Faculty Responds to Executive Orders

On Thursday, April 3, a group of Law School faculty published a collective letter responding to the Trump administration’s executive orders targeting law firms and the legal profession. Sixty-eight out of the Law School’s approximately 115 faculty members signed in their individual capacities. Signatories included tenured, emeritus, and general (tenure-ineligible)[1] faculty members. “We are writing to affirm some core values that we share, including a commitment to taking law seriously and a belief in the importance of both legal institutions and civic discourse to a free society,” the professors wrote.

In recent weeks, Trump has issued several executive orders targeting both individual firms and attorneys, as well as the legal profession as a whole. The letter expresses concern about the apparent “retribution” exacted against law firms and individual lawyers “based either on the President’s grievances or on lawful and ethical representation of clients disfavored by the current administration.” Such attacks by a sitting president are unprecedented in the United States. As Professor Joshua Fischman, a signatory, commented, this letter would feel “redundant” a decade ago. Professor Sarah Shalf ’01, a signatory who teaches professional responsibility (PR) at the Law School, commented on the theme of professional ethics: “As I emphasize in PR, a key value of the profession is that attorneys must be able and willing to represent clients with disfavored views to give effect to the rule of law. Recent attacks on lawyers, law firms, and law clinics (including the Congressional investigation of Northwestern University’s law clinics) violate this principle.”

Professor George Cohen, another professor of PR at the Law School, suggested the inclusion of an excerpt from the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct in the letter: “An independent legal profession is an important force in preserving government under law, for abuse of legal authority is more readily challenged by a profession whose members are not dependent on government for the right to practice.” Professor Cohen emphasized that the legal profession’s independence is not a new idea, nor is the process for holding attorneys accountable for misconduct. The traditional regulators for attorneys are federal agencies, state bars, and courts, not the president, and particularly not with a retributive bent. Professor Cohen pointed out that the executive orders “raise serious due process concerns” because they circumvent the accepted processes for regulating and sanctioning attorneys. Professor Ruth Buck ’85, a signatory, also commented that she found it “extremely concerning” that the current administration appears to be condoning defiance of judges’ orders and due process.

The Trump administration itself invoked ABA Model Rule 3.1, a rule that prohibits frivolous and bad faith legal or factual arguments by lawyers, in its recent memorandum, “Preventing Abuses of the Legal System and the Federal Court.”[2] Harvard faculty also invoked the Model Rules in their earlier letter responding to the executive orders.[3] The Model Rules are intended as guidance. They are not legally binding,[4] though they have served as a model for most state ethics rules.[5] The authors of the rules specifically warn against their invocation as “procedural weapons.”[6]

The letter concludes by noting the irregular breadth of the administration’s attack on the legal profession, which it characterizes as being on a “scale of norm-breaking and even law-breaking [that] is unusual and troubling,” even compared to recent history. Professor Cohen noted that this paragraph can be read as a response to Professor Adrian Vermeule of Harvard Law School’s “what aboutism” dissent to the Harvard faculty’s letter.

As it has been alluded to, the UVA letter follows letters signed by contingents of faculty members at Harvard Law School[7], a subsequent response letter by Professor Adrian Vermeule of Harvard Law School[8], and a letter signed by faculty at UCLA [9] School of Law. A faculty member at UVA’s Law School commented, on condition of anonymity, that several additional faculty letters will be forthcoming from even more schools. The letter also follows a March 26 letter signed by seventy-eight law school deans, which was not signed by Law School Dean Leslie Kendrick ’06.[10]

UVA’s letter emerged “organically from a number of faculty who thought it important to speak about what is going on,” said Professor Kevin Cope, an early participant in the initiative.

“The statements made by other law schools got our faculty to think about [our own statement],” commented Professor Deborah Hellman. “But we felt the consensus was that it would be good to draft our own statement. It was important that it was words that we drafted.”

A small group of faculty drafted an initial statement before circulating it among the entire Law School faculty to solicit feedback. All Law School faculty had an opportunity to provide feedback, and the final letter was similarly circulated among all the faculty, who each had an opportunity to sign. While the majority of signatories are tenured or emeritus, not all are. Professor Kelly Orians, the Director of the Decarceration and Community Reentry Clinic, shared that she signed “in spite of advice that I not, on account of not being tenured.” She commented that “signing a letter that says I am ‘concerned,’ that I take the law ‘seriously’ and that some of the actions taken by this administration ‘appear’ to be taken without concern for the law is the least any law professor can do right now.”

“I became a law professor in part because I think that law matters, and I signed the letter for the same reason,” commented Professor Caleb Nelson, another faculty signatory. “In my view, what has been happening is not normal or okay. I don’t think that people in positions of power have enough respect for legal restrictions or legal institutions, or for the value of free speech.”

We at Law Weekly remain eager to hear from faculty, staff, students, and community members about their thoughts on this letter. Breadth of perspective is one of our core values. We encourage anyone interested in speaking with us to please reach out.

[1] UVA Policy PROV-004

[2] https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/03/preventing-abuses-of-the-legal-system-and-the-federal-court/. (change to Federal Register if available)

[3] https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aKzGVQxrotpNGblivMHsIdXnXwVDlJ3M/preview.

[4] ABA Model Rules Preamble and Scope, Paragraph 20

[5] https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/#:~:text=The%20ABA%20Model%20Rules%20of,Model%20Code%20of%20Professional%20Responsibility

[6] Id.

[7] https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aKzGVQxrotpNGblivMHsIdXnXwVDlJ3M/preview.

[8] https://thenewdigest.substack.com/p/an-open-letter-to-my-students.

 [9] https://sites.google.com/view/letter-ucla-law-students.

[10] https://www.linkedin.com/posts/william-treanor_today-i-joined-78-of-my-fellow-law-school-ugcPost-7310717627155271688-E2Co/?utm_medium=ios_app&rcm=ACoAAASzYsgB3EQfxwoQXJ1NoMopdLBouc6OLh0&utm_source=social_share_send&utm_campaign=mail.

__

Emily Becker ’27 — ejb6zt@virginia.edu

Noah Coco’ 26 — cmz4bx@virginia.edu