{"id":111637,"date":"2025-03-24T13:02:48","date_gmt":"2025-03-24T21:02:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/03\/24\/details-emerge-on-how-paul-weiss-tried-to-save-its-own-skin\/"},"modified":"2025-03-24T13:02:48","modified_gmt":"2025-03-24T21:02:48","slug":"details-emerge-on-how-paul-weiss-tried-to-save-its-own-skin","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/03\/24\/details-emerge-on-how-paul-weiss-tried-to-save-its-own-skin\/","title":{"rendered":"Details Emerge On How Paul Weiss Tried To Save Its Own Skin"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Over the weekend, former Above the Law editor David Lat published an email<\/a> Paul Weiss chair Brad Karp sent to the firm justifying the groveling<\/a> it did to Donald Trump. It\u2019s a fascinating inside look at the major law firm\u2019s justification for selling out the rule of law in order to get out from under an Executive Order targeting<\/a> the firm.<\/p>\n

There\u2019s a lot in the email that\u2019s infuriating, but for my $.02, the finger pointing Karp does is just beyond. He blames the firm\u2019s competitors for forcing his hand in negotiating a deal with Trump.<\/p>\n

\n

We were hopeful that the legal industry would rally to our side, even though it had not done so in response to executive orders targeting other firms. We had tried to persuade other firms to come out in public support of Covington and Perkins Coie. And we waited for firms to support us in the wake of the President\u2019s executive order targeting Paul, Weiss. Disappointingly, far from support, we learned that certain other firms were seeking to exploit our vulnerabilities by aggressively soliciting our clients and recruiting our attorneys.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

So Karp was waiting on other Biglaw firms to do what he would not? Because whatever he says about trying to rally firms behind the scenes, neither Karp individually, nor Paul Weiss as a firm ever made a statement in support of either Perkins Coie or Covington. It\u2019s rich as fuck that he tries to pin the blame for his cowardice on other firms when he did literally the same thing.<\/p>\n

The letter also dedicated considerable space to damage control:<\/p>\n

\n

To be clear, and to clarify misinformation perpetuated from various media sources, the Administration is not dictating what matters we take on, approving our matters, or anything like that. We obviously would not, and could not ethically, have agreed to that. Instead, we have agreed to commit substantial pro bono resources, in addition to the $130+ million we already commit annually, in areas of shared interest. We will continue all of the existing pro bono work we already do and will continue in our longstanding role as a leader of the private bar in the pro bono and public interest sphere.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

At least the media is in good company underneath the Paul Weiss bus<\/a>. But here\u2019s the thing, the reporting is based Trump\u2019s own social media post boasting<\/a> about the deal. And I\u2019m not sure the terms are really what matters \u2014 it\u2019s the acquiescing to Trump that emboldens him to go after other lawyers, firms, judges, and the entire legal system.<\/p>\n

Karp\u2019s email continues:<\/p>\n

\n

This existential crisis required the leadership of our law firm to make incredibly difficult decisions under extraordinary time pressure. In making those decisions, we were guided by two fundamental principles. First and foremost, we were guided by our obligation to protect our clients\u2019 interests. As I mentioned earlier, we concluded that even a victory in litigation would not be sufficient to do so, because our firm would still be perceived as persona non grata with the Administration. We simply could not practice law in the Paul, Weiss way if we were still subject to the executive order. This resolution was unambiguously in our clients\u2019 best interests.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

This right here is why Paul Weiss\u2019s move is devastating for the industry \u2014 it\u2019s the 21st richest law firm in the nation, and it just showed its belly to a powerful bully. This makes it much more difficult \u2014 though not impossible<\/a> \u2014 to stand against the growing\u00a0 threat Trump poses. To be clear, the cowardice of Paul Weiss *is* the existential threat, not to any one law firm but to the legal system as a whole.<\/p>\n

