Law firms targeted by Trump ask judges to permanently bar executive orders against them – live
Law firms targeted by Trump ask judges to permanently bar executive orders against them
Law firms Perkins Coie and WilmerHale will ask federal judges in Washington DC on Wednesday to permanently bar Donald Trump’s executive orders against them, calling the measures acts of retaliation that violate US constitutional protections.
The court hearings will be the latest flashpoint in a legal battle pitting prominent law firms against the Republican president and his administration. Trump announced earlier this morning he was suing Perkins Coie.
Trump’s orders against Perkins Coie and WilmerHale sought to restrict their lawyers’ access to federal buildings and to end government contracts held by their clients, citing the firms’ connections to his legal and political enemies.
Reuters reports that US district judge Beryl Howell will hear Perkins Coie’s request for summary judgment at 11am ET, followed by a hearing in WilmerHale’s case at 2pm before US district judge Richard Leon.
Leon, a Republican appointee, issued a temporary order last month blocking key provisions of the order against WilmerHale, an 1,100-lawyer firm that has a large office in Washington. Howell, a Democratic appointee, also temporarily blocked Trump’s order last month against Perkins Coie. Two other judges weighing lawsuits by other firms have issued similar orders.
The justice department has defended the executive orders as lawful presidential directives.
Nine law firms, including Paul Weiss, Skadden Arps, Latham & Watkins and Kirkland & Ellis, settled with the White House to avoid a similar order being issued against them. They and several others have cumulatively pledged nearly $1bn in free legal services and made other concessions in their deals with Trump. Some lawyers at law firms that have cut deals with Trump have resigned in protest.
Hundreds of law firms, thousands of lawyers and dozens of attorney bar groups have backed the law firms suing the administration, calling the executive orders an illegal attempt to intimidate firms from representing clients adverse to Trump’s interests.
Key events
Adria R Walker
Trump cuts federal grants to Louisiana plantation museum focused on reality of slavery
The Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS ) has terminated two grants for Black history and culture that were awarded to the Whitney Plantation, a former indigo, sugar and rice plantation in Louisiana that focuses on the truths of slavery and the experiences of people who were enslaved. IMLS provides resources and support to libraries, archives and museums in all 50 states and territories.
The termination comes as the Trump administration has both gutted federal funding aimed at arts and cultural institutions and has pushed to end state and federal initiatives in support of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI).
The Whitney Plantation already received one of the grants this year, but the other, which was to help fund an exhibit about how enslaved people resisted on plantations, was set to be completed in June this year. Without the funding, the Whitney stands to lose about $55,000. The exhibit on resistance to slavery, on which the museum had worked for three years, was due to open in January 2026.
When the Whitney Plantation opened in 2014 as a museum, it was the first plantation in the country dedicated to memorializing slavery and honoring enslaved people – most plantations in the US, often used as sites for weddings or other lighthearted forms of tourism, instead erase the history of slavery.
In March, the IMLS itself was a target for Donald Trump and the so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge), which has been responsible for numerous cuts to the federal government since it began operating in January. In a March executive order, Trump called for the IMLS to be “eliminated to the maximum extent consistent with applicable law” within seven days of the order. Also in March, Doge put nearly all of the IMLS’s employees on administrative leave, rendering it difficult for the federal agency to fully function. As a result, library systems and museums across the country have reported concerns about receiving promised IMLS grants, while others, like the Whitney Plantation, have been notified that their grants are terminated.
Trump claims Russia-Ukraine peace deal close but accuses Zelenskyy of harming process and having ‘no cards to play’
Donald Trump has attacked Volodymyr Zelenskyy after Ukraine’s president said he would not recognize Russia’s occupation of Crimea.
Trump said the inflammatory statement would make a peace deal with Russia harder to achieve. “This statement is very harmful to the Peace Negotiations with Russia,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social. He said “We are very close to a Deal”, adding that Crimea was lost years ago “and is not even a point of discussion”.
