The fallout continues from the Trump administration’s crackdown on major law firms, and the decision by several to negotiate deals to stave off punishing executive orders.
In recent days, some clients have reportedly shifted work away from firms that made deals, partners and associates have contemplated departures, and at least one group of anti-Trump lawyers from Big Law has created a new firm aimed at bucking the administration.
Meanwhile, firms—fearing potential political consequences—may be shifting away from pro bono work that could anger Trump officials. At the same time, they are being pressured to take on matters for administration allies, and are continuing to face scrutiny over diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts. A few major firms have even hired Washington lobbyists to help plead their cases.
Big Law Blacklist
Beginning in February, President Donald Trump issued executive orders blacklisting several large law firms that have represented clients opposed by the administration. The orders suspended lawyers’ security clearances, blocked access to government buildings, prevented the government from hiring firm employees, and required federal agencies to terminate contracts with the firms. Trump also targeted diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs and launched a regulatory probe into hiring practices at several major firms.
Nine of the nation’s largest firms bowed to the pressure, making deals with Trump to retool or scrap DEI initiatives, hire lawyers from across the political spectrum, and offer financial concessions to fund pro-administration legal causes. The firms include Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison; Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom; Willkie Farr & Gallagher, Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft; Milbank; Kirkland & Ellis; Allen Avery Shearman & Sterling; Latham & Watkins; and Simpson Thacher & Bartlett.
Other firms have fought back in court. To date, Susman Godfrey, Jenner & Block, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have won temporary injunctions halting executive orders targeting them. On May 2, Perkins Coie won a permanent injunction from Judge Beryl Howard of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
“In a cringe-worthy twist on the theatrical phrase ‘Let’s kill all the lawyers,’ [the executive order] takes the approach of ‘Let’s kill the lawyers I don’t like,’ sending the clear message: lawyers must stick to the party line, or else,” Howard wrote in her decision.
Client Questions
The decision by firms to make deals with Trump may be prompting some clients to rethink their outside counsel relationships. The New York Times reported earlier this month that Microsoft had dropped Simpson Thacher as counsel in a Delaware Court of Chancery case involving the company’s 2023 acquisition of video game maker Activision Blizzard. Jenner & Block, one of the firms that has opposed Trump’s efforts, is now representing Microsoft.
While Microsoft has said it continues to work with Simpson Thacher, the move by one of the nation’s largest corporations may give other companies cover to make changes if they are uncomfortable with firms’ decisions regarding Trump’s executive orders.
Already, according to a Law.com report, some in-house lawyers are quietly pulling work away from law firms that have made deals with Trump. An energy company general counsel interviewed by the website said he is no longer using two of the firms that settled and added that he is aware of more than a dozen companies that are looking for new outside counsel. Other GCs are looking to reward firms that have resisted. One technology company GC told law.com that in-house counsel are looking for ways to “get more work” to firms that have fought back in court.
Yet, for some of the firms, a settlement with the Trump administration may yield a windfall. Bloomberg reported on May 14 that Saudi Arabia—which has pledged to invest $1 trillion in the United States—has developed close ties with Latham and A&O Shearman and will require law firm assistance to obtain government permission for investments in the country.
Jumping Ship?
Legal recruiters and law firm leaders have reported that partners at the nine firms that settled with Trump have expressed frustration about their firms’ decisions and have considered lateral moves to other firms. The American Lawyer reported that many of the firms are grappling with morale, culture, and unity issues over their decisions.
Yet making a lateral move is a momentous step for a partner, and recruiters told the magazine that many who have considered leaving are worried their new firm will make a deal with Trump as well. “They realized that leaving a firm because of an agreement could have massive ramifications if the new firm they join ended up doing the same," said Dan Binstock, a recruiter and partner at Garrison, a legal search firm, in an interview with the publication.
To date, just one partner and 11 associates have publicly resigned from firms that have cut deals with Trump, according to figures compiled by The Huffington Post. The outlet noted, however, that each departure has attracted notice from news outlets and on social media. “The firms are still shocked that this is still in the news cycle,” one of the associates who exited said in an interview with the website.
And while a few lawyers have made their decisions public, others may be taking a quieter approach. Bloomberg reported on May 9 that two litigation partners at Cadwalader had jumped ship after the firm struck a deal with Trump and pledged $100 million for White House-backed pro bono causes. The partners, Phara Guberman and Kenneth Breen, joined Foley & Lardner. While neither commented on the move, Bloomberg, citing an internal email and a source familiar with the discussions, said their decision was influenced by Cadwalader’s deal with the administration.
A New Firm
One group of Big Law lawyers has decided to open a new firm aimed at taking on the politically sensitive cases.
On May 2, Abbe Lowell, one of Washington’s best-known litigators, announced that he had left Winston & Strawn to start his own firm, Lowell & Associates. Lowell has represented high-profile political figures on both sides of the aisle, including Hunter Biden, Jared Kushner, and Ivanka Trump. He will be joined by two associates who publicly resigned from their firm after it made a deal with Trump—former Skadden attorneys, Rachel Cohen and Brenna Trout Frey.
