In another legal setback for US president Donald Trump, a federal judge on Tuesday halted large portions of his executive order that blocks the federal government from working with any business linked to the law firm Susman Godfrey.
The Texas-based firm had represented a voting machine company in a high-profile defamation case that resulted in a $787 million settlement from Fox News over alleged false claims about the 2020 election.
US district judge Loren AliKhan granted a temporary restraining order in favour of Susman Godfrey, calling Trump’s order “a shocking abuse of power.” She said the move likely violates both the first and fifth amendments of the US constitution. “The government cannot hold lawyers hostage to force them to agree with it,” she added.
This is the fourth court ruling finding Trump's legal targeting of firms to be unconstitutional. Some firms agreed to settlements offering free legal services for Trump-backed causes, but Susman and at least three others chose to fight in court—and have so far won.
Susman’s lawyer, former US solicitor general Don Verrilli, argued that urgent judicial action was needed. “We’re sliding very fast into an abyss here,” he told the court.
The blocked parts of Trump’s order had banned federal contracts with firms like Susman and even restricted their staff from entering federal buildings. Verrilli also highlighted the suspicious timing of the order, issued just before Trump’s next defamation trial involving Newsmax.
The Texas-based firm had represented a voting machine company in a high-profile defamation case that resulted in a $787 million settlement from Fox News over alleged false claims about the 2020 election.
US district judge Loren AliKhan granted a temporary restraining order in favour of Susman Godfrey, calling Trump’s order “a shocking abuse of power.” She said the move likely violates both the first and fifth amendments of the US constitution. “The government cannot hold lawyers hostage to force them to agree with it,” she added.
This is the fourth court ruling finding Trump's legal targeting of firms to be unconstitutional. Some firms agreed to settlements offering free legal services for Trump-backed causes, but Susman and at least three others chose to fight in court—and have so far won.
Susman’s lawyer, former US solicitor general Don Verrilli, argued that urgent judicial action was needed. “We’re sliding very fast into an abyss here,” he told the court.
The blocked parts of Trump’s order had banned federal contracts with firms like Susman and even restricted their staff from entering federal buildings. Verrilli also highlighted the suspicious timing of the order, issued just before Trump’s next defamation trial involving Newsmax.
You may also like
Namrata Shirodkar watches Nick's 'spectacular show,' thanks Priyanka for 'fabulous evening'
India sure contender for seat in expanded UNSC: IGN Chair Amb AlBanai
Delhi: 17-year-old boy stabbed to death, police launch probe
'Make the West great again': Trump and Meloni bond over tariffs, immigration, and a shared conservative vision
World Heritage Day 2025: 50 Heritage Structures In Bhopal Encroached Upon
