{"id":115009,"date":"2025-04-15T15:02:46","date_gmt":"2025-04-15T23:02:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/04\/15\/biglaw-calls-it-pro-bono-gimme-a-break\/"},"modified":"2025-04-15T15:02:46","modified_gmt":"2025-04-15T23:02:46","slug":"biglaw-calls-it-pro-bono-gimme-a-break","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/04\/15\/biglaw-calls-it-pro-bono-gimme-a-break\/","title":{"rendered":"Biglaw Calls It Pro Bono. Gimme A Break."},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Ed. note<\/u>: Please welcome Vivia Chen back to the pages of Above the Law. Subscribe to her Substack, \u201cThe Ex-Careerist,\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>here<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

STOP, JUST STOP<\/strong>, calling what Donald Trump has extracted from Biglaw \u201cpro bono.\u201d<\/p>\n

It is such an obvious sham. Yet the media use that term liberally \u2014 without quote marks, mind you \u2014 as if it were true.<\/p>\n

To put it bluntly, nine of the nation\u2019s most profitable law firms cut deals with the administration in order to get off the president\u2019s personal shit list. They\u2019ve pledged a staggering $940 million in free legal services for Trump-approved projects. These firms are: Paul Weiss, Skadden Arps, Willkie Farr, Milbank Tweed, Kirkland & Ellis, Latham & Watkins, Simpson Thacher, A&O Shearman, and Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft. No doubt, more firms will join this ignominious list and break the $1 billion ceiling in no time.<\/p>\n

To call this arrangement \u201cpro bono,\u201d in either spirit or practice, is outrageous.<\/p>\n

You don\u2019t have to be a legal scholar to know what pro bono means<\/strong>: it\u2019s providing free legal representation to those in need \u2014 the indigent, the disenfranchised, and the powerless. It does not mean serving the will of the most powerful ruler in the world who also happens to be hostile to those constituents.<\/p>\n

While some of Trump-approved \u201cpro bono\u201d seems palatable enough \u2014 e.g., representing veterans, members of law enforcement, and the military and fighting antisemitism (though why not racism?), he\u2019s clearly not stopping there. At a recent executive order signing ceremony (does he ever sign anything without pageantry?), Trump announced to the dozens of coal miners in attendance: \u201cWe\u2019re going to use some of those firms to work with you on your leasing and other things.\u201d<\/p>\n

Then, at a cabinet meeting, Trump said he would \u201ctry to use these very\u00a0prestigious firms to help us out with the trade<\/a>.\u201d He made a similar point the day before: \u201cI think part of the way I\u2019ll spend some of the money that we\u2019re getting from the law firms in terms of their legal time will be \u2014 if we can do it, I think we can do it \u2014 using these great law firms to represent us with regard to the many, many countries that we\u2019ll be dealing with.\u201d<\/p>\n

Serving the coal industry and helping to clean up the mess of Trump\u2019s tariffs now fall within the purview of pro bono? That\u2019s certainly a long ways from helping the poor.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe work that law firms would provide to ramp up coal production may be financially uncompensated but it is not \u2018pro bono\u2019 as that term is understood,\u201d says a legal ethics expert dryly. As for pro bono tariff work, \u201cthe government has plenty of lawyers of its own and could well afford outside counsel.\u201d<\/p>\n

This isn\u2019t about pro bono but protection money<\/strong>. And if you have any doubts, consider this: right after Kirkland & Ellis, A&O Shearman, Simpson Thacher, and Latham & Watkins each coughed up $125 million for Trump\u2019s \u201cpro bono\u201d projects, the EEOC letters directed at those firms for possible DEI violations were withdrawn, with the announcement that the EEOC \u201cwill not pursue any claims related to those issues.\u201d (The EEOC also withdrew its letters targeting Skadden and Milbank after they signed agreements with the administration. Cadwalader and Paul Weiss were not on\u00a0EEOC\u2019s original list of 20 firms<\/a>.)<\/p>\n

