1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Paul Weiss leader cites potential ‘existential…

Law Firms

Paul Weiss leader cites potential ‘existential crisis’ as 1 reason for Trump deal; critics include 141 firm alumni

By Debra Cassens Weiss

March 24, 2025, 1:49 pm CDT

An executive order targeting Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison “could easily have destroyed our firm,” the law firm’s chairman, Brad Karp, told employees in a March 23 statement defending the deal that he reached with President Donald Trump.

Karp’s message, printed by Original Jurisdiction, said Paul Weiss was facing an “existential crisis” as a result of a March 14 executive order by Trump. The order had suspended security clearances held by people at the firm, restricted their access to government buildings, required government contractors to disclose whether they do business with the firm, and required agencies to take steps to terminate contracts with Paul Weiss or its clients.

The executive order is being revoked as a result of the deal, Trump announced in a post on Truth Social, his social media platform, March 20. According to Trump, the deal provides that Paul Weiss:

  • Will not deny representation to clients because of lawyers’ personal political views.

  • Will take on a wide variety of pro bono matters that represent the full spectrum of political viewpoints.

  • Will dedicate $40 million in pro bono legal services “to support the administration’s initiatives, including: assisting our nation’s veterans, fairness in the justice system, the president’s Task Force to Combat Antisemitism and other mutually agreed projects.”

  • “Affirms its commitment to merit-based hiring, promotion and retention and will not adopt, use or pursue any DEI policies.”

Karp sent a copy of the agreement to firm employees that differs from Trump’s description, the New York Times reports. Karp’s version does not mention DEI, but it did affirm a commitment to merits-based employment practices and to hire an outside expert to audit those practices.

Karp also said under the agreement, “the administration is not dictating what matters we take on, approving our matters or anything like that.”

The Truth Social post also quoted a White House statement that said Karp had “acknowledged the wrongdoing of former Paul Weiss partner Mark Pomerantz,” who worked on a criminal case against Trump while he was with the New York district attorney’s office. But Karp’s copy of the agreement did not mention Pomerantz, who has denied doing anything wrong, according to the New York Times.

Karp negotiated the agreement just a few months after suffering a heart attack, the New York Times reports in another article. The deal was supported by “the vast majority” of the firm’s partners, the New York Times said, which relied on anonymous sources.

Karp said he was initially “hopeful that the legal industry would rally to our side” after Trump issued the executive order. Instead “certain other firms were seeking to exploit our vulnerabilities by aggressively soliciting our clients and recruiting our attorneys,” he said.

Paul Weiss initially planned to challenge the executive order in a lawsuit, but it soon became clear that a successful legal challenge “would not solve the fundamental problem, which was that clients perceived our firm as being persona non grata with the administration,” Karp said. In reaching a deal, Karp said, “we were guided by our obligation to protect our clients’ interests” and the need to ensure that the firm would survive.

Critics of the deal include 141 Paul Weiss alumni who signed a March 24 letter protesting the firm’s decision, according to a March 24 press release.

“We expected the firm to be a leader in standing up for the legal profession, the adversary system and the right to counsel,” the letter said. “Instead of a ringing defense of the values of democracy, we witnessed a craven surrender to, and thus complicity in, what is perhaps the gravest threat to the independence of the legal profession since at least the days of Sen. Joseph McCarthy.”

Taking the other side is Stephen Gillers, a professor at the New York University School of Law, who told Law.com that Paul Weiss “had no obligation to fight Trump in court.”

The firm “has obligations to its clients, who must deal with the federal government regularly as an adversary or a regulator, and to its thousands of employees, including lawyers,” he said.

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Kansas nears ‘constitutional crisis’ because…

Judiciary

Kansas nears ‘constitutional crisis’ because of attorney shortage, justice says

By Debra Cassens Weiss

December 23, 2024, 3:50 pm CST

A shortage of lawyers in rural Kansas is straining the court system and requiring judges to look outside the community to find lawyers to represent parties entitled to a court-appointed lawyer, according to Kansas Supreme Court Justice Keynen “K.J.” Wall Jr., who chaired a committee examining the problem.

Wall said at a Friday news conference Kansas is “approaching a constitutional crisis” because of attorney shortages in rural areas.

The Kansas Reflector, the Kansas Beacon, WIBW and Courthouse News Service have coverage; a press release is here.

About 45% of the state’s population lives in rural areas, while only about 21% of the state’s working attorneys practice in rural areas, according to a report released Friday titled Kansas Rural Justice Initiative.

Sixteen Kansas counties have three or fewer attorneys, including Hodgeman County and Wichita County—which have no active lawyers, according to the press release and the report. The problem is likely to get worse because the attorney population in Kansas, especially rural Kansas, is older than national averages and closer to retirement.

Attorneys in nearly one out of three counties have a median age of older than 60 years old. If those attorneys aren’t counted, 87 counties would have one or fewer attorneys per 1,000 people, and nine counties would have no attorneys.

The report has 10 recommendations, including that the Kansas Supreme Court should work with lawmakers and others to:

  • Create a rural-attorney training program at the state’s two law schools. Tuition-reimbursement incentives to encourage rural practice should be part of the program.

  • Establish a student loan repayment program for lawyers working and practicing in the state’s rural areas.

  • Develop a professional group for rural attorneys to collaborate on issues relating to recruitment and retention.

In part four of a CBS News investigation into domestic violence in the military, a former Army attorney said the crisis has only compounded after 20 years of war. Norah O’Donnell has more.