In our initial coverage of the Paul Weiss deal with Trump, we asked for readers to sound off \u2014 and the response has been epic, the kind usually reserved for bonus season at ATL. And the comments were *universally* opposed to the Paul Weiss deal. \u00a0Some tipsters made similar jokes, but we still love to see it:<\/p>\n

\n

I believe that part of the agreement was to rename the law firm Paul Wuss instead of Paul Weiss.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\n

Paul Weiss to change name to Craven Lickspittle<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

It was also interesting to see folks that had Paul Weiss proudly on their resumes sing a different tune:<\/p>\n

\n

I left PW for a lot of reasons (sweatshop conditions, mostly) and lost a lotta sleep over that decision. I will sleep soundly now knowing I was on the right side of history. This is some shameful shit.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

And:<\/p>\n

\n

I have always been proud to have been part of Paul Weiss, in part because of its unabashed commitment to causes I believe everyone should care about (to the extent you can expect out of Big Law at least).<\/p>\n

When I saw the news about the executive order, I figured PW would either remain silent or put out some bland PR statement, but while I\u2019m not surprised that it tried to make a deal with this administration, I was disappointed that it did. To be fair to Brad\u2013who has always been well-liked and respected within the firm as far as I was aware\u2013he probably took one for the team and he did make a good deal to get a vindictive president off his back. Substantively, PW did not give up much here, and it seems unlikely that much attention can be devoted to monitoring PW\u2019s implementation of this deal in any event. But the deal itself sends the wrong message in every possible way. For a firm that has always touted its Jewish roots, PW should have stayed far, far away from even appearing to do the biddings of the biggest Nazi-sympathizing president in our lifetimes. Given its portfolio, PW is also probably not nearly as affected by this EO as, for instance, Perkins Coie and Covington (who have not bent the knee), and there had to have been a principled way to absorb this loss while not waving the white flag. Yes, it could\u2019ve cost the firm a lot of money, and I\u2019m aware at the end of the day Big Law is big business, but PW could\u2019ve afforded to and should\u2019ve been prepared to pay the price to do the right thing, and at a time it could\u2019ve stood by its peers to defend the legal profession from an administration bent on tearing down the rule of law, it ran away. And forgive me if this reeks too much of idealism, but to even appear to disclaim diversity, equity, and inclusion seems like a fundamental betrayal of the uphill climb PW\u2019s own founders had to undertake during the firm\u2019s early days.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Perhaps not shockingly, Paul Weiss alums have rallied against the firm\u2019s<\/a> capitulation.<\/p>\n

We also heard Paul Weiss referred to as \u201ca bunch of pansies,\u201d while others decried the \u201cmost shameful capitulation to authoritarianism by lawyers since the Judges Trial<\/a>.\u201d And plenty of commenters have questioned the long-term impact of Paul Weiss\u2019s deal on client relationships, \u201cI mean, why would anyone in the future expect this law firm to stand up for them, when they don\u2019t stand up for themselves?\u201d and on recruiting, \u201cWhat kind of person would now apply for a summer associateship at Paul Weiss?\u201d\u00a0 And other\u2019s put the deal into historic terms:<\/p>\n

\n

Like Neville Chamberlain before him, the pathetic chairman of Paul Weiss may delude himself into thinking he bought peace in his time. The Paul Weiss cowardly appeasement of convicted felon Trump will inevitably come back to haunt the firm. Why? Because agreements mean nothing to Trump. I hope Paul Weiss got the deal in writing, because the only value it has is to get framed and hung in its reception area as proof of its own weakness and stupidity.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Lots of people agree<\/a> this was a bad move by Paul Weiss, but only time will prove exactly what this deal with the devil cost the firm.<\/p>\n

\n

\"\"Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, host of The Jabot podcast<\/a>, and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer<\/a>. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her<\/a> with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter @Kathryn1<\/a>\u00a0or Mastodon @Kathryn1@mastodon.social.<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

