INSIDE ELITE LAW FIRMS, PROTESTS AND QUITTING AFTER TRUMP DEALS

Ever since the elite law firms Paul Weiss and Skadden reached deals
with President Trump to scuttle executive orders that could have
crippled their businesses, the firms’ top partners have closed ranks
in support of the agreements.

But there is discontent among the vast army of lawyers who may not
have much sway in decision-making at the two firms but who do much of
the work: their associates.

Some of these young lawyers are saying both privately and openly that
their leaders betrayed their firms’ principles with deals that could
undermine a commitment to provide free legal work to public interest
groups and causes at odds with the White House.

In recent days, associates at Paul Weiss and Skadden have written
emails to their leadership in protest, and a few have quit their jobs.

One Skadden associate who resigned is Thomas Sipp.

A Columbia Law School graduate, Mr. Sipp, 27, said in an interview
that he had been attracted to Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom
because of its “pay and prestige,” but also because of the
firm’s “commitment to pro bono work.” On Monday, he wrote an
email to his colleagues about why he was leaving after less than two
years.

“I am sure some of you will question my decision and chalk it up to
me being a young attorney too eager to throw his career away,” he
wrote. “I am sure there will also be those of you who will think of
me as naïve.”

But he added: “Skadden is on the wrong side of history. I could no
longer stay knowing that someday I would have to explain why I
stayed.”

So far, it does not appear that the associates’ complaints are
resonating with their firms’ leadership.

The decision-making at many large firms is controlled by a small group
of partners who are annually paid as much as $20 million each because
of their relationships with lucrative corporate clients. At large
firms, starting associates tend to make more than $220,000 a year plus
a bonus.

At Paul Weiss, the top partners have argued that their deal with Mr.
Trump was necessary to keep the firm afloat. The executive order, they
said, would have prevented the firm from representing clients before
the federal government could have cost partners and associates their
jobs.

Skadden appears to have taken steps to prevent the internal dissent
from spreading. Mr. Sipp and another associate there, Brenna Frey, who
quit on Friday, said they had been blocked from announcing their
resignations widely on Skadden’s email channels.

Two other associates said Skadden’s email system had not allowed
them to send messages about their concerns about the deal to broad
groups of lawyers. Those associates spoke on the condition of
anonymity because they still work at Skadden.

The lawyers had often used internal group email lists to circulate
questions, such as asking about colleagues’ experiences with judges
or mediators.

Skadden declined to comment, and a spokesperson for Paul Weiss did not
respond to a request for comment.

Objections to the deals could have other implications for the firms as
they try to retain talented associates and recruit new ones from top
law schools. On Monday, a student-run group at Georgetown
University’s law school sent a letter to Skadden saying it would not
participate in a recruiting event the next day at the firm’s
Washington office.

The letter, from several of the more than 150 members of the
Georgetown Energy Law Group, said the organization had decided not to
participate in response to Skadden’s “pre-emptive acquiescence to
pressure from the Trump administration.”

At Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, a group of 43 associates
emailed Brad Karp, the firm’s longtime chairman, in the days after
the deal last month, asking for a staff meeting with senior leadership
to address concerns about the “firm’s commitment to longstanding
principles,” according to a copy of the note reviewed by The New
York Times.

Some of the most vocal protests are coming from former Paul Weiss
lawyers.

Elizabeth J. Grossman, a former Paul Weiss associate who is executive
director of Common Cause Illinois, said she had chosen the firm after
law school because of its commitment to democracy defense, among other
issues.

“Paul Weiss recruited on the basis that they were different,” she
said.

Ms. Grossman, who helped organize an open letter to Mr. Karp that
called the decision to settle “cowardly,” said she was still
fielding calls from lawyers interested in signing the letter.

Last month, one former Paul Weiss associate even organized a virtual
shiva — the weeklong mourning period in Jewish tradition — where
lawyers could gather to commiserate.

The deals focused heavily on Paul Weiss’s and Skadden’s pro bono
programs, in which young lawyers provide many hours of free legal
services to nonprofit groups that are often at odds with Mr. Trump’s
policies. The deals require that the firms’ lawyers devote
substantial work hours to causes favored by Mr. Trump.

Even before the president issued the executive orders, Paul Weiss had
begun to take down some references to its public interest work that
conflicted with the administration.

Last month, Paul Weiss removed a web page that had highlighted its
“leadership in a court-ordered effort to find parents deported by
the Trump administration and to reunify families.” Visitors to the
page now get an error message, as do users looking for any mention of
Paul Weiss’s pro bono work on behalf of L.G.B.T.Q. people.

Mr. Karp has long been a supporter of Democrats and their causes; he
positioned Paul Weiss as a bulwark against many of the policies that
the party objected to during the first Trump administration.

Other large law firms, like WilmerHale and Jenner & Block, have opted
to go to court to fight Mr. Trump’s executive orders targeting them.

But Mr. Karp sought to strike a deal with the White House only hours
after Paul Weiss was hit with an order, two people briefed on the
matter said. He was prepared to offer pro bono work on causes
supported by Mr. Trump, including helping the administration launch a
sovereign wealth fund, one of the two people and another who was
briefed on the matter said.

After meeting with Mr. Trump, Mr. Karp and a lawyer he had hired in
Washington to deal with the executive order, Bill Burck, engaged in a
back-and-forth with Mr. Trump’s advisers over the wording of the
agreement.

Mr. Trump’s team wanted Paul Weiss to agree to not engage in
“weaponization” of the law or “diversity, equity and
inclusion” in hiring, two of the people briefed on the matter said.

Mr. Karp won the battle over the word “weaponization,” which was
not mentioned in the version of the deal published on the White House
website. But a general prohibition on policies that promote D.E.I. in
the firm’s hiring did appear.

The agreement “will have no effect on our work and our shared
culture and values,” Mr. Karp said in an email to his firm. “The
core of who we are and what we stand for is and will remain
unchanged.”