Happy Wednesday! We’re happy to announce that we have renamed every Dispatch Slack channel “Houthis PC Small Group.” 👊🔥🇺🇸
Quick Hits: Today’s Top Stories
- Ukraine and Russia have agreed to halt fighting in the Black Sea, the Trump administration announced Tuesday. According to the White House, the U.S.-brokered pair of deals—which followed three days of negotiations in Saudi Arabia—would “ensure safe navigation, eliminate the use of force, and prevent the use of commercial vessels for military purposes in the Black Sea.” However, Russian President Vladimir Putin said Tuesday that Moscow’s participation in the agreement would be contingent on the lifting of Western sanctions on Russian banks and companies involved in exporting agricultural products. Asked by a reporter whether the U.S. plans to heed the Russian demand, President Donald Trump responded: “There are five or six conditions. We are looking at all of them.” Meanwhile, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said it was “too early to say that it will work.”
- Hundreds of people took to the streets of the northern Gazan city of Beit Lahia on Tuesday to demand an end to Hamas’ rule, in what appeared to be the largest Palestinian demonstration against the terrorist group since its attack on Israel on October 7, 2023. The protests—which included chants of “Hamas out,” “Hamas terrorists,” and “Yes to peace, no to the ongoing war”—followed the collapse of a U.S.-brokered ceasefire and hostage deal last Tuesday. Hamas has long suppressed internal dissent, and growing signs of domestic opposition to the terrorist group likely signal its weakness following more than a year of fighting with Israel.
- A Tokyo district court on Tuesday ordered the closure of the Japanese branch of the controversial Unification Church following a government investigation into the organization’s alleged practices of manipulating members—known as “Moonies”—into making financially ruinous donations. The ruling, which the church can appeal, would strip it of its tax-exempt status and mandate that it liquidate its assets, though it wouldn’t bar worshippers from practicing in Japan. The religious sect founded by Sun Myung Moon came under heightened scrutiny after the 2022 assassination of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, whose killer blamed the church for bankrupting his family.
- A Monday airstrike by the Sudanese Armed Forces on a market in the country’s western Darfur region killed hundreds of people, according to the Emergency Lawyers Group, an independent war monitor. A military spokesman on Tuesday denied claims that Sudan’s army had targeted civilians, though video footage and satellite imagery corroborated the monitor’s claim that the strike had hit a densely populated commercial area. The civil war between the Sudanese army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces has left at least 28,000 people dead and displaced 11 million others since April 2023.
- Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe on Tuesday denied sharing classified information in a group chat between several top national security officials earlier this month. In the chat—outlined by Atlantic editor in chief Jeffrey Goldberg, who was accidentally included in the text thread—Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reportedly shared sensitive information about forthcoming U.S. airstrikes targeting the Iranian-backed Houthis in Yemen. Appearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday, Ratcliffe told senators that his communications did not break any laws on the sharing of sensitive government information. Gabbard, meanwhile, claimed that “no classified material” had been transmitted in the chat, which was conducted over the commercial messaging app Signal.
- President Trump on Tuesday signed an executive order seeking to significantly reform U.S. elections, including requiring all voters to show proof of citizenship, mandating that all ballots be received by Election Day, and conditioning federal funding on state compliance with the rules. Many election law experts immediately cast doubt on Trump’s legal authority to enact many of the order’s components, including directing the Election Assistance Commission, an independent agency, to add the proof of citizenship requirement to national voter registration forms.
- The Senate voted 54-47 on Tuesday to confirm Dr. Jay Bhattacharya as director of the National Institutes of Health. Meanwhile, the upper chamber voted 56-44 to confirm Dr. Marty Makary, a Johns Hopkins University surgeon and researcher, as head of the Food and Drug Administration. Both men will be charged with overseeing President Trump’s efforts to cut spending at the health agencies.
- The Senate voted 74-25 on Tuesday to confirm Michael Kratsios, President Trump’s chief technology officer during his first term, to lead the White House’s Office of Science and Technology Policy. Through the position, Kratsios will be tasked with shaping the U.S. approach to artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and other emerging technologies.
Trump Takes Aim at Lawyers
Earlier this month, President Donald Trump delivered a speech in the Great Hall of the Justice Department. But he did not laud the impartial application of the law, as past presidents have done in the staid space. Instead, he took the opportunity to signal some score-settling against the lawyers involved in legal challenges against him.
“They spied on my campaign; launched one hoax and disinformation operation after another; broke the law on a colossal scale; persecuted my family, staff, and supporters; raided my home, Mar-a-Lago; and did everything within their power to prevent me from becoming the president of the United States,” Trump said, referencing his past campaigns and some of the criminal and civil cases brought against him. He went on to single out several lawyers allegedly involved in the scheme by name, including “radicals like Marc Elias, Mark Pomerantz” and “scum” like “Andrew Weissmann, deranged Jack Smith.”
