Law firm betrayal: What in the world are they thinking? Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton and Garrison LLP

Echo opinion published in The Boston Globe by 

Lauren Stiller Rikleen, executive director of Lawyers Defending American Democracy* and editor of “Her Honor: Stories of Challenge and Triumph from Women Judges.”

Obviously the law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind Wharton and Garrison LLP are destined to fail because they betrayed their mission.  (LLP- Limp aLong Paul)

The once proud law firm of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP has chosen to kiss the ring of autocracy rather than stand for principle. It is a steep fall for a once mighty institution.

Like so many other targets of an administration that knows no legal boundaries, Paul, Weiss was the recipient of an executive order issued by President Trump. This one was a punishment for the work of a former law partner who had been involved in the investigation of the president’s hush-money payments to Stormy Daniels when he was a prosecutor in the Manhattan district attorney’s office. The executive order suspended security clearances of those who worked at the firm and included other terms that would render the firm incapable of representing clients before government agencies.

As if that were not sufficient retribution, the order also stated that the firm’s practices would be reviewed “to ensure compliance with civil rights laws against racial bias.” 

Translation: The firm would be investigated as part of this administration’s war on women and people of color. 

At least here, Paul, Weiss would have some interesting defenses, such as the photo of its all-white partner class from 2018.

The firm had two primary choices to make in responding to this executive edict. It could join the path chosen by Perkins Coie LLP, another large law firm similarly targeted by the president for, among other retributive reasons, its previous representation of Hillary Clinton. Perkins Coie chose to defend itself through a lawsuit that called the order “an affront to the Constitution and our adversarial system of justice.” 

In granting a temporary restraining order on behalf of the firm, Judge Beryl Howell stated that it “sends little chills down my spine” that the administration claimed it would have such sweeping executive powers.

The firm’s second primary option was appeasement, a strategy that generally does not work out well in response to those who try to bully their adversaries into submission. Assuming not all history lessons have yet been purged by the current administration, Paul, Weiss would have been wise to review how appeasement worked out for Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain of the United Kingdom.

In choosing the latter course, it is difficult to read the reported terms of the alleged deal that Paul, Weiss reached with the president as a settlement. Rather, it represents a sorrowful surrender of long-touted principles. In exchange for a rescission of the order, Paul Weiss agreed to donate $40 million in pro bono legal services to support the president’s initiatives and to take on its own pro bono matters that “represent the full spectrum of political viewpoints,” Trump announced.

Other terms should serve as a warning to women and people of color who work at the firm or are law students assessing their opportunities for future success. Paul, Weiss agreed to audit its own employment practices and purge them of any diversity, equity, and inclusion policies. It is difficult to understand how the firm will explain this agreement to those diverse lawyers in the firm who were told they had an equal opportunity for success, in the face of commitments to a president implementing policies that effectively lead to the ascension of white men over all others.

It is a sad result for the firm that once considered itself a leader in addressing societal inequities. In 2020, Brad Karp, the firm’s managing partner, wrote of his “pain, sorrow and outrage” at the “senseless and racially motivated murder” of George Floyd and Ahmaud Arbery. 

Moreover, he stated that his expressions of pain cannot bring back “any of the thousands of other innocents whose lives have been taken solely because of the color of their skin” and urged engagement, action, accountability, and justice. 

He committed to using his firm’s powerful platform “to root out systemic racism.”

The following year, in a firm newsletter, Karp touted the firm’s Black Lawyers Network, its anti-Asian hate efforts, and its innovative inclusion initiatives, noting that the Financial Times recognized the firm for its “diversity, equity and inclusion efforts throughout the year.”

Now the firm will not be able to use the words diversity, equity, and inclusion, as the current administration seeks to wipe the concept of DEI out of existence. The federal government’s purge of terms from its own websites and social media will result in the erasure of the history of progress of all Americans under prior administrations. 

Furthermore, with escalating actions being filed against other law firms for their inclusion practices, this purge will quickly extend into the private sector if law firms continue to capitulate.

Paul, Weiss may think it saved itself, but its talented lawyers may choose to depart for a firm that chooses to fight as hard for its own principles as it does for its clients. Through its actions, the firm has let down the profession and sent an ominous message to aspiring lawyers throughout the country.

The legal profession is at an inflection point. Will lawyers be part of a principled fight to demonstrate to their employees, clients, and the nation that our Constitution and the rule of law still have meaning❓ Or will they bring us further to the place where democracy is just another banned word❓

*

Lawyers Defending American Democracy is a coalition of lawyers united in the defense of our democracy.