WilmerHale has announced that a court has taken swift action to block key provisions of a controversial executive order that the firm challenged.
According to a spokesperson for the firm, “We appreciate the court’s swift action to preserve our clients’ right to counsel and acknowledgement of the unconstitutional nature of the executive order and its chilling effect on the legal system. The court’s decision to block key provisions of the order vindicates our and our clients’ foundational First Amendment rights.”
The firm remains confident about ultimate success on the merits regarding the national security provisions of the order, including those related to security clearances. It’s worth noting that WilmerHale was the only firm that attempted to challenge these provisions, despite the high legal bar required for securing a Temporary Restraining Order.
Court’s Decision Highlights
In its ruling, the court emphasized several critical points:
- The executive order’s retaliatory nature “is clear from its face” and from the accompanying Fact Sheet published the same day
- The order required government contracting agencies to “disclose, review, and terminate all contracts with the plaintiff” (Section 3)
- It also restricted WilmerHale employees from “access to federal officials, buildings, and employment” (Section 5)
The court definitively stated: “There is no doubt this retaliatory action chills speech and legal advocacy, or that it qualifies as a constitutional harm.”
Addressing the potential impact, the court noted that while economic loss does not always warrant a Temporary Restraining Order, “this is not a typical situation.” The court recognized that WilmerHale faced “more than economic harm – it faces crippling losses, and its very survival is at stake.”
The ruling also acknowledged broader implications, stating: “The injuries to plaintiff here would be severe, and would spill over to its clients and the justice system at large. The public interest demands protecting against harms of this magnitude.”