Trump could care less about the individuals and organizations that are the supposed beneficiaries of the pro bono he extracted from Biglaw. But he is absolutely bedazzled by the nearly $1 billion in legal freebies from America\u2019s top firms.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe have a lot of law firms that have\u00a0paid me<\/strong>\u00a0a lot of money,\u201d Trump bragged at the Cabinet meeting. \u201cHopefully I won\u2019t need that many legal fees. I may. Who knows? After it ends. After I leave maybe I\u2019ll need it, but if I do it won\u2019t be very pleasant.\u201d<\/p>\n

It\u2019s not clear what exactly Trump is talking about but it sure sounds like he\u2019s not precluding dipping into that stash for himself in the future. And what else might qualify as \u201cpro bono\u201d in his expansive version of the term? Free legal advice to the family on its\u00a0crypto ventures<\/a>,\u00a0Melania on her line of fashion merchandise<\/a>, or the Trump Organization on developing the\u00a0Gaza Riviera<\/a>? Use your imagination. The possibilities are endless.<\/p>\n

Look, law firms are free to do whatever they want. If they want to go along with Trump\u2019s flexible interpretation of pro bono and throw him some very expensive legal services for free or at heavily discounted rates, that\u2019s their business. (Though wouldn\u2019t both the firms and Trump have to disclose the largesse?)<\/p>\n

In the meantime, though, can we stop this \u201cpro bono\u201d nonsense? When powerful law firms give away their services to despots, that\u2019s called a tribute. A cynical quid pro quo. Ransom money. Maybe bribery. But it certainly isn\u2019t about serving justice or the public good. And the rest of us shouldn\u2019t be giving it cover by going along with the pretense.<\/p>\n

Subscribe to read more at The Ex-Careerist\u2026.<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

\n

Vivia Chen\u00a0writes\u00a0\u201cThe Ex-Careerist\u201d<\/a>\u00a0column on Substack where she unleashes her unvarnished views about the intersection of work, life, and politics. A former lawyer, she was an opinion columnist at Bloomberg Law and The American Lawyer. Subscribe to her Substack by clicking here:<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n

The post Biglaw Calls It Pro Bono. Gimme A Break.<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n

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

Ed. note<\/u>: Please welcome Vivia Chen back to the pages of Above the Law. Subscribe to her Substack, \u201cThe Ex-Careerist,\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>here<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

STOP, JUST STOP<\/strong>, calling what Donald Trump has extracted from Biglaw \u201cpro bono.\u201d<\/p>\n

It is such an obvious sham. Yet the media use that term liberally \u2014 without quote marks, mind you \u2014 as if it were true.<\/p>\n

To put it bluntly, nine of the nation\u2019s most profitable law firms cut deals with the administration in order to get off the president\u2019s personal shit list. They\u2019ve pledged a staggering $940 million in free legal services for Trump-approved projects. These firms are: Paul Weiss, Skadden Arps, Willkie Farr, Milbank Tweed, Kirkland & Ellis, Latham & Watkins, Simpson Thacher, A&O Shearman, and Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft. No doubt, more firms will join this ignominious list and break the $1 billion ceiling in no time.<\/p>\n

To call this arrangement \u201cpro bono,\u201d in either spirit or practice, is outrageous.<\/p>\n

You don\u2019t have to be a legal scholar to know what pro bono means<\/strong>: it\u2019s providing free legal representation to those in need \u2014 the indigent, the disenfranchised, and the powerless. It does not mean serving the will of the most powerful ruler in the world who also happens to be hostile to those constituents.<\/p>\n

While some of Trump-approved \u201cpro bono\u201d seems palatable enough \u2014 e.g., representing veterans, members of law enforcement, and the military and fighting antisemitism (though why not racism?), he\u2019s clearly not stopping there. At a recent executive order signing ceremony (does he ever sign anything without pageantry?), Trump announced to the dozens of coal miners in attendance: \u201cWe\u2019re going to use some of those firms to work with you on your leasing and other things.\u201d<\/p>\n

Then, at a cabinet meeting, Trump said he would \u201ctry to use these very\u00a0prestigious firms to help us out with the trade<\/a>.\u201d He made a similar point the day before: \u201cI think part of the way I\u2019ll spend some of the money that we\u2019re getting from the law firms in terms of their legal time will be \u2014 if we can do it, I think we can do it \u2014 using these great law firms to represent us with regard to the many, many countries that we\u2019ll be dealing with.\u201d<\/p>\n