However, earlier we reported that leaks to the Financial Times and other media have indicated that Russia is willing to abandon its territorial claims to three Ukrainian regions it only partly occupies after three years of fighting in return for the US formally recognising its 2014 annexation of Crimea as part of a ceasefire agreement. Such a recognition would be a formal acknowledgment that it is possible to change borders by force, in effect creating an extraordinary post-second world war precedent.
At present neither Russia nor the US has gone on the record to confirm the reports, though on Monday Trump said he would be providing “full detail” on the peace proposals “over the next three days”.
Zelenskyy said on Tuesday his country could not accept recognising Crimea as Russian territory. “There is nothing new to mention or discuss. Ukraine will not recognise the occupation of Crimea,” he said, adding that it would be incompatible with Ukraine’s constitution.
Here is Trump’s lengthy (sorry) post:
Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, is boasting on the front page of The Wall Street Journal that, “Ukraine will not legally recognize the occupation of Crimea. There’s nothing to talk about here.” This statement is very harmful to the Peace Negotiations with Russia in that Crimea was lost years ago under the auspices of President Barack Hussein Obama, and is not even a point of discussion. Nobody is asking Zelenskyy to recognize Crimea as Russian Territory but, if he wants Crimea, why didn’t they fight for it eleven years ago when it was handed over to Russia without a shot being fired? The area also houses, for many years before “the Obama handover,” major Russian submarine bases. It’s inflammatory statements like Zelenskyy’s that makes it so difficult to settle this War. He has nothing to boast about! The situation for Ukraine is dire — He can have Peace or, he can fight for another three years before losing the whole Country. I have nothing to do with Russia, but have much to do with wanting to save, on average, five thousand Russian and Ukrainian soldiers a week, who are dying for no reason whatsoever. The statement made by Zelenskyy today will do nothing but prolong the “killing field,” and nobody wants that! We are very close to a Deal, but the man with “no cards to play” should now, finally, GET IT DONE. I look forward to being able to help Ukraine, and Russia, get out of this Complete and Total MESS, that would have never started if I were President!
Sam Levine
Donald Trump attacked the federal judge overseeing a legal challenge to his effort to punish a major law firm on Wednesday and appeared to confuse two legal cases.
Trump said on Wednesday that he was suing the firm, Perkins Coie. But it is actually Perkins Coie that is suing him for a 6 March executive order that essentially makes it impossible for the firm to do business with the federal government or represent clients who have business before it. Trump had sued Perkins Coie as part of a wide ranging lawsuit in Florida in 2022 before a different judge, Donald Middlebrooks. That case was dismissed in September 2022.
The suit filed by Perkins Coie has been assigned to US district judge Beryl Howell, whom Trump attacked on Wednesday.
“I’m suing the law firm of Perkins Coie for their egregious and unlawful acts, in particular the conduct of a specific member of this firm, only to find out that the Judge assigned to this case is Beryl Howell, an Obama appointment, and a highly biased and unfair disaster,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social.
“She ruled against me in the past, in a shocking display of sick judicial temperament, on a case that ended up working out very well for me, on appeal,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social. “Her ruling was so pathologically bad that it became the “talk of the town.” I could have a 100% perfect case and she would angrily rule against me. It’s called Trump Derangement Syndrome, and she’s got a bad case of it. To put it nicely, Beryl Howell is an unmitigated train wreck. NO JUSTICE!!!”
Neither Perkins Coie nor the White House immediately returned a request for comment.
The government previously asked Howell to be recused from the case – a request that she rejected.
“When the U.S. Department of Justice engages in this rhetorical strategy of ad hominem attack, the stakes become much larger than only the reputation of the targeted federal judge. This strategy is designed to impugn the integrity of the federal judicial system and blame any loss on the decision-maker rather than fallacies in the substantive legal arguments presented,” Howell wrote in an opinion denying the request to recuse herself.
Perkins Coie has already secured a temporary restraining order blocking portions of the order. The firm asked Howell this week to permanently block the order.
Another firm challenging a similar order, WilmerHale, has made a similar request in a separate case. The firms Jenner & Block and Susman Godfrey are also suing the Trump administration in challenges of executive orders that are widely seen to be an effort to intimidate lawyers from taking on cases adverse to the administration.