“Some lawyers and law firms aren't prepared to meet the current moment,” Cohen wrote in a LinkedIn post. “We are, and I'm hopeful that firms like ours choosing to lead the way will bring others down the path with us.”
The new firm’s client roster includes Trump foe and New York Attorney General Letitia James, who is facing a Justice Department inquiry, as well as two individuals stripped of their security clearances in a Trump executive order. They are Mark Zaid, a prominent Washington lawyer for whistleblowers, and Miles Taylor, a former Department of Homeland Security official.
While Lowell and Winston & Strawn have not been targeted by an executive order, current and former employees of the firm told NBC News that Lowell’s departure “decreases the risk” that the firm will become a target of one of Trump’s executive orders.
Pro Bono Changes
Political considerations may be spilling over into pro bono work, as well. In their settlements with Trump, the nine firms have committed nearly $1 billion to pro bono work for administration-backed causes. That has resulted, The American Lawyer wrote, in firms being “bombarded with pro bono requests from various White House referrals.” A law firm leader quoted by the publication said partners were being asked to handle matters “outside the scope of normal pro bono work for them.”
At the same time, law firms may be steering clear of or dropping matters that may offend the administration. In January, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher sued the Trump administration on behalf of immigrants facing deportation. The New York Times, citing interviews with five people with direct knowledge of the matter, reported that the firm could not put its name on another deportation case that it had been working on with public interest groups. “Lawyers from Gibson Dunn explained that it was afraid of incurring Mr. Trump’s wrath if the firm was associated publicly with [the] lawsuit,” the Times said.
Because of the political climate, public interest and legal aid organizations worry that firms are backing away from a number of issues that have traditionally received strong pro bono support. More than a dozen law firm partners, pro bono program directors and legal aid group leaders told CNN they are particularly concerned about matters involving reproductive and abortion rights, LGBTQ issues, voting access, and immigration.
DEI Drama
Firms also continue to take fire over their diversity, equity and inclusion programs. On May 12, the anti-DEI group Americans for Equal Opportunity filed a discrimination complaint against 44 large law firms over a program that provides paid summer internships to minority students before their first year of law school.
The complaint, Bloomberg noted, “may be a test case” for Equal Employment Opportunity Commission enforcement actions around DEI programs, “which is among the priorities laid out by Republican EEOC Acting Chair Andrea Lucas.”
Some of the firms cited have already been the subject of DEI-related inquiries from the EEOC or have been hit with executive orders by Trump. On March 6, Trump signed an executive order directing the EEOC to review Big Law’s diversity, equity, and inclusion practices. The agency, the order said, should determine whether elite law firms “reserve certain positions, such as summer associate spots, for individuals of preferred races; promote individuals on a discriminatory basis; permit client access on a discriminatory basis; or provide access to events, trainings, or travel on a discriminatory basis.”
Lucas followed up with letters to 20 Am Law 100 firms requesting information about their DEI-related employment practices. A&O Shearman, Kirkland & Ellis, Latham & Watkins, and Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, Bloomberg reported, “ultimately struck deals with the administration that ended the probes.”
Hiring Lobbyists
A few major firms have also taken the unusual step—for an Am Law 200 firm, at least—of hiring outside lobbyists to help them navigate the administration.
In March, Washington-based Ballard Partners registered to lobby on behalf of Simpson Thacher & Bartlett and Kirkland & Ellis. According to federal disclosure documents, the firms paid Ballard $100,000 each during the first quarter to lobby on labor and workplace issues. Ballard Partners is led by Brian Ballard, a lobbyist and lawyer—he is currently an of counsel at Fort Lauderdale, Fla.’s Panza, Maurer & Maynard—with deep ties to the Trump administration.
Miller Strategies, another lobbying shop with GOP and administration credentials, registered on March 25 to lobby for Skadden. According to federal lobbying records, Skadden paid the firm $20,000 during the first quarter for help on labor and workplace issues.
Jeffrey Miller, the firm’s CEO and a longtime Republican strategist and fundraiser, is handling Skadden’s efforts along with Stefan Passantino, a former deputy White House counsel who worked on the transition team for Trump’s second term.
What Happens Next?
While the courts have been skeptical about Trump’s executive orders, the administration appears to be keeping up the pressure on law firms.
In late April, Trump issued an executive order directing the attorney general to find a way to “use…private-sector pro bono assistance” for “law enforcement officers who unjustly incur expenses and liabilities for actions taken during the performance of their official duties to enforce the law.” On May 9, according to court documents, two WilmerHale lawyers received letters informing them that their federal security clearances have been suspended. In Washington, D.C., a fight is also brewing over leadership of the influential D.C. bar, where two Trump allies—including the brother of the attorney general—are vying to lead the organization. Stay tuned.
--
David L. Brown is a legal affairs writer and consultant, who has served as head of editorial at ALM Media, editor-in-chief of The National Law Journal and Legal Times, and executive editor of The American Lawyer. He consults on thought leadership strategy and creates in-depth content for legal industry clients and works closely with Best Law Firms as senior content consultant.
