Among the wealthiest law firms in the country, these firms boast some of the most articulate litigators. However, as the legal industry faces scrutiny from President Trump, a majority of these Big Law leaders remain silent rather than defending one of their own.
For almost three weeks, there’s been a widespread initiative within the legal community to gather signatures from law firms for a friend of the court brief supporting Perkins Coie, the first firm targeted by Mr. Trump in his retaliatory campaign against those he perceives as adversaries. Perkins Coie has initiated legal action, and a judge has provisionally halted the president’s order, which threatened their capacity to represent government contracts and limited their access to federal buildings.
According to individuals familiar with the matter, most of the top revenue-generating law firms were approached to endorse the brief supporting Perkins Coie, and all were made aware of the signature campaign.
Yet, as of now, none of the top 10 firms have agreed to sign, even after a preliminary deadline passed on Tuesday, sources indicate. A select few firms within the top 50, as listed by American Lawyer, have consented to add their signatures.
The brief, authored by Donald B. Verrilli Jr., a former solicitor general during Barack Obama’s administration, aims to present a united front against Mr. Trump. Ahead of the deadline, over 200 firms have endorsed it, with the majority being midsize and boutique firms.
Mr. Verrilli, who is a partner at Munger, Tolles & Olson—a noteworthy firm but not among the top revenue earners—is expected to file the brief in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. as early as Friday, according to knowledgeable sources. Firms still have the opportunity to sign before the submission, and if momentum builds, larger firms might ultimately join in.
Some larger firms have expressed willingness to sign, contingent on the support of other firms, and several top-20 firms are still deliberating their decision to sign, sources noted.
The brief presents a critical moment for the legal industry, testing its determination when faced with a direct threat to the foundational principles of the profession. The reluctance of major firms like Kirkland & Ellis and Latham & Watkins to sign reflects a deeper divide among law firms since Mr. Trump began issuing executive orders against those he deemed antagonistic to his administration.
Kirkland and Latham did not provide comments.
For many of the large firms, their hesitation is not due to a fundamental disagreement with the brief, sources have indicated. They are supportive, albeit quietly, worried that endorsing the document could provoke Mr. Trump’s backlash and jeopardize client relationships, or that signing would not meaningfully aid Perkins Coie.
Additionally, some firms point out that signing the brief is not the only means through which the legal community supports those caught in Mr. Trump’s executive orders. Two notable firms, Williams & Connolly and Cooley, are representing other firms in lawsuits challenging these orders.
Further, the New York City Bar Association publicly expressed its support for these lawsuits on Wednesday.
“The City Bar believes it’s vital for legal organizations across the country to uphold the rights of lawyers and law firms regarding association, freedom of expression, due process, and maintaining their contractual relationships,” the statement declared.
Perkins Coie was the pioneer in challenging an executive order in court. Recently, two other top 100 firms by revenue, WilmerHale and Jenner & Block, have taken similar actions. All three firms have connections to the investigation regarding Russia’s involvement in Mr. Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.
WilmerHale previously employed Robert Mueller III, the former F.B.I. director who oversaw that investigation. Jenner & Block had a leading prosecutor who collaborated with Mr. Mueller, while Perkins Coie was linked to a dossier compiled during the 2016 campaign addressing Mr. Trump’s possible connections with Russia.
Although federal judges have currently halted the most severe provisions of the orders—and the firms are expected to prevail in court—their financial stability may still take a hit. Perkins Coie has revealed in a court filing that it has “already suffered significant revenue losses due to the loss of clients.”
In light of potential losses like those, other firms targeted by Mr. Trump have opted for compromise.
Paul Weiss, a prominent firm closely aligned with Democrats that previously sued the first Trump administration, initially considered legal action after facing an executive order. However, as many of its corporate partners expressed concerns regarding financial repercussions, the firm chose to negotiate with Mr. Trump, agreeing to undertake $40 million worth of pro bono work for causes endorsed by the White House.
Last month, the firm’s chairman expressed disappointment over the lack of support from other firms.
“We anticipated firms would rally behind us following the president’s executive order,” Paul Weiss’s chairman, Brad Karp, wrote in an email to the firm. “Unfortunately, rather than support, we discovered that certain firms were looking to capitalize on our vulnerabilities by actively soliciting our clients and recruiting our attorneys.”
Recently, to avert an executive order, the large firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom agreed to contribute $100 million in pro bono work related to issues that Mr. Trump supports.
These negotiations with Mr. Trump have been perceived by many in the legal community as a submission and a way to bolster the White House.
On Tuesday, Willkie Farr & Gallagher, a firm employing Doug Emhoff, the husband of former Vice President Kamala Harris, reached an agreement with Mr. Trump to sidestep an executive order.
The identities of the firms endorsing Mr. Verrilli’s brief in support of Perkins Coie have not been made public. However, at least one firm has openly announced its backing: Keker, Van Nest & Peters, a distinguished litigation boutique in San Francisco.
In a recent guest essay for the New York Times, the named partners at this firm urged others to join the movement, asserting, “If lawyers and law firms won’t stand up for the rule of law, who will?”
Conversely, Mr. Trump has implied that many law firms are more focused on arranging deals.
“They’re all capitulating, saying, ‘Sir, thank you very much,’” he remarked last week, suggesting that law firms are asking, “‘Where do I sign? Where do I sign?’”
Susan C. Beachy contributed research.
