The Trump administration and the Department of Justice (DOJ) have expressed strong opposition to a federal court’s discovery order issued on August 3, which mandates the disclosure of individuals involved in drafting and approving executive orders targeting prominent law firms. This development arises from a lawsuit filed by the American Bar Association (ABA), challenging the administration’s actions against these firms.
In 2025, the administration issued executive orders against several major law firms, including Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, WilmerHale, and Susman Godfrey. These orders alleged that the firms engaged in activities detrimental to American interests and imposed sanctions such as revoking security clearances and terminating government contracts. For instance, the executive order against Susman Godfrey accused the firm of “spearheading efforts to weaponize the American legal system and degrade the quality of American elections.” ([whitehouse.gov](https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/04/addressing-risks-from-susman-godfrey/?query-11-page=141&utm_source=openai))
The ABA contends that these executive orders constitute unconstitutional retaliation against law firms representing clients or causes unfavorable to the administration. In response, the ABA initiated legal action seeking to block the enforcement of these orders. ([abovethelaw.com](https://abovethelaw.com/2026/07/the-aba-wants-the-white-houses-receipts-on-the-biglaw-executive-orders/?utm_source=openai))
During the discovery phase of the lawsuit, the ABA requested internal White House communications related to the executive orders, including those involving senior advisers such as Steve Bannon and Boris Epshteyn. The administration has resisted these requests, citing concerns over separation of powers and the confidentiality of internal deliberations. ([lawandcrime.com](https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/another-impasse-in-discovery-has-white-house-communications-about-trumps-uniquely-dangerous-executive-orders-under-the-microscope/?utm_source=openai))
In July 2026, the DOJ issued subpoenas to 14 major law firms targeted by the executive orders or those that had reached agreements with the administration. These subpoenas demanded records of communications related to the executive orders, including interactions with Boris Epshteyn since the start of President Trump’s second term. ([investing.com](https://www.investing.com/news/politics-news/trump-administration-discloses-subpoenas-to-law-firms-in-fight-with-us-lawyer-group-4799510?utm_source=openai))
Legal experts view the administration’s resistance to the discovery order as an attempt to shield internal deliberations from scrutiny. The outcome of this legal battle could have significant implications for the balance of power between the executive branch and the legal profession, as well as the extent to which internal White House communications are subject to judicial review.