A hush has fallen over the American legal elite—not the calm of consensus, but the stunned silence of a profession watching one of its own strike a bargain with power.
At the center: Paul Weiss, one of the most prestigious firms on Wall Street. Its chairman, Brad Karp, chose not to fight an executive order from President Donald Trump that threatened to throttle the firm’s future. Instead, he cut a deal—$40 million worth of free legal work devoted to administration-approved causes like veterans and antisemitism. The fallout was immediate and fierce.
Over 100 former Paul Weiss lawyers—now scattered across the country’s most influential firms—signed an open letter condemning the move as capitulation, calling it nothing less than “a surrender” to an administration they accuse of wielding executive power like a bludgeon against dissent.
Perkins Coie, another major firm named in Trump’s executive order, took a very different route: straight to court. It filed suit challenging the legality of the order, describing it as a direct attack on client representation and the independence of counsel. The firm warned that Trump’s move posed an existential threat, but refused to bow. “We cannot allow our clients to be bullied,” it declared.
Paul Weiss, however, claimed it was on the brink of collapse. According to an internal letter from Karp, clients were walking away, competitors were circling like vultures, and support from other firms never materialized. “We were unlikely to survive a full-scale battle,” he wrote.
Trump, for his part, has only turned up the heat. From the White House lawn on Monday, he delivered his verdict on the legal community: “Law firms have to behave themselves.” He hinted that more firms—especially those tied to immigration or past lawsuits against the government—might soon find themselves in similar crosshairs.
Bar associations from coast to coast—New York, L.A., Philly, San Francisco—have condemned the president’s actions, warning they trample on the fundamental rights of counsel and threaten the very concept of legal independence.
But some firms are choosing to stand tall. Selendy Gay, a litigation shop born from a Quinn Emanuel split, declared its full-throated support for Perkins Coie, saying the government has no business punishing lawyers for their choice of clients. California’s Complex Appellate Litigation Group joined the fray as well, signing on to a legal brief defending the right to represent without fear of political retribution.
Behind the scenes, Munger Tolles & Olson has quietly drafted and coordinated a collective brief, aiming to mount a legal firewall against the executive order’s spread. A judge has already blocked parts of the order targeting Perkins Coie, citing likely constitutional violations. But the war is far from over.
As for Paul Weiss, the firm insists its integrity remains intact. Karp claims the administration will have no veto over its pro bono work and that its hiring will remain merit-based, despite Trump’s public claims the firm has agreed to abandon its diversity programs.
Still, reputational scars run deep. “This might buy them breathing room today,” said legal veteran Kevin Burke, “but at a long-term cost.”
And so America’s legal giants face a grim equation: stand and fight, risking everything—or bend the knee and hope to survive.
One firm gambled on resistance. Another on survival. The profession watches, knowing full well: history will remember who blinked.
