Once upon a time — say, exactly two months ago — Skadden thought it had outmaneuvered the Trump administration. To avoid the looming threat of an executive order stripping it of federal contracts and security clearances, the firm struck a deal: $100 million in vaguely defined pro bono legal services for causes that both the firm and Trump support. The agreement, announced like all good contracts via Truth Social post, didn’t exactly memorialize a meeting of the minds, with Trump publicly deputizing Skadden, along with the other settling firms, to do police brutality defense work for the Justice Department while Skadden assured agitated legislators that the deal “does not obligate the Firm or any Skadden attorneys to take on any specific representation.”
Potato, pro-bono-a-toh.
Alas, ambiguity breeds chaos. If the firms say the deal hasn’t given Trump the power to assign work, then his fans have decided that must give them the right to roll up on the firms asking for legal service handouts on their own accord.
Newsmax host Greta Van Susteren, appointed herself the liaison between one disgruntled veteran and Skadden. According to reporting in the New York Times, Van Susteren approached the Biglaw behemoth, requesting they represent a 47-year-old veteran peeved that his divorce proceedings resulted in a protective order against him. Skadden declined because this is absolutely not something they do. Undeterred, Van Susteren took to X faster than she used to spend network dollars on trips to Aruba to publicly chastise the firm, tagging Trump for good measure.
To be clear, if Skadden intended to act on this $100 million deal, it planned to do so with some ongoing pledge to donate time to the American Legion. It was not ever intending to become Legal Aid for individual veterans with axes to grind. Biglaw pro bono efforts rely on public interest groups to handle vetting as opposed to subjecting the firm’s lawyers to direct appeals.
Apparently Skadden isn’t alone. Since the pro bono deals were publicized, the Times claims that Kirkland and Paul Weiss have also been inundated with requests from veterans seeking free legal assistance.
Based on their responses to congressional inquiry, the firms seem to view these Trump deals as symbolic at best. Most of the responses stress, “oh, sure we committed $100 million, but we were going to do all that work anyway… shhh, don’t tell Trump.” Skadden specifically is testing the extent of the administration’s patience by taking on an immigration case pro bono, placing it at odds with the White House. If they’re right that these deals shield them from getting hassled by the administration — and they’re wrong — it’s delicious to learn that all they bought themselves was a deluge of individuals ringing up the firm to secure elite legal services for free.
Trump basically scrawled the phone numbers of all these firms on the bathroom wall with “For a good time, call Cadwalader” and now they’re fielding annoying calls and even more annoying disgruntled blowback on social media from aggrieved people who don’t understand why the firms aren’t doing what THE PRESIDENT demanded.
Couldn’t be happening to a better set of firms.
Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter or Bluesky if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.
The post Biglaw Promised Trump Pro Bono… His Fans Heard ‘Free Lawyers For Me!’ appeared first on Above the Law.
Once upon a time — say, exactly two months ago — Skadden thought it had outmaneuvered the Trump administration. To avoid the looming threat of an executive order stripping it of federal contracts and security clearances, the firm struck a deal: $100 million in vaguely defined pro bono legal services for causes that both the firm and Trump support. The agreement, announced like all good contracts via Truth Social post, didn’t exactly memorialize a meeting of the minds, with Trump publicly deputizing Skadden, along with the other settling firms, to do police brutality defense work for the Justice Department while Skadden assured agitated legislators that the deal “does not obligate the Firm or any Skadden attorneys to take on any specific representation.”
Potato, pro-bono-a-toh.
Alas, ambiguity breeds chaos. If the firms say the deal hasn’t given Trump the power to assign work, then his fans have decided that must give them the right to roll up on the firms asking for legal service handouts on their own accord.
Newsmax host Greta Van Susteren, appointed herself the liaison between one disgruntled veteran and Skadden. According to reporting in the New York Times, Van Susteren approached the Biglaw behemoth, requesting they represent a 47-year-old veteran peeved that his divorce proceedings resulted in a protective order against him. Skadden declined because this is absolutely not something they do. Undeterred, Van Susteren took to X faster than she used to spend network dollars on trips to Aruba to publicly chastise the firm, tagging Trump for good measure.
To be clear, if Skadden intended to act on this $100 million deal, it planned to do so with some ongoing pledge to donate time to the American Legion. It was not ever intending to become Legal Aid for individual veterans with axes to grind. Biglaw pro bono efforts rely on public interest groups to handle vetting as opposed to subjecting the firm’s lawyers to direct appeals.
Apparently Skadden isn’t alone. Since the pro bono deals were publicized, the Times claims that Kirkland and Paul Weiss have also been inundated with requests from veterans seeking free legal assistance.
Based on their responses to congressional inquiry, the firms seem to view these Trump deals as symbolic at best. Most of the responses stress, “oh, sure we committed $100 million, but we were going to do all that work anyway… shhh, don’t tell Trump.” Skadden specifically is testing the extent of the administration’s patience by taking on an immigration case pro bono, placing it at odds with the White House. If they’re right that these deals shield them from getting hassled by the administration — and they’re wrong — it’s delicious to learn that all they bought themselves was a deluge of individuals ringing up the firm to secure elite legal services for free.
Trump basically scrawled the phone numbers of all these firms on the bathroom wall with “For a good time, call Cadwalader” and now they’re fielding annoying calls and even more annoying disgruntled blowback on social media from aggrieved people who don’t understand why the firms aren’t doing what THE PRESIDENT demanded.
Couldn’t be happening to a better set of firms.
Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter or Bluesky if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.