As of Tuesday, each of those attorneys has something else in common: They all have current or former ties to law firms now in Trump’s crosshairs. Over the last month, Trump has threatened four law firms in what appears to be a broader campaign of intimidation directed at the legal profession. Coinciding with the administration’s recent attacks on judges, legal scholars fear the moves could represent a serious threat to the independence of the bar and the ability of individuals to effectively challenge the government in court.
The campaign kicked off in late February when the president issued a memorandum order going after Covington & Burling for its pro bono work for Jack Smith, the special counsel who brought two criminal cases against Trump. “We’re going to call it the deranged Jack Smith signing,” Trump said as he signed the document. The memo suspended the security clearances of Covington employees and directed federal agencies to review any contracts the government had with the firm.
Then, on March 6, Trump issued an executive order targeting Perkins Coie, Marc Elias’ former law firm, over its work for the Democratic Party and involvement in the infamous Steele Dossier. The order not only revoked the firm’s security clearances—it also barred Perkins Coie employees from federal buildings and blocked employees from future government employment opportunities. And most significantly, the order directed agencies to terminate government contracts with Perkins Coie’s clients, threatening the firm’s ability to stay in business.
On March 14, the same day that Trump delivered the speech at the Justice Department, the prominent New York-based firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison was hit with effectively the same order as Perkins Coie. The firm’s offense? Offering pro bono outside counsel to the District of Columbia attorney general prosecuting people who participated in the January 6 attack on the Capitol. The order also cited the firm’s hiring of Mark Pomerantz, a former prosecutor who at one point oversaw the Manhattan district attorney’s investigation into Trump’s business practices.
Finally, on Tuesday, Jenner & Block joined the tally. The latest order specifically cited the law firm’s rehiring of Andrew Weissmann, who previously worked for Robert Mueller—the special counsel who led an investigation into allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election—as justification for the targeting. (Each of the orders also alleged, without providing evidence, that the firms are engaging in discriminatory hiring practices.)
And Jenner & Block is unlikely to be the last law firm singled out by the president for disciplinary action. Trump issued a memorandum on Saturday directing the attorney general to begin a broader review of lawyers and firms that have been involved in litigation with the government. The probe would seek to identify additional law firms guilty of “misconduct” and apply penalties, including revoking security clearances and reassessing government contracts.
Legal analysts fear the executive actions are intended to either intimidate law firms into submission or force them out of business. “By imposing sanctions for representations described as ‘harmful activity,’ the order was designed to limit these firms’ ability to make independent professional judgments about the clients they take on and the lawsuits they file or defend,” Bob Bauer, a law professor at New York University and former White House counsel in the Obama administration, wrote Monday.
Because the orders threaten client contracts and any good standing with the government, firms stand to face a potential exodus of business even if they beat the administration in court. And Trump allies have done little to assuage concerns about the president’s ultimate goal: “What we’re trying to do is put you out of business and bankrupt you,” Steve Bannon said earlier this month.
The responses from the firms have ranged from silence to fighting back in court to negotiating. In a statement following Trump’s February executive order, Covington & Burling vowed to continue serving as Smith’s defense counsel: “For more than 100 years, Covington has represented clients facing government investigations, consistent with the best traditions of the legal profession.” But otherwise, the firm has done little in response.
Perkins Coie, meanwhile, mounted a legal challenge and secured a temporary restraining order blocking the president’s action. Judge Beryl Howell, the judge overseeing the case, said the executive order targeting the firm likely violated the Constitution. She added that attempting to punish law firms for representing clients with whom a president disagrees “threatens the very foundation of our legal system.” But despite the early legal victory, some clients have already left Perkins Coie, according to the complaint filed by the firm.
Paul Weiss chose door number three: negotiation. After talks that reportedly included a three-hour-long meeting between Trump and Paul Weiss Chair Brad Karp at the White House, the president rescinded the order. In exchange, the firm agreed to provide $40 million in pro bono legal services “to support the administration’s initiatives,” including veterans’ issues, combating antisemitism, and “other mutually agreed projects.” In an email sent to the entire firm on Sunday, Karp said that although he initially prepared to fight the order in court, “it became clear that, even if we were successful in initially enjoining the executive order in litigation, it would not solve the fundamental problem, which was that clients perceived our firm as being persona non grata with the administration.”
“We could prevent the executive order from taking effect, but we couldn’t erase it,” he added. “Clients had told us that they were not going to be able to stay with us, even though they wanted to. It was very likely that our firm would not be able to survive a protracted dispute with the administration.”
Some legal observers were surprised that Paul Weiss capitulated to Trump. “This is one of the ones that people would have expected to be a liberal lion of the law, to use an old fashioned phrase,” Walter Olson, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute’s Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies, told TMD. “If he can do this to Paul Weiss, he can probably do this to a lot of other firms, more or less at will.”
