Executive privilege
Archived — this story has rotated out of today’s deck. It is kept here in full.
The gist
Trump's Justice Department claims executive privilege to shield advisers' names in law firm order lawsuit. The move expands presidential secrecy, potentially shielding corruption and blocking accountability.
Background
The Trump administration is facing a lawsuit from the American Bar Association over executive orders targeting major law firms. A federal judge ordered the White House to identify individuals involved in drafting those orders, but the Justice Department is now asserting executive privilege to keep those names secret, arguing that presidential communications are protected. This is part of a broader pattern of using executive privilege to avoid accountability, as seen in past attempts to block testimony from officials like Don McGahn.
How it unfolded
- Jun 2025The American Bar Association sued the Executive Office of the President over executive orders targeting law firms, alleging a coordinated campaign to intimidate the legal profession.
- Aug 18, 2026The Justice Department formally asserted executive privilege in response to a court order from Judge Amir Ali requiring the White House to identify individuals involved in drafting the executive orders.
- Aug 25, 2026A Guardian opinion piece criticizes a recent Office of Legal Counsel memo that extends executive privilege to private advisers, arguing it invites corruption and undermines accountability.
Who’s saying what
- Official
- The administration argues that the information is shielded under a special privilege accorded to presidential communications, and cannot be forced to identify advisers.
- Critics
- Critics, including The Guardian, argue that this expansive view of executive privilege is dangerous and invites corruption by allowing presidents to block witnesses and hide communications.
Still unverified
The specific contents of the Office of Legal Counsel memo are not fully detailed in the material, and its legal standing is disputed.