The Justice Department is escalating its legal fight with federal courts after several judges blocked President Donald Trump’s executive orders targeting prominent law firms. The dispute centers on orders that would have barred certain firms from doing business with the federal government.
The latest developments were detailed by The New York Times, which reported that the department sharply criticized federal judges in a new appeals filing after multiple rulings halted the policy. In the same sequence of filings, the Justice Department also revived a case it had previously asked a court to dismiss, a sudden reversal that has drawn attention within the legal community.
The department’s 97-page filing appeals four district court decisions that blocked Trump’s executive orders targeting several major law firms. Those rulings found the orders likely violated constitutional protections.
Justice Department attacks court rulings while reviving the case
In the filing, Justice Department lawyers argued that the courts had overstepped their authority. The brief opened with the claim that “Courts cannot tell the president what to say,” and accused the judges of “bending over backwards” to rule against the administration, as Washington has also been consumed by the recent ICE detention dispute.
The language of the filing stood out because it directly criticized the decisions of lower court judges while making its argument to a federal appeals court. The department described the rulings as encroachments on presidential authority and called them a “grave error.”
At the same time, the case took an unexpected turn earlier in the week. On Monday, the Justice Department asked the D.C. court to dismiss the case entirely, signaling it was prepared to drop the dispute.
But the following day the department asked the court to withdraw that motion, effectively reversing its position and continuing the legal fight. The abrupt shift drew attention as the administration has often pushed back against suggestions it backed away from a public dispute, amid the Jan. 6 curriculum law debate elsewhere in politics.
The executive orders targeted firms that the administration viewed as connected to Trump’s political opponents. Several major firms including Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, Jenner and Block, and Susman Godfrey quickly challenged the orders in court.
District court judges sided with the firms and blocked the policies, describing them as unconstitutional efforts to punish perceived adversaries. Some other firms reached agreements with the government to avoid the restrictions.
The dispute is part of a broader series of clashes between the Trump administration and federal courts as judges continue to scrutinize executive actions across multiple policy areas.
Published: Mar 7, 2026 01:30 pm