A few weeks ago, several prominent American universities and law firms found themselves in what seemed to be a classic prisoner’s dilemma, courtesy of President Trump.

His campaign of retribution against law firms that represented or hired his political opponents, and against universities that engaged in “woke” policies or purportedly fostered antisemitism, was forcing them to make an unappealing choice.

Those who capitulated and struck an early deal with the White House, it seemed, might be spared the worst of Mr. Trump’s wrath, but at the cost of jeopardizing their independence. Standing up to the president risked even harsher punishment, particularly if other institutions stayed silent.

Columbia University made a deal with the administration. So did some of the largest law firms in the country. Recent changes, however, suggest that the dilemma is starting to look very different.

Last month, Harvard became the first university to announce that it would not comply with the administration’s demands, which it called “illegal.” Other universities moved from collective silence to unified opposition: “We speak with one voice against the unprecedented government overreach and political interference now endangering American higher education,” more than 400 university leaders said in a statement.

Several large law firms sued to block the executive orders targeting them, winning temporary injunctions. Hundreds of other firms signed on in support of the effort. And on Thursday, Microsoft dropped a law firm that cut a deal with the White House, and hired one of dissenting firms to represent it in a high-profile case.