Have You No Shame?

On March 2, 2026, the Office of the Attorney General of the United States agreed to abandon its appeal from the District Court rulings in favor of Perkins Coie and other firms seeking to strike down the Executive Order punishing them.  Sanger, Hanley, Sanger & Avila, along with 503 other firms, signed on to an amicus brief supporting the targeted firms who then prevailed in the district court.  When the appeal was filed by the government, our firm re-upped to submit a brief to the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals.

The filing of the one-page Notice of Appeal by the government was perfunctory. The deadline for filing the opening brief to set forth the legal grounds for the appeal was – and is – March 6, 2026.  Understandably, the lawyers in the Attorney General’s Office assigned to support the clearly unconstitutional executive order decided that they should abandon the appeal.  They reached an agreement with the aggrieved law firms that they would ask to dismiss the appeal in exchange for a mutual waiver of attorney’s fees and costs, hence the request filed on March 2.

Without explanation, on March 3, 2026, the next day after requesting to abandon the appeal, the Attorney General submitted a request to the Circuit Court to disregard their abandonment and allow them to proceed with the “merits” of the appeal.  Such a maneuver would bring shame upon any lawyer or law firm absent a good explanation.  No explanation was offered.

Donald Trump, in his private capacity and as president has, over the years, compelled lawyers to take positions in litigation that, not only were bound to be unsuccessful, but pressed or exceeded ethical limits.  Many of those lawyers have paid the price publicly and professionally.

The legal decision to abandon the appeal in the Perkins Coie case, which could not be prosecuted in good faith, was understandable.  What we do not know is what happened behind closed doors between the abandonment of the appeal on March 2 and the request to rescind the abandonment on March 3.  We do not know what compelled lawyers with responsible positions in the United States Attorney General’s Office to sacrifice their professional reputations and their credibility before the federal courts in favor of a political directive.

We will see how the Circuit Court handles this bizarre turn of events.  However, this is another instance where we have to ask of those government lawyers involved, “Have you no shame?”