Joanna Walters
In a video post announcing that he will not seek re-election next year at the end of his latest term in the US Senate, Dick Durbin of Illinois had a warning.
“Right now the challenges facing our country are historic and unprecedented. The threats to our democracy and way of life are very real,” he said.
He continued: “And I can assure you I will do everything in my power to fight for Illinois and the future of our country every day of my remaining time in the Senate.”
He said he had spent half his life in national politics. “I’ve always tried to stand up to power,” he said. He pays tribute to his family and his staff and then points out that the Illinois junior senator, Tammy Duckworth, who will inherit from him the status as senior senator for the state (ie she will then become the longer serving of the two senators, with someone filling the then junior seat vacated by Durbin), is “a trusted friend and an effective leader”, adding that “she will be a real asset to Illinois and the nation” as our state’s senior senator.
Durbin titled the video “Time to pass the torch”. It echoes Joe Biden who came into the presidency promising to be a bridge to the next generation but then deciding to run for a second term at 81 and eventually having to drop out under pressure four months before the 2024 election, after being urged by his own party to “pass the torch”. Donald Trump then beat Biden’s successor Kamala Harris for the White House.
Democratic Senator Dick Durbin will not seek re-election
Joanna Walters
Illinois’s Dick Durbin has announced he will retire after 44 years in the US Congress and as one of the most influential Democrats in Washington.
Durbin is the second highest ranking Democrat in the US Senate, behind minority leader Chuck Schumer, and the 80-year-old has announced moments ago that he will not seek re-election in 2026.
He posted on X: “The decision of whether to run for re-election has not been easy. I truly love the job of being a United States Senator. But in my heart, I know it’s time to pass the torch. So, I am announcing today that I will not be seeking re-election at the end of my term.”
Joanna Walters
In the latest legal wrinkle in the vexed and constitution-testing case of Kilmar Ábrego García, the Trump administration moments ago continued to resist the federal judge’s orders to produce information about the steps it has taken, if any, to return him to the US after he was, by the government’s admission, mistakenly removed to El Salvador without due process.
Drew Ensign, a deputy assistant attorney general, filed a sealed motion asking for a stay of the judge’s order to provide sworn testimony and documents about efforts to return Ábrego García, who was living and working in Baltimore and subject to court protection against deportation to his native El Salvador before he was snatched up by the immigration authorities last month.
The request comes just hours after federal judge Paula Xinis in Maryland castigated the Trump administration and accused it of bad faith in trying to evade her orders without fully describing why it has special privilege to do so.
Xinis had given the administration until 6pm ET today to produce information. The White House has instead filed a sealed motion for a stay of seven days of her order, the Associated Press reports, and is also requesting relief from providing daily status updates on the Ábrego García’s status and their efforts to get him back – which courts have characterized essentially as non-efforts.
Federal judge accuses White House of ‘bad faith’ in Kilmar Ábrego García case
Joanna Walters and Sam Levine in New York and agencies
The federal court that has found itself in a pitched battle with the executive branch over the summary removal of Salvadorian Kilmar Ábrego García despite a previous order against deportation has now accused the Trump administration of “bad faith” in the case.
US district judge Paula Xinis has given the Trump administration until 6pm ET on Wednesday to provide details to support its claims that it does not have to comply with orders to return the man to the US, where he was living and working in Baltimore, because of special privilege.
Xinis castigated the administration late on Tuesday saying it is ignoring court orders and obstructing the legal process. She wrote:
For weeks, defendants have sought refuge behind vague and unsubstantiated assertions of privilege, using them as a shield to obstruct discovery and evade compliance with this court’s orders.
Giving the new deadline for information, she added:
Defendants have known, at least since last week, that this court requires specific legal and factual showings to support any claim of privilege. Yet they have continued to rely on boilerplate assertions. That ends now.
