Trump sued by law firm behind $787.5 mn Fox News case

By Justin Henry and Tatyana Monnay

Susman Godfrey is the latest major law firm to take the Trump administration to court over an executive order aimed at its attorneys.

Susman on Friday filed a suit to challenge President Donald Trump’s April 9 order, arguing that he violated the constitution by targeting the firm for its work in court. The firm asked a federal judge in Washington to freeze the order, which restricts lawyers’ access to government buildings and directs agencies to terminate federal contracts with Susman clients.

“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,” the firm said in the complaint. “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.”

Representatives for the White House didn’t immediately respond a request for comment.

The suit makes Susman the fourth major law firm to challenge Trump over executive orders against them, which also strip lawyers of security clearances. It comes as a growing list of corporate firms—including Kirkland & Ellis and Latham & Watkins—strike preemptive deals with the president, pledging a total of $940 million in free legal services to stay out of the bull’s eye.

Houston-founded Susman’s lawyers represented Dominion Voting Systems Inc. in a defamation lawsuit against Fox Corp., which ended with the company agreeing to pay a $787.5 million settlement. The case was based on the network’s reporting tying Dominion’s voting machines to conspiracy theories about a stolen 2020 election. Susman is pursuing a similar suit against Trump advocate Mike Lindell, the chief executive officer of MyPillow.

“Susman spearheads efforts to weaponize the American legal system and degrade the quality of American elections,” Trump said in the executive order.

Three other law firms—Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, and WilmerHale—already secured court rulings temporarily blocking much of the orders against them. Those firms were targeted for their ties to lawyers who investigated Trump or worked on cases against him.

Covington & Burling was the first Big Law firm targeted by the president, who issued a memorandum stripping partner Peter Koski’s security clearances because of his representation of former special counsel Jack Smith.

Susman is known for high stakes court fights for a wide range of clients. The firm often takes those cases on contingency fee arrangements, meaning its compensation depends largely on the outcome.

The firm, like the others suing Trump, detailed the potential harm posed by the order.

“All told, at least a third of the Firm’s current active matters require Susman Godfrey lawyers to appear before federal courts or interact with federal agencies in some capacity,” the firm said in the complaint. “And through its defamatory allegations against the Firm, the Order seeks to warn or drive clients away from engaging the Firm’s services. “

“Simply put, the Order endeavors to foreclose the Firm from practicing law—for the perceived transgression of undertaking representations with which the President disagrees,” Susman said.

Donald Verrilli, who served as solicitor general in the Obama administration, is representing Susman. Verrilli’s firm, Munger Tolles & Olson, has emerged as a leading critic of Trump’s executive orders. Munger lawyers organized an amicus brief on behalf of more than 500 law firms in support of Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block and WilmerHale.

“This goes far beyond law firms and lawyers,” Susman Godfrey said in a statement. “Today it is our firm under attack, but tomorrow it could be any of us. As officers of the court, we are duty-bound to take on this fight against the illegal executive order.”