Major Companies Abandon Law Firms That Signed Deals with Trump: Report

bnew

Veteran
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Messages
66,094
Reputation
10,216
Daps
179,266

Major Companies Abandon Law Firms That Signed Deals with Trump: Report​


Published Jun 02, 2025 at 8:11 AM EDT

By Sophie Clark

Live News Reporter

Major companies in the U.S. have begun shifting legal work away from prominent law firms that struck deals with the Trump administration, according to The Wall Street Journal.

The WSJ reported on a legal luncheon at Manhattan's Cipriani restaurant in May, where Brooke Cucinella, a top lawyer at the hedge-fund Citadel, told other lawyers present that they like working with lawyers who don't run from a fight.

Not only are firms that struck deals losing clients, but those actively challenging the Trump administration in court are attracting new corporate business, per the WSJ.

Newsweek has contacted two firms in legal fights with the Trump administration via email for comment.

Paul Weiss protests


Demonstrators outside the law offices of Paul Weiss in New York protesting the firm's agreement to do free legal services for the Trump administration, Tuesday, April 22, 2025.Ted Shaffrey/AP Photo

Why It Matters​


Firms' decisions to either challenge or cooperate with the Trump administration's executive orders are now influencing high-stakes client choices with financial and reputational repercussions.

The situation also raises broader questions about the independence of the legal profession and the potential long-term impact of political pressure on corporate legal partnerships.

What To Know​


Beginning in late February 2025, President Donald Trump issued several executive orders directing federal agencies to strip certain law firms of government security clearances and to remove those firms' clients from lucrative federal contracts.

The administration alleged these firms represented political opponents or had adopted practices it considered harmful. Four prominent firms—Jenner & Block, Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, and Susman Godfrey—chose to challenge the orders in court.

Several other law firms targeted by these orders opted to cut deals to avoid disruption. These deals involved promising to do pro-bono work, some of this work will be defending police officers accused of wrongdoing.

Legal executives from at least 11 major companies are redirecting assignments away from firms that made pacts with the White House, the WSJ reported. Oracle, Morgan Stanley, an unnamed airline, a pharmaceutical company, and McDonald's have all moved or considered moving legal work, in some cases explicitly citing dissatisfaction with the firms' response to White House pressure. Microsoft raised conflict-of-interest concerns with Latham & Watkins, temporarily removing the firm from its preferred counsel list before reinstating it after further discussions.

Law firms which chose to sign deals with the administration are not only facing financial stress due to a reported drop in clients, but are also facing internal protest and resignations.

Partners and associates at firms including Paul Weiss, Kirkland & Ellis, Skadden, Simpson Thacher, and others, expressed anger and frustration over what they perceived as a retreat from defending the firm's independence.

Four senior partners at Paul Weiss, one major firm which reached a settlement with the Trump administration, have quit to form their own firm.

The law firms that challenged the administration's orders—Jenner & Block, Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, and Susman Godfrey—noted an influx of business from large companies seeking to reward their stance, according to interviews the WSJ carried out with general counsels at multiple corporations.

Judges have blocked or struck down Trump's orders against WilmerHale, Jenner & Block, and Perkins Coie, calling them unconstitutional acts of retaliation

Jenner & Block was targeted "because of the causes Jenner champions, the clients Jenner represents, and a lawyer Jenner once employed," ruled U.S. District Judge John Bates.

Bates, appointed by former President George W. Bush wrote, "Going after law firms in this way is doubly violative of the Constitution," adding that the administration sought to "chill legal representation" it didn't like.

Bar Association protests

Attendees gather in a rally organized by the Bar Association of San Francisco in support of attorneys and law firms targeted by President Donald Trump, San Francisco, Thursday, May 1, 2025. Stephen Lam/San Francisco Chronicle via AP

What People Are Saying​


Jon Palmer, General Counsel of Microsoft, told the WSJ: "The Latham agreement created concerns about potential conflict of interest issues that could have affected the firm's ability to represent Microsoft...[Latham's leaders] provided the strong assurances we needed to address our concerns."

Jenner & Block, said in a statement in March: "[Making a deal with the White House would mean] compromising our ability to zealously advocate for all of our clients and capitulating to unconstitutional government coercion, which is simply not in our DNA."

What Happens Next​


Judicial challenges to Trump's executive orders are ongoing, with courts so far siding with law firms that mounted legal opposition.

Corporate clients, meanwhile, are expected to continue evaluating their legal relationships based on firms' responses to government pressure, with many indicating a sustained preference for firms seen as maintaining independence.
 

bnew

Veteran
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Messages
66,094
Reputation
10,216
Daps
179,266

Commented on Mon Jun 2 12:36:05 2025 UTC

Seriously, why would you choose a law firm to represent you if they won't even defend themselves when the Constitution is 100% on their side? This isn't even about political values, it's just common sense.


│ Commented on Mon Jun 2 13:00:51 2025 UTC

│ Look, I don’t know about you, but the first thing I look for in a Lawyer is someone who will absolutely cave at the slightest pressure. /s
 

Tupac in a Business Suit

Middle aged....Middle paid
Supporter
Joined
May 14, 2012
Messages
3,868
Reputation
2,022
Daps
16,782
Reppin
Harlem via Brooklyn
Lol Citadel has the money to stand their ground like Harvard.


This is going to be interesting.

A select few powerful entities are standing up to him.
What baffles me is when people act like charges won’t be brought against bad actors once this current administration leaves office.
 

MajesticLion

Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2018
Messages
32,876
Reputation
6,606
Daps
70,954
We were just following (Presidential) orders, it was legal...

We were just working with and respecting the office, the man doesn't matter...






All the usual umbrella excuses are fully prepped and ready for airtime. What will determine how effective they are will be the political/social/ethical will to move beyond the excuses, and take all these snakes to task for their schemes.

And right there is the rub, because the only reason what's going on has room to operate is that those that should be the guardrails have their own schemes going on...and we're right back to square one with quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
 
Top