The hiring of Attorney General Garland by a billion-dollar law firm, Arnold & Porter, could well lead to President Trump sanctioning another blue-chip legal entity. 

America’s 86th attorney general is one of Mr. Trump’s foremost antagonists, having in 2023 appointed Special Counsel Jack Smith to conduct a criminal investigation of Mr. Trump for election interference and the storage of secret documents at Mar-a-Lago. Mr. Smith ended up bringing criminal charges against Mr. Trump in both cases, though these cases were dismissed when Mr. Trump won the 2024 presidential election.  

Mr. Garland also oversaw the prosecution of more than 1,500 January 6 defendants, which amounted to one of the largest law enforcement dragnets in the history of the Department of Justice. Some of the protesters received stiff prison sentences. Mr. Trump pardoned or commuted the sentences of all of those defendants, calling their prosecution a “grave national injustice.”  

Prior to serving as America’s top law enforcement official, Mr. Garland was the chief judge of the District of Columbia Circuit of the United States Court of Appeals. He was nominated to the Supreme Court by President Obama after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, but a confirmation vote was foiled by Senator McConnell. Justice Neil Gorsuch was eventually confirmed for that seat, preventing a swing to the left for the high court. 

Arnold & Porter, in a statement celebrating Mr. Garland’s return to the firm after he worked there earlier in his career, heralds his “unique depth of experience” and “distinguished career at DOJ.” Mr. Garland declares: “It is an honor to return to Arnold & Porter, where I first learned how to be a lawyer and about the important role lawyers can play in ensuring the rule of law.”

Mr. Garland’s reference to “the rule of law” could amount to a veiled criticism of the Trump administration, which Democrats have accused of running roughshod over legal norms. Mr. Trump in September reckoned that “the disgraceful conduct of Attorney General Merrick Garland has done tremendous damage to a once great institution.” Now, Arnold & Porter’s touting of his hiring could raise the 47th president’s ire.  

Mr. Trump’s executive order against Jenner and Block, for example, noted how the firm “was ‘thrilled’ to re-hire the unethical Andrew Weissmann after his time engaging in partisan prosecution as part of Robert Mueller’s entirely unjustified investigation.” Mr. Trump accused the firm of having “abandoned the profession’s highest ideals, condoned partisan ‘lawfare,’ and abused its pro bono practice to engage.”    

Mr. Garland has also attracted criticism from the left. One former federal prosecutor, Ankush Khardori, ventured that Mr. Garland “may go down as one of the worst and most broadly unpopular attorney generals in American history — hated by the anti-Trump part of the country for failing to bring Trump to justice, and hated by the pro-Trump part of the country for pursuing Trump at all.”      

Mr. Garland was harshly criticized by the left for taking too long to appoint a special counsel to investigate Mr. Trump, thereby allowing the president to run down the clock and eventually avoid a conviction that could have brought him a stiff prison sentence. The Department of Justice prohibits the prosecution of a sitting president.  

Since returning to power, Mr. Trump has been taking on so-called Big Law,  which has traditionally supported liberal causes with its pro bono work. Mr. Trump’s executive orders against law firms — those that employed prosecutors who sought to imprison him, and devoted extensive pro bono resources to fighting key policy initiatives from his first term — have emerged as legal flashpoints in the first months of his presidency. 

The orders have stripped security clearances for lawyers at the targeted firms, terminated government contracts, and even prevented employees from entering government buildings. Government work is a lucrative revenue stream for many Big Law firms. 

Mr. Trump is also targeting the firms for their internal policies of “diversity, equity and inclusion,” including what the firms call “diversity pipelines,” which the White House reckons are illegal racial quota programs.

Several firms, like Paul, Weiss and Skadden Arps, have chosen to reach agreements with the White House whereby the punitive orders are withdrawn in exchange for supporting the president’s agenda. These terms have included banishing DEI programs and setting aside millions of dollars for different kinds of pro bono work, such as countering antisemitism.  

Other firms, like Perkins Coie, have elected to litigate the orders as unconstitutional. Perkins secured an injunction blocking the order against it from Judge Beryl Howell, an appointee of President Obama, who wrote, “If the founding history of this country is any guide, those who stood up in court to vindicate constitutional rights and, by so doing, served to promote the rule of law, will be the models lauded when this period of American history is written.”

Judge Howell determined that Mr. Trump’s order “presents an unprecedented attack” on the rule of law and “violates the Constitution in multiple ways.” Perkins Coie occupies a special place in the anti-Trump canon for the key role it played in the development of the Russia probe during Mr. Trump’s first term.

The order notes that “in 2016 while representing failed Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, Perkins Coie hired Fusion GPS, which then manufactured a false ‘dossier’ designed to steal an election.” That arrangement was coordinated by a former partner of the firm, Marc Elias. Mr. Trump is likely to appeal Judge Howell’s ruling. 

In addition to hiring Mr. Garland, Arnold & Porter has a long record of liberal pro bono work. In particular, the firm has plowed resources into fighting Mr. Trump’s border polices and working on behalf of “voter rights” initiatives. The firm has also represented Black Lives Matter-supporting demonstrators who sued police departments after the George Floyd-related unrest.

Arnold & Porter and Mr. Garland did not respond to requests for comment by press time.