys at solo and small law firms that signed another amicus brief also supporting the legal positions of Susman Godfrey and the three other firms.
The corporate general counsel brief also argues that the settlement agreements to dismiss the executive orders that a handful of the national law firms, led by Paul Weiss, “further reinforced the risks for general counsels in hiring the targeted firms.”
“By agreeing to lift the Paul, Weiss executive order in exchange for $40 million in pro bono commitments and ideological concessions unrelated to the national security interests the executive orders purported to invoke, the administration made clear to the American legal and business communities that the executive orders were, in reality, instruments of ideological leverage rather than genuine national security measures,” the GC brief states.
“To companies, that sent a clear message: Hiring one of the targeted firms risks a type of retaliation from the federal government like the retaliation in the Executive Orders. That confirmation made it even harder to hire one of the targeted firms, and made the harm to those firms even more immediate and concrete.”
List of 23 Texas lawyers at solo and small firms that signed an amicus brief
- Daniel Berner, Austin
- Karen C. Burgess — Burgess Law, Austin
- Alicia Calzada, San Antonio
- Kyle Carney — Carney Law, Fort Worth
- Rhonda Cates — Law Office of Rhonda Cates, Garland
- Thomas J. Crane — Law Office of Thomas J. Crane, San Antonio
- Luecretia Dillard — Lue Dillard, Attorney at Law, Houston
- Gerry J. Elman — Elman IP, Denton
- Antonio Glenn — AMG Counsel, Dallas
- Lacey L. Gourley, Austin
- Eric Greenwald — Law Offices of Eric A. Greenwald, Austin
- Ira D. Joffe — Attorney at Law, Bellaire
- Parth Kalaria — Kalaria Law, Dallas
- Annette M. Lamoreaux — Law Offices of Annette Lamoreaux, Huntsville
- Emil Lippe Jr. — Lippe & Associates, Dallas
- Marc Meyer — Law Office of Marc Meyer, Montgomery
- Feras Mousilli — Lloyd & Mousilli, Houston
- Pamela Parker — Parker Counsel Legal Services, Austin
- Susan F. Smith — Law Office of Susan F. Smith, Arlington
- Nitin Sud — Sud Law, Bellaire
- Elena Sullivan — Endereza Law, San Antonio
- Lisa Tanner — Lisa Tanner Law, Bee Cave
- Asia Wright — The Wright Choice, Dallas