In sudden reversal, Trump DOJ moves to revive retaliation cases against law firms

The Justice Department on Tuesday abruptly reversed course and asked a federal court to allow it to continue defending executive orders that targeted four major law firms. Just one day earlier the Trump administration had moved to voluntarily dismiss its appeals in the cases involving Jenner and Block, WilmerHale, Perkins Coie and Susman Godfrey. Lower court rulings had found the orders unlawful and unconstitutional on the grounds that they punished the firms for representing clients and causes opposed The government had sought to drop the appeals after district courts concluded that the orders threatened the adversarial legal system. On Tuesday the department filed a motion to withdraw that dismissal and resume the appeals without providing an explanation for the change. The four firms opposed the request. In a filing they stated that plaintiffs appellees oppose the governments unexplained request to withdraw yesterdays voluntary dismissal to which all parties had agreed and that under no circumstances should the governments unexplained about face provide a basis for an extension of its brief. The orders had terminated government contracts with the firms, stripped lawyers of security clearances and blocked access to federal buildings. Some firms were targeted for representing Trumps political opponents while others faced sanctions for work on voting rights cases or challenges to his attempts to overturn the 2020 election. Multiple federal judges had found the orders likely violated the First Amendment protections for free speech and association as well as due process safeguards against government retaliation. In one March hearing U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell said the governments defense of the order sent chills down her spine and warned it could intimidate attorneys from taking politically sensitive cases. If the motion is granted the appeals would proceed in the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The administration would again argue that the president has broad