Tom Borman, LawFuel contributing editor
When the former president decides your firm is next on his legal hit list, you’ve officially joined what might be the most exclusive club no one asked to join. That’s the predicament elite litigation powerhouse Susman Godfrey the litigation boutique that finds itself in as the sixth law firm targeted by Trump’s executive order campaign.
“There is no question that we will fight this unconstitutional order,” said a combative Susman in a statement that surprised absolutely no one familiar with a firm whose bread and butter is high-stakes litigation.
Susman Godfrey is represented in their legal action opposing the Trump order by former Solicitor General Don Verrilli, now of Munger, Tolles & Olson.
The Susman action seeks to enjoin the enforcement of the EO and have it declared unconstitutional, reading in part:
“The president is abusing the powers of his office to wield the might of the executive branch in retaliation against organizations and people that he dislikes. Nothing in our constitution or laws grants a president such power; to the contrary, the specific provisions and overall design of our constitution were adopted in large measure to ensure that presidents cannot exercise arbitrary, absolute power in the way that the president seeks to do in these executive orders.”
Trump, playing whack-a-law-firm and warned Wednesday that Susman won’t be the last target. “We have another five to go,” he announced, presumably while checking his executive order template for the next firm’s name to insert.
The presidential decree aims to strip Susman lawyers of security clearances, restrict access to government buildings, terminate government contracts.
What representation earned Susman this executive branch time-out?
Apparently, “spearheading efforts to weaponize the American legal system” which in non-Trump-speak means representing Dominion Voting Systems in its defamation lawsuit against Fox News that settled for a cool $787.5 million.
While four firms, includiing Paul Weiss, Milbank, Willkie Farr, and Skadden, have already folded their hands and agreed to provide millions in pro bono services to Trump-approved projects, Susman joins Wilmer, Jenner & Block, and Perkins Coie in the resistance club, lead also by lawyers opposed to the Trump orders.
Paul Weiss this week lost their pro bono chief who opposed the deal is firm had made.
For those keeping score at home, the temporary scoreboard shows:
- Firms that cut deals: 4
- Firms fighting back: 4
- Constitutional crisis: Ongoing
Corporate law watchers can’t help but wonder: is representing clients adverse to Trump now a partner compensation liability or a recruiting advantage? Either way, Susman’s profits of nearly $7 million per partner suggest they can afford the fight ahead.
But in uncertain times and with a president with lawyers in his sights and plenty of power to play with, the outcome also remains uncertain – and worrying – for law firms.
