WilmerHale has secured a sweeping legal victory in its challenge to a Trump administration executive order, with a federal judge permanently blocking the directive as unconstitutional. U.S. District Judge Richard Leon granted summary judgment to the firm Tuesday, ending the case without trial and delivering a forceful defense of First Amendment rights and legal advocacy.

The executive order had directed federal agencies to curtail dealings with WilmerHale and consider canceling contracts with its clients, citing the firm’s association with Robert Mueller, the former special counsel who led the investigation into Trump’s 2016 campaign. WilmerHale argued the order infringed on its right to represent clients of its choosing and constituted unlawful retaliation for protected legal expression.

“Indeed, to rule otherwise would be unfaithful to the judgment and vision of the Founding Fathers!” Leon wrote in his emphatic opinion, which reportedly included 26 exclamation marks and likened the order to a pot of “gumbo” that gave him “heartburn.”

As reported by Bloomberg Law, the court ruled in WilmerHale’s favor on most of the 11 counts brought in its complaint, including all four related to First Amendment protections. Those counts cited retaliation, viewpoint discrimination, and violations of the rights to petition the government and associate freely.

“The Order is intended to, and does in fact, impede the firm’s ability to effectively represent its clients,” Leon wrote. “Taken together, the provisions constitute a staggering punishment for the firm’s protected speech!”

While the court did not uphold WilmerHale’s argument that the order violated the Spending Clause by conditioning federal funds on speech-based criteria, Judge Leon found that the order’s intent was clear: to chill legal advocacy disfavored by the president. “The Order shouts through a bullhorn: If you take on causes disfavored by President Trump, you will be punished!” he wrote.

WilmerHale, represented by former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement and Erin Murphy of Clement & Murphy, celebrated the ruling as a win for the legal profession and its clients. “The Court’s decision to permanently block the unlawful executive order in its entirety strongly affirms our foundational constitutional rights and those of our clients,” the firm said in a statement.

Trump’s executive orders against law firms have triggered a wave of legal challenges. Courts have already struck down similar orders targeting Perkins Coie and Jenner & Block, while cases brought by Susman Godfrey and others are pending. Meanwhile, nine prominent firms—including Paul Weiss, Kirkland & Ellis, and Latham & Watkins—have avoided legal fights by settling and agreeing to provide nearly $1 billion in pro bono work aligned with the Trump administration’s priorities.

The case is Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP v. Executive Office of The President, No. 1:25-cv-00917, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.