via
ChatGPT)
Donald
Trump’s
dogged
pursuit
of
executive
orders
that
target
Biglaw
firms
that
displease
him
continues.
Yes,
four
different
district
court
judges
from
across
the
political
spectrum
have
all
ruled
that
EOs
aimed
at
Perkins
Coie,
Jenner
&
Block,
WilmerHale,
and
Susman
Godfrey,
respectively,
are
unconstitutional
on
a
variety
of
grounds.
Despite
L
after
L
on
the
matter,
yesterday
the
Trump
administration
announced
they
are
appealing
the
Jenner
&
Block
case.
Which,
isn’t
shocking
since
the
Department
of
Justice
has
already
appealed
the
similar
case
versus
Perkins
Coie.
But
it
puts
none
too
fine
a
point
on
the
question
of
WHY
they’re
doing
it.
Matthew
Wallin
at
Slate
argues
that
railing
against
judges
that’ve
done
Trump
wrong
is
simply
part
of
his
brand
at
this
point.
Trump
administration
has
a
very
different
relationship
with
legal
action
than
any
previous
administration.
They
do
not
seem
to
view
legality,
or
effective
administration
of
existing
laws,
to
be
a
primary
or
even
desirable
goal.
Rather,
they
seem
to
view
state
action
primarily
as
a
means
of
political
advocacy,
in
which
an
ultimate
loss—or
a
few
constitutional
violations—doesn’t
really
matter
as
long
as
those
losses
manage
to
move
the
conversation.
(This
is
a
lesson
that
Democrats
could
stand
to
learn
from.)
Appealing
this
decision
plays
exactly
into
this
strategy,
because
it
allows
the
Trump
administration
to
keep
threatening
lawyers
representing
political
opponents
because
they
get
to
keep
talking
about
it.
…Which
checks
out.
And
of
course
there’s
the
elephant
at
1
First
Street.
These
appeals
(obviously
at
this
point
they’re
expected
in
the
WilmerHale
and
Susman
cases)
are
how
Trump
gets
in
front
of
his
favorite
justices.
Wallin
acknowledges
that
the
Supreme
Court’s
tendency
to
bend
over
backwards
for
Trump
means
that
what
should
be
an
easy
call
at
the
High
Court
gets
a
lot
more
dicey,
“The
government
could
appeal
an
issue
that
they
never
argued
in
the
lower
court
(despite
the
fact
that
they’re
not
supposed
to
be
able
to
do
that),
and
the
Supreme
Court
could
agree
with
them
on
that.
The
Trump
administration
might
do
something
so
new
and
crazy
that
OK’ing
this
executive
order
suddenly
seems
like
a
‘moderate’
decision.”
You
won’t
go
poor
betting
on
the
Roberts
court
selling
out
the
norms
and
precedent
of
the
legal
system,
so
it’s
definitely
on
the
table
that
SCOTUS
backs
Trump
on
this
one.
I
still
think
these
orders
are
such
an
affront
to
legal
institutions
and
the
very
rule
of
law
that
the
EOs
won’t
get
the
green
light
from
the
Court.
But
it’s
not
100%
—
and
that’s
terrifying.
Kathryn
Rubino
is
a
Senior
Editor
at
Above
the
Law,
host
of
The
Jabot
podcast,
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
AtL
tipsters
are
the
best,
so
please
connect
with
her.
Feel
free
to
email
her
with
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments
and
follow
her
on
Twitter
@Kathryn1 or
Mastodon
@[email protected].