It remains to be seen what path Jenner & Block will take. “Today, we have been named in an executive order similar to one which has already been declared unconstitutional by a federal court,” the firm said in a statement Tuesday. “We remain focused on serving and safeguarding our clients’ interests with the dedication, integrity, and expertise that has defined our firm for more than one hundred years and will pursue all appropriate remedies.”
The orders and the threat of additional action by the president are still reverberating throughout the legal profession, and scholars warn the consequences could be felt well beyond the offices of white-shoe law firms. “An attack on the legal profession like this is fundamentally an attack on your ability, any person’s ability, to receive justice and to defy the administration in power,” our friend David French argued on Advisory Opinions. As Olson told TMD: “If the government has wronged you in some way, you need to be able to go to the courts and have a lawyer who isn’t afraid of making every argument and bringing up every piece of evidence, even though it’s embarrassing to the government.”
The law firm targeting comes as Trump and his allies have also mounted a pressure campaign against federal judges who have ruled in favor of challenges to the administration’s policies. “It’s an attack across the board,” Olson said, “on the legitimacy of a legal system that is independent of whatever the will of the leader is.”
Today’s Must-Read
In Better Spirits
The cool-ification of the nation’s capital is a symptom of America’s broader urban revival and is indicative of shifting demographics and changing expectations among its young and affluent residents. Hip coffee shops, Michelin quality dining, and cocktails that don’t suck are no longer a pipe dream for Hill staffers wondering why they didn’t just take that job in New York—they’re an everpresence, and an expectation. But high-end craft cocktail bars like Press Club couldn’t have existed two decades ago. Even in the recent past, you would have struggled to find a bartender in the city who knew how to make the most basic classic cocktail, let alone a bar that squeezed fresh citrus or knew to refrigerate its vermouth. But today, the city’s cocktail bars are packed with well-informed patrons clamoring to drop $20 on everything from a classic Manhattan to avant-garde concoctions derived from laboratory centrifuges and rotary evaporators.
Toeing the Company Line
Worth Your Time
- Why are incumbents worldwide, on the left and right, so deeply unpopular? In the Atlantic, Moisés Naím argued it’s because citizens now expect governments to do far more than they can actually deliver on. “Public sectors the world over may be structurally unable to fulfill voters’ expectations, not necessarily because government-service provision is bad (though in many cases it is bad) but because the growth of expectations could well have escaped the capacities of governments to keep up,” he wrote. “Leaders of all stripes may be scrambling to provide services that their constituents will consider even adequate, let alone good. That the anti-incumbent mood will turn on the populists it helped get elected is reasonable to expect. The world of gate-kept media that filters extreme views and moderates discontent is gone for good. Everybody-to-everybody communications are a permanent feature of modern societies. And although public-sector reforms could make some difference on the margin to help bureaucracies do their jobs better, governments will not likely overcome runaway expectations driven by the new information age.”
- Writing for his Substack, Slow Boring, Matt Yglesias highlighted persistent problems with the Democratic strategy on immigration—and outlined recommendations for how to fix them. “Unfortunately for Democrats, the advocacy groups they outsourced their immigration policy thinking to are very anchored in the community of immigration lawyers and in broad progressive skepticism of law enforcement. It’s not just that those voices can push fairly extreme positions, it’s that they don’t really have a coherent account of why immigration is good that is persuasive to most American voters,” he wrote. “Politicians still need to have policy ideas they can explain when directly asked and a blueprint for how to govern the country. Shining a light on the most egregious instances of Trump’s cruelty in enforcement is important, but if that’s all Democrats do, they’ll end up with an immigration policy that amounts to ‘do less enforcement,’ which doesn’t really work. We need to start with the premise that economic growth is good, that good immigration policy can contribute to economic growth if approached with an empirical spirit rather than cultural panic, and come up with ideas that facilitate that.”
Politico: [Democratic Rep.] Jasmine Crockett Called Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, Who Uses a Wheelchair, ‘Governor Hot Wheels’
Reached in the halls of the Capitol, Crockett told POLITICO her statement “speaks for itself.”
But in a post on X several hours later, Crockett said she wasn’t thinking about the governor’s condition, but “about the planes, trains, and automobiles he used to transfer migrants into communities led by Black mayors, deliberately stoking tension and fear among the most vulnerable.”
In the Zeitgeist
The countdown to the second season of Andor, a Star Wars spinoff series, continues. To hold us over until the April 22 release date, Disney+ just dropped a new trailer.
Let Us Know
Do you agree with Sarah Isgur’s assessment last week that Donald Trump’s targeting of law firms is “the scariest thing that this administration has done by a mile”?