The post Details Emerge On How Paul Weiss Tried To Save Its Own Skin<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\"\"
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Over the weekend, former Above the Law editor David Lat published an email<\/a> Paul Weiss chair Brad Karp sent to the firm justifying the groveling<\/a> it did to Donald Trump. It\u2019s a fascinating inside look at the major law firm\u2019s justification for selling out the rule of law in order to get out from under an Executive Order targeting<\/a> the firm.<\/p>\n

There\u2019s a lot in the email that\u2019s infuriating, but for my $.02, the finger pointing Karp does is just beyond. He blames the firm\u2019s competitors for forcing his hand in negotiating a deal with Trump.<\/p>\n

\n

We were hopeful that the legal industry would rally to our side, even though it had not done so in response to executive orders targeting other firms. We had tried to persuade other firms to come out in public support of Covington and Perkins Coie. And we waited for firms to support us in the wake of the President\u2019s executive order targeting Paul, Weiss. Disappointingly, far from support, we learned that certain other firms were seeking to exploit our vulnerabilities by aggressively soliciting our clients and recruiting our attorneys.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

So Karp was waiting on other Biglaw firms to do what he would not? Because whatever he says about trying to rally firms behind the scenes, neither Karp individually, nor Paul Weiss as a firm ever made a statement in support of either Perkins Coie or Covington. It\u2019s rich as fuck that he tries to pin the blame for his cowardice on other firms when he did literally the same thing.<\/p>\n

The letter also dedicated considerable space to damage control:<\/p>\n

\n

To be clear, and to clarify misinformation perpetuated from various media sources, the Administration is not dictating what matters we take on, approving our matters, or anything like that. We obviously would not, and could not ethically, have agreed to that. Instead, we have agreed to commit substantial pro bono resources, in addition to the $130+ million we already commit annually, in areas of shared interest. We will continue all of the existing pro bono work we already do and will continue in our longstanding role as a leader of the private bar in the pro bono and public interest sphere.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

At least the media is in good company underneath the Paul Weiss bus<\/a>. But here\u2019s the thing, the reporting is based Trump\u2019s own social media post boasting<\/a> about the deal. And I\u2019m not sure the terms are really what matters \u2014 it\u2019s the acquiescing to Trump that emboldens him to go after other lawyers, firms, judges, and the entire legal system.<\/p>\n

Karp\u2019s email continues:<\/p>\n

\n

This existential crisis required the leadership of our law firm to make incredibly difficult decisions under extraordinary time pressure. In making those decisions, we were guided by two fundamental principles. First and foremost, we were guided by our obligation to protect our clients\u2019 interests. As I mentioned earlier, we concluded that even a victory in litigation would not be sufficient to do so, because our firm would still be perceived as persona non grata with the Administration. We simply could not practice law in the Paul, Weiss way if we were still subject to the executive order. This resolution was unambiguously in our clients\u2019 best interests.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

This right here is why Paul Weiss\u2019s move is devastating for the industry \u2014 it\u2019s the 21st richest law firm in the nation, and it just showed its belly to a powerful bully. This makes it much more difficult \u2014 though not impossible<\/a> \u2014 to stand against the growing\u00a0 threat Trump poses. To be clear, the cowardice of Paul Weiss *is* the existential threat, not to any one law firm but to the legal system as a whole.<\/p>\n

In our initial coverage of the Paul Weiss deal with Trump, we asked for readers to sound off \u2014 and the response has been epic, the kind usually reserved for bonus season at ATL. And the comments were *universally* opposed to the Paul Weiss deal. \u00a0Some tipsters made similar jokes, but we still love to see it:<\/p>\n

\n

I believe that part of the agreement was to rename the law firm Paul Wuss instead of Paul Weiss.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\n

Paul Weiss to change name to Craven Lickspittle<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

It was also interesting to see folks that had Paul Weiss proudly on their resumes sing a different tune:<\/p>\n