The US supreme court ordered the Trump administration nearly two weeks ago to facilitate Ábrego García’s return to the US from a notorious Salvadorian prison, rejecting the White House’s claim that it couldn’t retrieve him despite the administration having admitted previously in court that it had sent him out of the country by mistake.
Earlier, we brought you Trump’s comments that he’s apparently suing Perkins Coie, one of the law firms that has sued his administration after Trump issued punitive executive orders because of their connection to adversaries or involvement in causes against him.
While we get some clarity on what Trump is actually doing, this is from Politico.
Trump appears confused here. He is suing Perkins Coie in Florida in a case before Judge Middlebrooks that has been dismissed and resulted in sanctions against him and Alina Habba.
Perkins Coie is suing HIM before Judge Howell over his retaliatory executive order. pic.twitter.com/JTEwzDU75h
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) April 23, 2025
Law firms targeted by Trump ask judges to permanently bar executive orders against them
Law firms Perkins Coie and WilmerHale will ask federal judges in Washington DC on Wednesday to permanently bar Donald Trump’s executive orders against them, calling the measures acts of retaliation that violate US constitutional protections.
The court hearings will be the latest flashpoint in a legal battle pitting prominent law firms against the Republican president and his administration. Trump announced earlier this morning he was suing Perkins Coie.
Trump’s orders against Perkins Coie and WilmerHale sought to restrict their lawyers’ access to federal buildings and to end government contracts held by their clients, citing the firms’ connections to his legal and political enemies.
Reuters reports that US district judge Beryl Howell will hear Perkins Coie’s request for summary judgment at 11am ET, followed by a hearing in WilmerHale’s case at 2pm before US district judge Richard Leon.
Leon, a Republican appointee, issued a temporary order last month blocking key provisions of the order against WilmerHale, an 1,100-lawyer firm that has a large office in Washington. Howell, a Democratic appointee, also temporarily blocked Trump’s order last month against Perkins Coie. Two other judges weighing lawsuits by other firms have issued similar orders.
The justice department has defended the executive orders as lawful presidential directives.
Nine law firms, including Paul Weiss, Skadden Arps, Latham & Watkins and Kirkland & Ellis, settled with the White House to avoid a similar order being issued against them. They and several others have cumulatively pledged nearly $1bn in free legal services and made other concessions in their deals with Trump. Some lawyers at law firms that have cut deals with Trump have resigned in protest.
Hundreds of law firms, thousands of lawyers and dozens of attorney bar groups have backed the law firms suing the administration, calling the executive orders an illegal attempt to intimidate firms from representing clients adverse to Trump’s interests.
US treasury secretary Scott Bessent on Wednesday called on the International Monetary Fund and World Bank to refocus on their core missions of macroeconomic stability and development, claiming they have strayed too far into vanity projects such as climate change that have reduced their effectiveness.
Reuters reports that Bessent, in remarks outlining his vision for US engagement with the IMF and World Bank on the sidelines of the institutions’ spring meetings, said that they serve critical roles in the international financial system.
“And the Trump administration is eager to work with them, so long as they can stay true to their missions,” Bessent said in prepared remarks to the Institute of International Finance.
“The IMF and World Bank have enduring value. But mission creep has knocked these institutions off course. We must enact key reforms to ensure the Bretton Woods institutions are serving their stakeholders – not the other way around,” he said, calling on US allies to join the effort. He added:
America First does not mean America alone.
Bessent said the IMF needed to focus on its key mandate and adhere to strong standards in its lending.
The IMF was once unwavering in its mission of promoting global monetary cooperation and financial stability. Now it devotes disproportionate time and resources to work on climate change, gender, and social issues. These issues are not the IMF’s mission.
And sometimes, the IMF needs to say ‘No.’ The organization has no obligation to lend to countries that fail to implement reforms.
Bessent added that the World Bank must be “tech-neutral and prioritize affordability in energy investment. In most cases, this means investing in gas and other fossil fuel-based energy production.” He added that it could also finance renewable energy projects along with systems to manage energy latency in wind and solar.
