A federal judge has struck down President Trump's executive order targeting the law firm WilmerHale, ruling it unconstitutional and emphasizing the importance of judicial independence and free speech, marking a setback for Trump's efforts to penalize firms associated with critics like Robert Mueller.
A federal judge in D.C. struck down President Trump's executive order targeting the law firm WilmerHale, ruling it unconstitutional and emphasizing the importance of an independent judiciary, marking the third such legal defeat for Trump's efforts to punish law firms associated with his perceived enemies.
A federal judge struck down President Trump's executive order targeting law firm WilmerHale, citing it as unconstitutional and an attempt to retaliate against the firm for its association with Robert Mueller, with the ruling highlighting the order's impact on the firm's ability to represent clients and its broader implications for judicial independence.
A U.S. District Judge ruled that President Trump's executive order targeting the law firm WilmerHale was unconstitutional, emphasizing the importance of judicial independence and condemning the order's punitive measures against the firm for its protected speech and legal work.
A federal judge invalidated President Trump's executive order targeting law firm WilmerHale, ruling it unconstitutional as it violated free speech and due process rights, marking the third such legal defeat for Trump's efforts to punish firms linked to political adversaries.
A federal judge struck down President Trump's executive order targeting law firm WilmerHale, ruling it unconstitutional as it violated the firm's First Amendment rights and due process, marking the third such legal defeat for Trump's efforts to punish firms associated with his political opponents.
A federal judge ruled in favor of WilmerHale, striking down President Trump's executive order that targeted the law firm, citing violations of constitutional rights including free speech and due process, and emphasizing the order's retaliatory nature against the firm's legal activities related to Robert Mueller's investigation.
The presidents of Harvard, the University of Pennsylvania, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology faced criticism for their evasive responses during a congressional hearing on whether they would discipline students who called for the genocide of Jews. It has now been revealed that the law firm WilmerHale, known for its work with universities, prepared the school presidents for the testimony. The firm had separate teams to prepare each president and already had ties with all three schools. The presidents' responses sparked an investigation by a House committee and led to consequences such as a donor retracting a large donation to Penn. Critics argue that the answers seemed too focused on First Amendment concerns and lacked a clear condemnation of such calls for violence.