Paul Weiss Trump Surrender – Did Big Law’s Backbone Just Disappear?

Tom Borman, Legal contributing writer

We need to talk about what just happened at Paul Weiss. And no, this isn’t your typical Biglaw gossip about partner compensation or summer associate antics.

This is about nothing less than whether the legal profession still has the fortitude to stand up to power when it matters.

Spoiler alert: The early returns aren’t encouraging.

In what will surely become a Harvard Business School case study in how not to handle political pressure, Paul Weiss Chairman Brad Karp made his pilgrimage to the Oval Office to kiss the ring.

The terms of their capitulation would make Machiavelli blush. The terms include $40 million in pro bono services redirected to Trump’s pet causes (antisemitism, veterans, and the nebulously defined “fairness in justice”) and a wholesale abandonment of DEI initiatives.

• And not forgetting a public disavowal of former partner Mark Pomerantz’s work on the Manhattan DA’s Trump investigation (which Pomerantz himself has called “baseless”).

All this to escape an executive order that revoked the firm’s security clearances and threatened its government business.

The meeting, brokered by Trump-whisperer Bill Burck (pictured) of Quinn Emanuel, wasn’t negotiation—it was unconditional surrender.

The Legal World Reacts: Outrage with a Side of Existential Dread

The reaction from the legal community has been swift and brutal. Democratic lawyer extraordinaire Marc Elias (pictured) didn’t mince words, calling the deal “a stain on the firm.” Constitutional law professor Orin Kerr delivered the academic equivalent of a mic drop: “Paul Weiss used to be respected. Now it’s a cautionary tale.”

Even associates are voting with their feet. Skadden associate Alexandra Cohen resigned in protest, declaring that Paul Weiss’s capitulation was “the last straw.” When you’re losing young talent in this market, you know you’ve miscalculated.

On Legal Twitter (yes, I refuse to call it X), the Yiddish term “#Shanda” (disgrace) has been trending. As one former Paul Weiss partner told me off the record: “They showed the world that one of the most powerful firms had a glass jaw. We’re never living this down.”

Trump’s Law Firm Hit List: You Could Be Next

If you think this is just a Paul Weiss problem, I’ve got some oceanfront property in Kansas to sell you. Trump’s retribution machine has already targeted Perkins Coe for working with Hillary Clinton and the Steele dossier and Covington & Burling for lawyers who advised Special Counsel Jack Smith.

The message couldn’t be clearer if it were written in ALL CAPS TWEETS: Represent Trump’s opponents, and your government contracts, security clearances, and perhaps even your DC office leases are on the chopping block.

As one stunned Paul Weiss refugee told Politico: “No one thought taking on controversial cases could tank their firm. That’s the sea change.”

The Precedent No One Wanted

Here’s the truly alarming part. Paul Weiss—a firm with enough lawyers, resources, and connections to fight this thing all the way to the Supreme Court—simply folded. As John Moscow, a former Manhattan prosecutor, pointed out: “They set a precedent of yielding to illegal orders instead of challenging them.”

By bypassing the judicial system entirely, Paul Weiss handed Trump a bullying blueprint that works. Why bother with those pesky courts when you can just intimidate your targets into submission?

The delicious irony here? Paul Weiss has long positioned itself as a progressive bastion—the firm that fought for voting rights, defended marginalized communities, and stood up to government overreach.

Now they’re funding initiatives for an administration actively working to dismantle civil liberties. As one Rolling Stone source eloquently put it: “This isn’t just betrayal. It’s performance art hypocrisy.”

The Bottom Line: Everyone Has a Price (Apparently)

In the short term, Paul Weiss saved itself a messy legal battle and preserved relationships with clients who weren’t keen on becoming collateral damage. But at what cost? A reputation decades in the making lies in tatters, and the profession is left wondering whether any principle is truly non-negotiable.

For Trump, it’s a double victory: He’s neutered a Democratic-aligned legal powerhouse and demonstrated that even legal titans will bend the knee when properly pressured.

As other firms scramble to stay off Trump’s radar, one question lingers: When the next President with authoritarian tendencies comes calling, will any major firm have the backbone to refuse? Based on this precedent, I wouldn’t bet my SCOTUS fantasy league winnings on it.

[This article represents the author’s opinions and should not be considered legal advice. The author’s cynicism, however, comes free of charge.]