Trump Rescinds Executive Order Targeting Paul Weiss Following Agreement on Legal Services, DEI Audit
Former President Donald Trump has withdrawn an executive order that threatened government contracts and security clearances of lawyers at the prestigious law firm Paul Weiss Rifkind Wharton & Garrison. The decision comes after an agreement was reached wherein Paul Weiss committed to providing $40 million in pro bono legal services to projects mutually agreed upon with the administration and undergoing a comprehensive audit of its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies.
The initial executive order, issued on March 14, triggered widespread concern amongst free speech advocates and legal professionals, who viewed it as an attack on the independence of the legal profession and an attempt to stifle dissent. The order directed federal agency heads to suspend security clearances for Paul Weiss lawyers and hinted at the potential cancellation of government contracts held by the firm’s clients.
This was the third such action taken by Trump since late February, raising serious questions about the administration’s willingness to utilize government power to punish perceived political opponents. Previously, Trump had targeted Covington & Burling, a firm that had aided former special counsel Jack Smith, who had secured two indictments against Trump, and Perkins Coie, a firm that has been involved in Democratic political campaigns.
The rationale behind targeting Paul Weiss, as stated in the March 14 executive order, stemmed from the firm’s past employment of Mark Pomerantz, a former New York prosecutor. Pomerantz had authored a letter published in The New York Times in 2022, expressing his belief that Trump was guilty of numerous felony violations. This letter was written prior to Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg obtaining an indictment and subsequent conviction against Trump for falsifying business records. Trump has consistently maintained his innocence and is appealing the conviction.
A White House statement accompanying Trump’s announcement of the withdrawal emphasized the acknowledgment of wrongdoing by former Paul Weiss partner Mark Pomerantz and the purported dangers of "weaponization" of the justice system. The statement highlighted a meeting between Trump and Paul Weiss Chairman Brad Karp, during which Karp seemingly conceded to the administrations concerns.
The executive order posed a considerable threat to Paul Weiss’s business. Beyond directly impacting the firm’s government contracts, it also compelled government contractors to disclose any business dealings with Paul Weiss, thereby potentially subjecting the firm’s clients to increased scrutiny or the risk of contract cancellations. One client, Steven Schwartz, a former legal executive of Cognizant Technology Solutions, even terminated Paul Weiss as defense legal counsel due to the executive order.
The agreement reached between Trump and Paul Weiss addresses several key points of contention raised by the administration. In addition to the $40 million commitment to pro bono legal services, Paul Weiss has also affirmed its commitment to merit-based hiring, promotion, and retention, vowing to abstain from adopting or pursuing any DEI policies. The firm will engage experts, mutually agreed upon with the administration within 14 days, to conduct a comprehensive audit of its employment practices.
The agreement has elicited strong reactions, particularly from those concerned about the potential erosion of legal ethics and the independence of the legal profession. George Conway, a prominent Republican-turned-Independent Trump critic, described the Paul Weiss agreement as "the most disgraceful action by a major law firm in my lifetime." This sentiment reflects a broader concern that the agreement may set a dangerous precedent, potentially encouraging other law firms to appease political pressures in order to avoid similar repercussions.
The suspension of security clearances and the threat of contract cancellations had previously been employed against Covington & Burling for their work with former special counsel Jack Smith. Smith, who oversaw investigations into Trump’s alleged interference in the 2020 election and the handling of classified documents, secured two indictments against the former president. Following Trump’s victory in the 2024 election, Smith dropped the charges.
Another law firm, Perkins Coie, which had also been targeted by an executive order, filed a lawsuit challenging the order’s constitutionality. A federal judge in Washington, D.C., issued a temporary restraining order halting several restrictions outlined in the order. The executive orders targeting Perkins Coie and Paul Weiss also cited objections to the firms’ DEI policies.
According to a statement attributed to Paul Weiss Chairman Brad Karp in Trump’s Truth Social post, the firm is "gratified that the President has agreed to withdraw the Executive Order concerning Paul, Weiss. We look forward to an engaged and constructive relationship with the President and his Administration.”
The resolution of this dispute raises several important questions about the boundaries of executive power, the independence of the legal profession, and the role of DEI initiatives in the workplace. While the withdrawal of the executive order may be seen as a positive development, the circumstances surrounding the agreement and the concessions made by Paul Weiss have fueled concerns about potential political interference in the legal system and the chilling effect it may have on attorneys representing unpopular clients or causes. It remains to be seen how this event will shape the legal landscape in the future and whether it will embolden further attempts to exert political pressure on law firms and other institutions.