Trump’s announcement that he’s suing Perkins Coie comes after the law firm successfully sued his administration for punitive executive orders which stripped security clearances from the firm’s lawyers, mandated the termination of any contracts and barred federal government employees from engaging with its attorneys or allowing them access to government buildings.
A federal judge on 12 March temporarily blocked most of the executive order Trump issued against Perkins Coie, finding it probably violated the US constitution. The judge ruled that the president used national security concerns as a pretext to punish the firm Perkins Coie for once working with Hillary Clinton.
Trump has punished several law firms with executive orders because of their connection to adversaries or involvement in causes against him. The orders threaten to cripple the firms by essentially making it impossible for them to do business with any client that has business before the government.
Per NPR, Trump’s executive order accused Perkins Coie of a range of nefarious actions over the years allegedly seeking to undermine democratic elections as well as the integrity of US courts and law enforcement. The order specifically mentioned the firm’s representation of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, and the role attorneys at Perkins Coie played in the creation of a dossier of unsubstantiated allegations about possible Trump-Russia ties.
While nine other law firms cut deals with the Trump administration to avoid being similarly targeted, Perkins Coie and two others sued the administration, its lawsuit pushing back against any allegation of wrongdoing. It noted that Trump filed a lawsuit in 2022 against Perkins Coie, Clinton and others alleging a conspiracy against him. The case was dismissed months later by a federal court.
On 4 April more than 500 legal firms moved to file an amicus brief signed a brief in support of Perkins Coie’s fight back against Trump’s punitive actions.
The firm and others named in the executive orders earlier are each representing clients in lawsuits against the Trump administration over issues such as immigration, transgender rights and firings of government workers.
Trump says he is suing Perkins Coie after law firm filed suit against punitive executive order
Donald Trump said he was suing Perkins Coie law firm for “egregious and unlawful acts” and cited the conduct of an unidentified member of the firm.
Trump did not elaborate in his Truth Social post. Trump issued an executive order last month that calls to terminate federal contracts held by Perkins Coie’s clients if the firm performed any work on them. Perkins Coie sued the Trump administration in response, arguing the president’s order violated constitutional protections.
In his post, Trump wrote:
I’m suing the law firm of Perkins Coie for their egregious and unlawful acts, in particular the conduct of a specific member of this firm, only to find out that the Judge assigned to this case is Beryl Howell, an Obama appointment, and a highly biased and unfair disaster. She ruled against me in the past, in a shocking display of sick judicial temperament, on a case that ended up working out very well for me, on appeal. Her ruling was so pathologically bad that it became the “talk of the town.” I could have a 100% perfect case and she would angrily rule against me. It’s called Trump Derangement Syndrome, and she’s got a bad case of it. To put it nicely, Beryl Howell is an unmitigated train wreck. NO JUSTICE!!!
Sam Levine
Analysis: A battle looms over rule of law as some courts start to flex their muscles against Trump
The US supreme court and other federal courts have begun flexing their muscles to push back on Donald Trump’s efforts to defy judicial orders, escalating a hugely consequential battle over the rule of law.
The supreme court issued a significant order early Saturday morning blocking the federal government from removing people who had been detained in northern Texas from the US. Separately, US district judge James Boasberg has found probable cause to hold the government in contempt for defying his orders to halt deportations.
In another case, the US district judge Paula Xinis has forced the government to provide daily updates in its efforts to comply with court orders to “facilitate” the return of Kilmar Ábrego García – the man who was wrongly deported to El Salvador.
It is a dynamic that underscores how a constitutional crisis between Trump and the courts is likely to be a push and pull between the government and judges that is simmering through the legal system and could very well break it.
US senator Peter Welch of Vermont, a Democrat, met with Mohsen Mahdawi on Monday at the prison and posted a video account of their conversation on X. Mahdawi said he was “in good hands”. He said his work is centered on peacemaking and that his empathy extends beyond the Palestinian people to Jews and to the Israelis.
“I’m staying positive by reassuring myself in the ability of justice and the deep belief of democracy,” Mahdawi said in Welch’s video. “This is the reason I wanted to become a citizen of this country, because I believe in the principles of this country.”
