Susman Godfrey Disqualification Bid Fails in Court

The susman godfrey disqualification fight ended in a loss for the Trump administration on Friday, when a federal judge allowed the law firm to keep representing the American Bar Association in its lawsuit accusing the administration of targeting law firms for retaliation.

U.S. District Judge Amir Ali in Washington ruled that the government had not shown that lawyers at Susman Godfrey would have to appear as witnesses in the case while also serving as the ABA’s counsel. He added that even if one lawyer were needed as a witness, professional conduct rules would not automatically bar the rest of the firm from representing the organization.

The Government’s Argument

The Justice Department asked Ali in July to remove Susman Godfrey under professional conduct rules barring lawyers from serving as both advocate and witness. The department argued that the ABA was seeking information about communications involving the firm, and contended that removing Susman would not harm the ABA because it could hire nearly any firm in the country.

The White House had no immediate comment on the ruling, and the ABA did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

A Broader Legal Battle

The ABA filed the lawsuit last year alleging the Trump administration adopted an unlawful policy of targeting law firms and lawyers over their legal work, hiring practices, diversity policies, and political ties. Susman Godfrey was itself among the firms hit by Trump’s executive orders and is one of three firms that won court orders last year permanently blocking enforcement of the orders against them; the administration’s appeal is pending.

Four firms — Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, Jenner & Block, and Susman Godfrey — fought the executive orders in court and won First Amendment rulings, while nine other firms struck deals pledging a combined $940 million in free legal work to avoid similar orders.

Source: Reuters