A prominent law firm is pushing back against the Trump administration’s executive orders with a First Amendment lawsuit, calling the recent action “blatantly unconstitutional” and a dangerous abuse of presidential power.
On April 9, 2025, President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order aimed at Susman Godfrey LLP, a Los Angeles-based law firm known for its legal advocacy, especially in cases that have been adverse to Trump’s interests. The order alleges that Susman Godfrey poses “significant risks” and is involved in egregious conduct and conflicts of interest related to its legal work, particularly its efforts during the 2020 presidential election.
The Allegations Behind the Executive Order
The order claims that Susman Godfrey has been involved in “weaponizing” the American legal system, undermining the integrity of U.S. elections, and funding efforts to undermine the U.S. military. It further accuses the firm of supporting racial discrimination, pointing to programs that allegedly benefit “students of color”.
However, the law firm has vehemently denied these accusations, asserting that Trump’s actions are retaliatory in nature, aimed at punishing them for their constitutional advocacy. In particular, the firm is accused of challenging Trump’s actions surrounding the 2020 election, a subject that has become the focus of much litigation, including efforts to uphold election integrity.
A Legal Battle Over Free Speech
In response, Susman Godfrey filed a 66-page lawsuit in Washington, D.C., claiming that Trump’s executive order violates the First and Fifth Amendments. The firm argues that the President is abusing his power, using his office to punish individuals and organizations based on their views, a clear violation of free speech protections.
The lawsuit alleges that the order violates the firm’s right to petition the government and interferes with their associations with clients. The firm’s lawyers contend that the executive order constitutes viewpoint discrimination, punishing the firm for its legal positions and efforts in defending the integrity of the 2020 election, an act that is protected by the First Amendment.
“The President is using the power of his office to retaliate against organizations and people he disagrees with,” the lawsuit reads. “Nothing in our Constitution grants a President the authority to do so.”
A Broader Legal and Political Implication
This lawsuit is part of a broader trend of executive overreach that many legal experts say poses a threat to fundamental democratic principles. Susman Godfrey has claimed that the order is not only an infringement on free speech but also an attempt to stifle legal advocacy in politically charged cases.
“In America, we have a government of laws, not men,” the lawsuit states, invoking the words of John Adams. “This Executive Order is a grave threat to the foundational principles of our Republic.”
The firm argues that the executive order is part of a larger pattern of unconstitutional actions targeting law firms, organizations, and individuals who challenge the administration’s policies. The firm’s filing cites several previous orders aimed at undermining legal professionals and their work.
Allegations of Racism and Discrimination
One of the more contentious claims in the executive order was that Susman Godfrey discriminates on the basis of race, citing a program that allegedly offers financial awards and employment opportunities only to “students of color.” However, the law firm has denied these accusations, asserting that there is no such program and that Trump’s criticism of the firm’s race-based efforts amounts to viewpoint discrimination.
“The Order punishes the Firm for advancing arguments and using ‘funding’ to support ‘efforts’ with which the President disagrees,” the lawsuit states. “This is prohibited by the First Amendment.”
Seeking Immediate Legal Action
In its lawsuit, Susman Godfrey is seeking declaratory judgment that the executive order is unconstitutional and has asked the court to issue an injunction against its enforcement. The firm also seeks a restraining order and an immediate halt to any actions resulting from the order.
The filing positions this lawsuit as a warning to other law firms and advocates who could be targeted by future executive orders or political retribution.
“Put simply, this could be any of us,” the lawsuit concludes.
Be First to Comment