\n

I left PW for a lot of reasons (sweatshop conditions, mostly) and lost a lotta sleep over that decision. I will sleep soundly now knowing I was on the right side of history. This is some shameful shit.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

And:<\/p>\n

\n

I have always been proud to have been part of Paul Weiss, in part because of its unabashed commitment to causes I believe everyone should care about (to the extent you can expect out of Big Law at least).<\/p>\n

When I saw the news about the executive order, I figured PW would either remain silent or put out some bland PR statement, but while I\u2019m not surprised that it tried to make a deal with this administration, I was disappointed that it did. To be fair to Brad\u2013who has always been well-liked and respected within the firm as far as I was aware\u2013he probably took one for the team and he did make a good deal to get a vindictive president off his back. Substantively, PW did not give up much here, and it seems unlikely that much attention can be devoted to monitoring PW\u2019s implementation of this deal in any event. But the deal itself sends the wrong message in every possible way. For a firm that has always touted its Jewish roots, PW should have stayed far, far away from even appearing to do the biddings of the biggest Nazi-sympathizing president in our lifetimes. Given its portfolio, PW is also probably not nearly as affected by this EO as, for instance, Perkins Coie and Covington (who have not bent the knee), and there had to have been a principled way to absorb this loss while not waving the white flag. Yes, it could\u2019ve cost the firm a lot of money, and I\u2019m aware at the end of the day Big Law is big business, but PW could\u2019ve afforded to and should\u2019ve been prepared to pay the price to do the right thing, and at a time it could\u2019ve stood by its peers to defend the legal profession from an administration bent on tearing down the rule of law, it ran away. And forgive me if this reeks too much of idealism, but to even appear to disclaim diversity, equity, and inclusion seems like a fundamental betrayal of the uphill climb PW\u2019s own founders had to undertake during the firm\u2019s early days.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Perhaps not shockingly, Paul Weiss alums have rallied against the firm\u2019s<\/a> capitulation.<\/p>\n

We also heard Paul Weiss referred to as \u201ca bunch of pansies,\u201d while others decried the \u201cmost shameful capitulation to authoritarianism by lawyers since the Judges Trial<\/a>.\u201d And plenty of commenters have questioned the long-term impact of Paul Weiss\u2019s deal on client relationships, \u201cI mean, why would anyone in the future expect this law firm to stand up for them, when they don\u2019t stand up for themselves?\u201d and on recruiting, \u201cWhat kind of person would now apply for a summer associateship at Paul Weiss?\u201d\u00a0 And other\u2019s put the deal into historic terms:<\/p>\n

\n

Like Neville Chamberlain before him, the pathetic chairman of Paul Weiss may delude himself into thinking he bought peace in his time. The Paul Weiss cowardly appeasement of convicted felon Trump will inevitably come back to haunt the firm. Why? Because agreements mean nothing to Trump. I hope Paul Weiss got the deal in writing, because the only value it has is to get framed and hung in its reception area as proof of its own weakness and stupidity.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Lots of people agree<\/a> this was a bad move by Paul Weiss, but only time will prove exactly what this deal with the devil cost the firm.<\/p>\n

\n

\"\"Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, host of The Jabot podcast<\/a>, and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer<\/a>. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her<\/a> with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter @Kathryn1<\/a>\u00a0or Mastodon @[email\u00a0protected].<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Over the weekend, former Above the Law editor David Lat published an email Paul Weiss chair Brad Karp sent to the firm justifying the groveling it did to Donald Trump. It\u2019s a fascinating inside look at the major law firm\u2019s justification for selling out the rule of law in order to get out from under […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":111621,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-111637","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-above_the_law"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/xira.com\/p\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/IMG_5243-1-scaled-e1623338814705-620x568-BoZKZ8.jpeg?fit=620%2C568&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/111637","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=111637"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/111637\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/111621"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=111637"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=111637"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=111637"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}