A leading global law firm, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, forged an agreement with the Trump administration to offer at least $100 million in free legal services and assess its staffing practices, thereby avoiding an executive order that could have had severe consequences. The announcement of this deal came shortly after two other legal firms initiated lawsuits against executive orders that risked holding their attorneys’ security clearances and federal building access.
The ongoing legal disputes occur amid a larger effort by President Donald Trump to exact significant compromises from renowned legal firms and impose consequences for past investigations into his administration. Alongside Skadden Arps, Paul Weiss is another firm that opted to reach an agreement with the White House. This action sparked criticism from some quarters, suggesting that such accords could potentially set a troubling precedent for the industry.
In a communication to his colleagues, Jeremy London, Executive Partner at Skadden Arps, disclosed that they were recently informed of a prospective executive order from the Trump administration, targeting the firm for its pro bono initiatives and its commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion. Faced with challenging decisions, London emphasized that the agreement with the administration was seen as the least detrimental option to protect the firm’s clients, personnel, and future.
In acting on this agreement, Skadden Arps has pledged to allocate at least $100 million in pro bono work devoted to various social causes, including veterans’ services and combating antisemitism. Furthermore, the firm agreed to focus on merit-based hiring, employing independent counsel to ensure the legality and fairness of its employment practices.
Meanwhile, Jenner & Block, alongside WilmerHale, contested the implications of the executive orders through federal lawsuits. They assert these orders pose unprecedented threats to the legal system and represent unconstitutional retaliation against law firms due to their past associations and legal representations. Federal judges responded by temporarily halting key elements of these orders.
WilmerHale’s spokesperson expressed gratitude toward the courts for swiftly safeguarding client rights and reaffirming the unconstitutional nature of the orders, highlighting the orders’ chilling impact. Both firms reported tangible business effects, with clients experiencing restricted access due to the orders.
The executive orders, rolled out earlier, led to immediate repercussions for Jenner & Block’s clients. One client was forced to choose between participating in a crucial meeting without their usual legal counsel or quickly securing new representation.
WilmerHale’s lawsuit criticized the orders for being excessively punitive and uniquely targeting the firm due to alleged associations with disliked figures, particularly referring to involvement with Robert Mueller’s investigative team.
Responses among targeted law firms vary. For instance, Perkins Coie challenged a similar order in court, achieving a temporary block, whereas Paul Weiss negotiated a settlement with the administration amid concerns of an existential threat.
The executive order against Jenner & Block is linked to Andrew Weissmann, a former employee involved in the Mueller investigation into Trump’s 2016 campaign activities and Russian involvement, a team also containing individuals associated with WilmerHale.
Another executive order previously targeted Covington & Burling, linked to attorney Jack Smith’s investigations on behalf of the Biden administration following Trump’s election the previous year.