TANTRUMP.org

A factual log of presidential escalations

← Back to entries

Executive order targeting Susman Godfrey law firm for challenging administration

December 15, 2025

3
Level

Multiple Guardrails

Founders' Principles Violated

J
Jefferson

Government actions that restrict liberty and public access to information.
A
Adams

Judicial independence and due process undermined.
M
Madison

Checks & balances bypassed. Executive action without Congressional authority.

Guardrails Violated

First Amendment

First Amendment press freedom guarantees violated.
Due Process

Due process protections and procedural requirements bypassed.
Separation of Powers

Separation of powers and constitutional balance between branches violated.

Why Level 3?

Multiple guardrails bypassed: First Amendment, due process, separation of powers. Executive order targeting law firm for legal challenges constitutes retaliation. Measurable harm to access to legal representation and attorney independence.

What Happened

Context

President Trump signed Executive Order 14263 on December 15, 2025, targeting the law firm Susman Godfrey LLP for challenging administration policies. The order froze security clearances, restricted access to federal buildings, and threatened termination of government contracts.

Action Taken

Signed Executive Order 14263 on December 15, 2025, targeting the law firm Susman Godfrey LLP for challenging administration policies. The order froze security clearances for firm attorneys, restricted access to federal buildings, and threatened termination of government contracts. Critics argued the order violated First Amendment rights and constituted retaliation against attorneys for legal challenges. The order created fear and uncertainty among attorneys representing clients against the administration.

In His Own Words

"Law firms that sue us will face consequences."

"We will not tolerate attorneys who attack our policies."

"Security clearances are a privilege, not a right."

What's Wrong

Executive order targeting specific law firm for legal challenges violates First Amendment rights and constitutes retaliation. The order froze security clearances and restricted access to federal buildings without proper legal basis. Critics argued the order constituted intimidation of attorneys and undermined access to legal representation.

Impact

Constitutional: Order violates First Amendment rights and undermines access to legal representation. Legal: Questions about authority to target law firms for legal challenges. Operational: Frozen security clearances and restricted access affected firm operations. Institutional: Created fear and uncertainty among attorneys representing clients against administration.

Primary Sources