Serving the coal industry and helping to clean up the mess of Trump\u2019s tariffs now fall within the purview of pro bono? That\u2019s certainly a long ways from helping the poor.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe work that law firms would provide to ramp up coal production may be financially uncompensated but it is not \u2018pro bono\u2019 as that term is understood,\u201d says a legal ethics expert dryly. As for pro bono tariff work, \u201cthe government has plenty of lawyers of its own and could well afford outside counsel.\u201d<\/p>\n

This isn\u2019t about pro bono but protection money<\/strong>. And if you have any doubts, consider this: right after Kirkland & Ellis, A&O Shearman, Simpson Thacher, and Latham & Watkins each coughed up $125 million for Trump\u2019s \u201cpro bono\u201d projects, the EEOC letters directed at those firms for possible DEI violations were withdrawn, with the announcement that the EEOC \u201cwill not pursue any claims related to those issues.\u201d (The EEOC also withdrew its letters targeting Skadden and Milbank after they signed agreements with the administration. Cadwalader and Paul Weiss were not on\u00a0EEOC\u2019s original list of 20 firms<\/a>.)<\/p>\n

Trump could care less about the individuals and organizations that are the supposed beneficiaries of the pro bono he extracted from Biglaw. But he is absolutely bedazzled by the nearly $1 billion in legal freebies from America\u2019s top firms.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe have a lot of law firms that have\u00a0paid me<\/strong>\u00a0a lot of money,\u201d Trump bragged at the Cabinet meeting. \u201cHopefully I won\u2019t need that many legal fees. I may. Who knows? After it ends. After I leave maybe I\u2019ll need it, but if I do it won\u2019t be very pleasant.\u201d<\/p>\n

It\u2019s not clear what exactly Trump is talking about but it sure sounds like he\u2019s not precluding dipping into that stash for himself in the future. And what else might qualify as \u201cpro bono\u201d in his expansive version of the term? Free legal advice to the family on its\u00a0crypto ventures<\/a>,\u00a0Melania on her line of fashion merchandise<\/a>, or the Trump Organization on developing the\u00a0Gaza Riviera<\/a>? Use your imagination. The possibilities are endless.<\/p>\n

Look, law firms are free to do whatever they want. If they want to go along with Trump\u2019s flexible interpretation of pro bono and throw him some very expensive legal services for free or at heavily discounted rates, that\u2019s their business. (Though wouldn\u2019t both the firms and Trump have to disclose the largesse?)<\/p>\n

In the meantime, though, can we stop this \u201cpro bono\u201d nonsense? When powerful law firms give away their services to despots, that\u2019s called a tribute. A cynical quid pro quo. Ransom money. Maybe bribery. But it certainly isn\u2019t about serving justice or the public good. And the rest of us shouldn\u2019t be giving it cover by going along with the pretense.<\/p>\n

Subscribe to read more at The Ex-Careerist\u2026.<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

\n

Vivia Chen\u00a0writes\u00a0\u201cThe Ex-Careerist\u201d<\/a>\u00a0column on Substack where she unleashes her unvarnished views about the intersection of work, life, and politics. A former lawyer, she was an opinion columnist at Bloomberg Law and The American Lawyer. Subscribe to her Substack by clicking here:<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n

The post Biglaw Calls It Pro Bono. Gimme A Break.<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Ed. note: Please welcome Vivia Chen back to the pages of Above the Law. Subscribe to her Substack, \u201cThe Ex-Careerist,\u201d\u00a0here. STOP, JUST STOP, calling what Donald Trump has extracted from Biglaw \u201cpro bono.\u201d It is such an obvious sham. Yet the media use that term liberally \u2014 without quote marks, mind you \u2014 as if […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":115010,"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-115009","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\/04\/Vivia-Chen-Ex-Careerist-q3bFEC.png?fit=286%2C72&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/115009","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=115009"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/115009\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/115010"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=115009"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=115009"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=115009"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}