Please click here to opt in to receive the Executive Functions Roundup via email.
Judge Benjamin Settle (W.D.Wash.) on Thursday issued a preliminary nationwide injunction barring the Trump administration from implementing President Trump’s executive order seeking to prevent transgender individuals from serving in the military. (Order.) (Opinion.)
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on Thursday administratively stayed a district court’s order enjoining the administration from implementing the executive order regarding transgender service members. However, the court wrote, “If any action occurs that negatively impacts service members [under certain policy and guidance issued pursuant to the executive order] before the court lifts the administrative stay, the plaintiffs may file a motion to lift the administrative stay, and the court will consider it expeditiously.” See the district court’s ruling in a prior Roundup. (Order.)
Chris Geidner analyzed the meaning of the D.C. Circuit’s order. (Law Dork.)
President Trump on Thursday issued an executive order targeting the WilmerHale law firm. The order focused on the roles of current and former members of the firm in the Mueller investigation and closely resembled others Trump has issued against large law firms. The New York Times reported on Thursday that the Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom law firm is having discussions with the Trump administration to avert an executive order targeting the firm. (Executive order.) (NYT.)
Bob Bauer argued that Trump’s directives against law firms represent an effort to abuse the legal process to exact harm on administration enemies and intimidate other institutions that might otherwise consider representing clients or causes disfavored by the administration. He also wrote that the effort against the firms serves as further evidence of weak, loyalty-first lawyering in Trump 2.0. (Executive Functions.)
Two Federal Trade Commission members who were fired by the Trump administration filed a lawsuit against the administration on Thursday. They argued that Humphrey’s Executor serves as “binding precedent that a President cannot remove an FTC Commissioner without cause.” (Complaint.)
Quinta Jurecic compared President Trump’s efforts to control the workings of the Justice Department in his first and second administrations. (Lawfare.)
Emergency Order Applications Involving the U.S. Government in the Supreme Court
Department of Education v. California: Government filed application On March 26 to vacate district court injunction and issue administrative stay; Court requested response by 4:00 p.m. today.
Office of Personnel Management v. American Federation of Government Employees: Government filed application on March 24 to stay district court injunction and issue administrative stay; Court requested response by 12:00 p.m. on April 3.
Trump v. Washington: Government filed application on March 13 to stay district court injunction; Court requested response by 4:00 p.m. on April 4.
Trump v. New Jersey: Government filed application on March 13 to stay district court injunction; Court requested response by 4:00 p.m. on April 4.
Trump v. CASA: Government filed application on March 13 to stay district court injunction; Court requested response by 4:00 p.m. on April 4.
Rana v. Engleman: Petitioner filed application on February 28 for stay of extradition pending litigation for writ of habeas corpus; application denied by Supreme Court on March 6; application refiled and submitted to the Court on March 7; application distributed for conference of April 4.