American Bar Association Sued Yesterday to Block Trump's 'Intimidation' of Law Firms

 June 17, 2025 – The American Bar Association (ABA), the nation's largest voluntary association for lawyers, yesterday, Monday, June 16th, filed a landmark lawsuit against the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump, seeking to block what it describes as an unconstitutional campaign of intimidation against major law firms. The suit, filed in a federal court in Washington, D.C., alleges that the Trump administration has used its executive powers to coerce lawyers and law firms into abandoning clients, causes, and policy positions disfavored by the President.

The lawsuit takes direct aim at a series of controversial executive orders signed by President Trump since he took office earlier this year. These orders reportedly direct the government to cut off security clearances, terminate government contracts, limit access to federal buildings, and even refrain from hiring employees from some of the nation's largest law firms. The administration has often justified these actions by faulting firms for taking on certain pro bono clients, associating with Mr. Trump's political opponents, or engaging in diversity, equity, and inclusion practices that the administration claims are discriminatory.

"Never before has there been as urgent a need for the ABA to defend its members, their profession, and the rule of law itself," the ABA stated in its lawsuit. The organization argues that President Trump has "used the vast powers of the Executive Branch to coerce lawyers and law firms to abandon clients, causes, and policy positions the President does not like," in direct violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The ABA's complaint details how these "Law Firm Intimidation Policy" tactics have produced a "chilling effect" across the legal profession. Many attorneys are reportedly no longer willing to take on representations that might require suing the federal government, fearing that such actions could make their firm the next target of devastating sanctions. The lawsuit cites instances where the ABA itself struggled to obtain pro bono representation in cases challenging the administration, with firms allegedly citing fear of unlawful retaliation from the President.

White House spokesperson Harrison Fields quickly dismissed the lawsuit as "clearly frivolous." In a statement to media, Fields asserted that the President has always had discretion over government contracts and security clearances, and that "His exercise of these core executive functions cannot be dictated by the ABA, a private organization, or the courts. The Administration looks forward to ultimate victory on this issue."

This lawsuit marks a significant escalation in the already contentious relationship between the ABA and the Trump administration. The administration has previously cut some government funding to the ABA and moved to restrict its traditional role in vetting federal judicial nominees, accusing the organization of bias.

Several individual law firms targeted by Trump's executive orders have already filed their own lawsuits, with federal judges striking down three of those orders as unconstitutional. However, these victories only protect the specific firms involved. The ABA's suit aims for a broader declaration that Trump's orders are unconstitutional and seeks to enjoin the administration from taking similar actions against any ABA member or their firm, thereby protecting a wider section of the legal profession.

The legal community remains divided, with some firms choosing to fight the orders in court, while others have opted to strike "deals" with the administration, pledging hundreds of millions of dollars in pro bono legal services to causes favored by the government in exchange for avoiding sanctions. These deals have drawn criticism from within the legal community, raising questions about ethical implications and the independence of the bar.