I just met with Mohsen Mahdawi where he’s being held in Vermont.
He was detained when he showed up for his citizenship interview.
He should be released so he can become a citizen.
— Senator Peter Welch (@SenPeterWelch) April 21, 2025
When I met with Mohsen Mahdawi today, we spoke about how appreciative he is to have the support of so many people in Vermont.
He said one of the reasons he wanted to become a citizen was because of his belief in American democracy.
He hopes that justice will prevail in his… pic.twitter.com/1bEz9kND3E
— Senator Peter Welch (@SenPeterWelch) April 21, 2025
Federal judge in Vermont to consider request for immediate release of detained Palestinian student Mohsen Mahdawi
A federal judge is scheduled to consider a request on Wednesday to immediately release a Palestinian man who led protests against Israel’s war on Gaza as a student at Columbia University and was arrested during an interview about finalizing his US citizenship.
Mohsen Mahdawi, a legal permanent resident for 10 years, was arrested on 14 April at the US Citizenship and Immigration Services office in Colchester, Vermont, by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) agents, his lawyers said. He is being detained at the Northwest state correctional facility in St Albans.
Mahdawi’s lawyers say he was detained in retaliation for his speech advocating for Palestinian human rights. “We ask this court to suspend this unlawful retaliation and slow the grave threat to free speech posed by his continued detainment by releasing Mr. Mahdawi on bail,” they ask in a court document filed on Tuesday.
The government also filed a response on Tuesday. US district court filings in Mahdawi’s case, with the exception of judicial orders, are not publicly available online. A representative of Mahdawi and a justice department lawyer did not immediately respond to an emailed Associated Press request for the document on Wednesday morning.
Mahdawi had attended his interview, answered questions and signed a document that he was willing to defend the US constitution and laws of the nation. “It was a trap,” his lawyers said. They said masked Ice agents entered the interview room, shackled Mahdawi and put him in a car. A judge later issued an order barring the government from removing him from the state or country.
Mahdawi is still scheduled for a hearing date in immigration court in Louisiana on 1 May, his attorneys said. His notice to appear says he is removable under the Immigration and Nationality Act because the secretary of state has determined his presence and activities “would have serious adverse foreign policy consequences and would compromise a compelling US foreign policy interest”.
Last month, secretary of state Marco Rubio said the state department was revoking visas held by visitors who were acting counter to national interests, including some who protested Israel’s war on Gaza and those who face criminal charges.
According to the court filing, Mahdawi was born in a refugee camp in the West Bank and moved to the US in 2014. He recently completed coursework at Columbia and was expected to graduate in May before beginning a master’s degree program there in the fall.
As a student, Mahdawi was an outspoken critic of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza and organized campus protests until March 2024.
Fears grow that Signal leaks make Pete Hegseth top espionage target
Ben Makuch
As more develops about the US defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, and his repeated disclosures of sensitive military intelligence in unsecured Signal group chats, there are growing concerns his behavior has weakened the Pentagon in the eyes of its foreign adversaries and made him and his entourage a top espionage target.
Allies, already concerned by Donald Trump’s aggressive tariffs, have also begun to see the US as an intelligence-sharing liability. There are fears that the increasing firings and leak inquiries in Hegseth’s orbit, along with his inability to manage these internal crises, exposes the entire global US war footing – especially, if a geopolitical and external crisis comes across his desk.
“[What if] a foreign entity, whether it be a state actor or non-state actor, is able to intercept the movements of troops or department personnel, or something like that, capture them and hold them to ransom,” said Kristofer Goldsmith, an Iraq war veteran and CEO at Task Force Butler. “That kind of thing could very easily happen.”
Former officials serving in national security positions under Joe Biden’s administration also told the Guardian on background that the situation is perilous and that Hegseth has endangered the secrets of the defense department and the White House. One person said Russian and Chinese spies were no doubt directly targeting susceptible people in Hegseth’s inner circle.
Goldsmith, a threat intelligence expert, said there were many scenarios wherein a foreign government could gain access to those chats, without the need to directly compromise Hegseth’s devices.
