Trump says he has no intention of firing Jerome Powell as Fed chair
One of the law firms that reached a deal with the Trump administration to head off punitive executive orders said in a letter to Democratic lawmakers that it felt it had little choice.
In response to a letter from Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland inquiring about the Trump deals with law firms, Brad Karp of the prominent firm Paul Weiss wrote that the EO “posed an unprecedented threat” to the firm and an “existential risk.”
“Because so many of the matters we handle on behalf of our clients, across practice areas, require productive interaction and engagement with the federal government—and because so many of our clients also value a productive relationship with the federal government and have significant commercial relationships with the federal government- we immediately understood that the effects of the executive order would destroy the firm, even if we ultimately prevailed in court,” Karp wrote.
Part of the firm’s agreement was to provide the administration tens of millions of dollars in free legal work for causes the president supports, but Karp said the administration “will not determine what matters we take on. We obviously could not ethically have agreed to such a condition.”
Another of the firms that struck a deal was Wilkie Farr & Gallagher LLP. K. Lee Blalack II of O’Melveny & Myers LLP, who is representing the firm, told the lawmakers in a letter that his client’s agreement “is consistent with Wilkie’s practices and core values, including client service and serving as a steward for the Firm’s employees, its clients, and the broader community.”
Blalack wrote that Wilkie “received outreach from the Administration in late March” and “began discussions with the Administration about a potential alternative resolution” to head off a Trump EO. He added that “nothing in the agreement will require our client to change course with respect to its values or its operations.”
Kirkland’s W. Neil Eggleston wrote that under the agreement, they would “continue to operate with the merit-based philosophy that is and has always been the essence of Kirkland and to provide substantial pro bono services on a non-partisan basis.”
In a joint statement, Blumenthal and Raskin said the responses were “inadequate” and troubling. “These responses only deepen our concern about what conditions are in place to coerce these firms into providing free legal services to the President’s pet causes — and what other provisions of their agreement these firms may be hiding,” the statement said.
