The Law Firm Paul Weiss Chooses Cowardice In Confrontation With Trump

Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, a nearly 150-year-old law firm, bent the knee to President Donald Trump Thursday evening when it struck a deal to get rid of the president’s executive order apparently punishing the firm for once employing a lawyer who worked on a case targeting the president.

Trump’s executive order purported to ban the law firm from government contracts, restrict its lawyers from federal buildings and require clients to disclose their employment of the firm when seeking government contracts. It would have been an existential blow to the firm, which operates a broad multinational practice that encompasses everything from mergers and acquisitions to white-collar defense to civil rights and free speech litigation. The deal to make the order go away, as described in a statement posted by Trump on Thursday, requires the firm to restrict its diversity, equity and inclusion practices and provide $40 million in pro bono services to the administration. In effect, the firm has not simply paid off, but joined the administration.

Paul Weiss’ acquiescence is the latest example of a great menace stalking the country in the early days of Trump’s second term: cowardice.

Let’s be clear about what happened here, Trump’s mafioso government extorted the firm to give up its historic support for civil rights and join itself to enacting his autocratic agenda. The firm could have challenged this illegal extortion, as the firm Perkins Coie, also targeted by the administration, has done with success so far, but instead it chose Vichy-style collaboration.

“We are gratified that the President has agreed to withdraw the Executive Order concerning Paul, Weiss,” Brad Karp, Paul Weiss chairman, said in a statement included in Trump’s post. “We look forward to an engaged and constructive relationship with the President and his Administration.”

This is particularly galling from a firm with a laudable history of standing up for civil rights and the advancement of minority groups. Paul Weiss was the first mixed Jewish and WASP law firm in New York City. It was the first American law firm to employ a Black associate, a Black woman associate and first to make a woman a partner. The firm also worked alongside former Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall on the Brown v. Board of Education case that ended formal segregation in schools, fought for more inclusive immigration laws during and after the Holocaust and defended free speech rights in a landmark case involving D.H. Lawrence’s novel “Lady Chatterley’s Lover.”

To protect its present pecuniary interests, the firm has now decided to throw that history in the gutter by accepting surrender to Trump’s anti-DEI initiatives.

Acquiescing to the Trump administration’s anti-DEI pressure campaign should not be seen in the light of the debate over the merits or demerits of DEI that preceded this administration. Instead, it should be understood as the Trump administration understands it: a frontal assault on civil rights law and desegregation.

Administration allies have all but admitted as much, as conservative activist Chris Rufo did in an interview with The New York Times’ Ross Douthat.

The administration’s actions are also very clear on this. Just look at what the Department of Defense is doing.

Links to web pages about Black, Latino and female military servicemembers buried at Arlington Cemetery have been deleted from parts of the cemetery’s web site. Web pages touting the accomplishments of Black servicemembers, including baseball great Jackie Robinson, were taken down and affixed with the label “DEI” in the page’s URL. (The administration reversed course and restored some pages, including Robinson’s, following outrage from sports media on Thursday.)

The General Services Administration also removed a requirement for contractors to not operate segregated facilities if they wanted to obtain contracts.

This is what eliminating DEI means to the Trump administration. And now, that’s what it means for Paul Weiss.

The firm has already begun to accept the Trump administration’s principles. Some time after the executive order came down, but before the firm allowed itself to be extorted, the firm took down a web page and links to its Center to Combat Hate. The firm launched the center in May 2024 to perform litigation alongside civil rights groups “to confront and redress hate-driven violence and intimidation” in order to “foster a more just and equitable society.” All links to it, including on the social media web site LinkedIn, are now dead.

Paul Weiss is not alone among elite institutions in choosing a whimper, not a bang when threatened by the Trump autocracy. Universities are largely bending over backwards to protect their own financial interests. Administrators at Columbia University are considering allowing itself to be extorted into giving up the university’s autonomy in order to keep $400 million in grants that the administration is using as leverage. The administration is also targeting the University of Pennsylvania and Johns Hopkins University with similar extortion efforts to seize control of their operations, with dozens of others likely to follow suit.

Nonprofits are being cowed into deleting references to diversity and inclusion, transgender people and changing the name of the Gulf of Mexico, sometimes after facing direct threats from the administration.

Corporations are sucking up and paying up to the administration in pursuit of government contracts, protection from investigation or prosecution and any number of corrupt acts they can extract from the nation’s mob boss. In some cases, corporate leaders, particularly in Silicon Valley, have fully embraced autocratic theories of government as a way to further enrich and empower themselves.

This cowardice is exactly what the Trump administration counts on to succeed. It is also precisely how a liberal democracy can succumb to autocracy: Private actors are putting their private interests above the common good. They have forgotten that liberalism and democracy do not just provide rights that protect their private interests, but demand public duties of citizens to uphold them. Those who choose otherwise accept their own corruption.

These elite institutions cannot, and will not save liberalism. Nor will they save democracy. They can join the people or they can join the autocrats in the public and private spheres who wish to rule as kings.

It’s time to ask: Which side are you on?