“Pete Hegseth is texting his wife and his wife is posting on Instagram, clicks a link, and gets malware on her phone,” said Goldsmith, describing a hypothetical scenario. “Then the Chinese or the Iranians or the Russians just happen to be like, ‘Oh, shit, we’ve got Mrs Hegseth, [without] even targeting her.’”
To Goldsmith, Hegseth, who came into power on the heels of publicly characterizing the Pentagon as a “woke” shambles after years of ignoring “war fighters”, has already undermined the overall power of the US military in his months-long reign.
These kinds of leaks, anticipating troop movements, anticipating attacks – those can put our adversaries in position to intercept pilots or convoys or ships, which could create an international incident. It could mean a nuclear or a biological or a chemical crisis of some kind.
My colleagues Dan Sabbagh and Pjotr Sauer have more on Marco Rubio’s abrupt cancelation of his trip to London to discuss ending Russia’s war in Ukraine and the subsequent downgrading of the talks.
Ministerial-level Ukraine peace talks that were due to take place in London on Wednesday have been postponed at the last minute amid speculation that Russia is willing to change its position and after the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, said he could not attend.
The UK Foreign Office indicated that ministerial-level meetings would be replaced by discussions at an official level – though initial public comments from the Kremlin suggested Moscow still opposed Nato countries sending peacekeepers to Ukraine.
The late downgrade came after reports apparently from Russia and the US suggesting the two countries had made progress in separate bilateral peace discussions between the White House and Kremlin.
Leaks to the Financial Times and other media indicate that Russia is willing to abandon its territorial claims to three Ukrainian regions it only partly occupies after three years of fighting in return for the US formally recognising the annexation of Crimea as part of a ceasefire agreement.
At present neither Russia nor the US has gone on the record to confirm the reports, though on Monday the US president, Donald Trump, said he would be providing “full detail” on the peace proposals “over the next three days”.
But a source familiar with Moscow’s thinking confirmed to the Guardian that Vladimir Putin had offered to freeze the conflict in Ukraine along the current frontlines during recent talks with Steve Witkoff, Trump’s Middle East envoy.
However, the source cautioned that it remained unclear what other demands Putin might present – and cautioned that the apparent concession could be a tactic to draw Trump into accepting broader Russian terms.
Talks between the US, Ukraine and European officials to discuss ending Russia’s war in Ukraine faltered on Wednesday as US secretary of state Marco Rubio abruptly cancelled his trip to London and negotiations were downgraded, reports Reuters.
Rubio’s no show prompted a broader meeting of foreign ministers from Ukraine, the UK, France and Germany to be cancelled, although talks continued at a lower level. The US would now be represented by Ukraine envoy Gen Keith Kellogg.
The downgrading of the talks comes at a critical time, just days after president Donald Trump warned that Washington could walk away if there was no progress on a deal soon. Trump raised the pressure on Sunday when he said he hoped Moscow and Kyiv would make a deal this week to end the three-year war.
According to Reuters, a source close to the discussions said the downgrading of the trip came after Ukraine drafted a paper for the Europeans on Tuesday, in which it said there would be no discussions on territorial issues until “a full and unconditional ceasefire”.
The source told Reuters that the apparent US nervousness could indicate that the Ukrainian position did not align with what Washington’s representatives had agreed so far with the Russians.
Rubio spoke to the UK foreign secretary, David Lammy, late on Tuesday and said he looked forward to rescheduling his trip in the coming months after Wednesday’s “technical meetings”.
Speaking on his arrival in London with the foreign and defense ministers, Ukrainian presidential adviser Andriy Yermak said the talks would focus on ways to achieve a full and unconditional ceasefire as a first step to peace. “Despite everything, we will work for peace,” he said on social media.
The meeting is a follow-up to a similar session in Paris last week where US, Ukrainian and European officials discussed ways to move forward and narrow positions. During those talks, Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff presented a paper to the participants outlining proposals in which Ukraine in particular, but also Russia, would need to make concessions, according to three diplomats aware of the talks, Reuters reports.
