2026年3月7日 1:44 UTC / 路透社
- 摘要
- 四名法官以违法为由阻止了特朗普的指令
- 政府周一表示将放弃上诉
- 司法部一天后改变立场
- 律所指控特朗普出于政治原因进行报复
华盛顿3月6日电（路透社）- 美国总统唐纳德·特朗普的政府周五向联邦上诉法院请求恢复其旨在惩罚四家美国主要律师事务所的行政命令，称联邦法官在阻止这些属于总统核心权力范围内的指令时越权了。
司法部向美国哥伦比亚特区巡回上诉法院表示，这四名法官”过度迁就”，在没有考虑到这些指令”明显符合宪法且具有适用性”的情况下，就宣布特朗普针对Perkins Coie、WilmerHale、Jenner & Block和Susman Godfrey律所的命令无效。
路透社伊朗简报通讯将为您提供伊朗战争的最新动态和分析。点击此处注册。
广告 · 滚动继续
节点运行失败
在质疑这些指令的诉讼中，这些律所表示，这位共和党总统非法报复了他们，原因是他们代表其政治对手或在法庭上挑战其政策的客户，或雇佣了参与过针对总统的政府调查的律师。
特朗普的行政命令试图限制这些律所律师进入联邦大楼，并终止这些律所客户持有的美国政府合同。
法官们裁定，特朗普违反了美国宪法第一修正案关于政府不得侵犯言论自由的保护以及第五修正案关于正当程序的承诺，并下达永久阻止这些指令的命令。
广告 · 滚动继续
在司法部周一提出放弃对司法裁决的上诉后，政府向哥伦比亚特区巡回上诉法院提交了相关文件，随后第二天又反转了这一立场。这份文件是政府首次解释其寻求恢复特朗普命令的法律依据。
WilmerHale周五在一份声明中表示：”我们不同意政府继续就这一司法共识提起上诉的决定，我们将自豪地继续为我们的客户和律所辩护。”
特朗普曾指控这四家律所”将法律体系武器化”来对付他和他的盟友，并推行他称之为歧视性的职场多元化政策。
在周五提交的文件中，司法部表示，此案”不是关于美国律师事务所的神圣性”，而是关于下级法院在国家安全和其他事务中”侵犯了总统的宪法权力”。
包括Paul Weiss、Skadden Arps、Latham & Watkins和Kirkland & Ellis在内的另外九家知名律所去年与特朗普达成和解，撤销或避免了类似针对它们的行动，并集体承诺为他支持的事业提供近10亿美元的免费法律服务。
政府面临周五提交上诉法院开场文件的最后期限。哥伦比亚特区巡回上诉法院尚未确定审理政府上诉的辩论日期。
迈克·斯卡塞拉报道；大卫·巴里奥和威尔·邓纳姆编辑
我们的标准：汤森路透信托原则。
Trump administration seeks to revive executive orders targeting law firms
March 7, 2026 1:44 AM UTC / Reuters
- Summary
- Four judges blocked Trump’s directives as unlawful
- Administration on Monday said it would drop its appeals
- Justice Department changed course one day later
- Firms accused Trump of retaliation for political reasons
WASHINGTON, March 6 (Reuters) – President Donald Trump’s administration asked a federal appeals court on Friday to revive his executive orders that sought to punish four major U.S. law firms, arguing that federal judges overstepped their authority by blocking directives that rest within core presidential powers.
The Justice Department told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that the four judges “bent over backwards” to invalidate Trump’s orders against the firms Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, Jenner & Block and Susman Godfrey “without considering their plainly constitutional aspects and applications.”
The Reuters Iran Briefing newsletter keeps you informed with the latest developments and analysis of the Iran war. Sign up here.
Advertisement · Scroll to continue
节点运行失败
The law firms in lawsuits challenging the directives said the Republican president illegally retaliated against them for representing his political adversaries or clients who challenged his policies in court, or had employed lawyers who took part in past government investigations aimed at the president.
Trump’s executive orders sought to restrict access to federal buildings for lawyers working for the firms and to end U.S. government contracts held by clients of the firms.
The judges found that Trump violated the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment protections against government abridgment of free speech and Fifth Amendment promise of due process, and issued orders permanently blocking the directives.
Advertisement · Scroll to continue
The administration’s filing with the D.C. Circuit came after the Justice Department on Monday moved to abandon its appeals of the judicial rulings, then reversed that stance the following day. The filing marked the administration’s first explanation of its legal rationale for seeking to reinstate Trump’s orders.
WilmerHale in a statement on Friday said “we disagree with the government’s decision to appeal this judicial consensus, and we will proudly continue to defend our clients and our firm.”
Trump had accused the four firms of “weaponizing” the legal system against him and his allies and promoting workplace diversity policies he called discriminatory.
In Friday’s filing, the Justice Department said the case is “not about the sanctity of the American law firm” but rather “is about lower courts encroaching on the constitutional power of the president” in the realm of national security and other matters.
Nine other prominent law firms, including Paul Weiss, Skadden Arps, Latham & Watkins and Kirkland & Ellis, reached settlements with Trump last year to rescind or avoid similar actions against them, and collectively pledged nearly $1 billion in free legal work to causes that he supports.
The administration had faced a Friday deadline to file its opening court papers in the appeals. The D.C. Circuit has not yet set an argument date to weigh the administration’s appeals.
Reporting by Mike Scarcella; Editing by David Bario and Will Dunham
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.