In a sharp judicial rebuke to Donald Trump’s latest executive push, a federal court has temporarily halted the enforcement of key parts of an executive order targeting powerhouse law firm Susman Godfrey LLP. The order, issued just six days prior, accused the firm of acting “against critical American interests” and threatened to strip it of federal access, contracts, and security clearances.
But on April 15, Judge Loren L. AliKhan of the District of Columbia pressed pause. In a decisive ruling, the judge granted a temporary restraining order, effectively freezing the administration’s attempt to ostracize Susman from federal dealings—for now.
At the heart of the blocked order were sweeping declarations: that any legal entity perceived to undermine U.S. values, influence elections, or promote what the administration called “radical ideology,” should be cut off from classified information and taxpayer-backed contracts. Susman, the order claimed, had crossed those lines.
The executive directive laid out aggressive measures. It called on intelligence chiefs and budget offices to immediately suspend security clearances, revoke access to secure facilities, audit federal contracts, and shut Susman out of government workspaces. It also sought to sever existing federal contracts and stop federal employees from interacting with the firm unless explicitly cleared to do so.
The administration took particular aim at Susman’s diversity programs, labeling them as discriminatory due to eligibility criteria that include race. “Blatant discrimination should not be rewarded with federal benefits,” the order declared.
But Judge AliKhan’s ruling clipped the order’s wings, invalidating Sections 1, 3, and 5—the portions outlining the rationale, contractor restrictions, and personnel limitations. Federal agencies are now barred from enforcing those elements and must roll back any guidance issued to comply with them. Disclosure requests tied to the order are to be treated as void. Agencies were told to act as though the contested portions of the order “had never issued.”
The Department of Justice, Office of Management and Budget, and other relevant agencies have been ordered to file compliance reports. The first was due the day after the ruling.
The legal action comes amid a broader battle between Trump’s administration and major U.S. law firms, especially those with diversity initiatives or ties to Democratic causes. Earlier in the month, over 500 firms threw their support behind Perkins Coie in a separate challenge to another Trump executive order.
Susman Godfrey, meanwhile, is fighting fire with fire—represented in court by Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP.
The courtroom drama is far from over, but for now, Trump’s legal offensive has hit a wall.
