Law Firms Who Folded To Trump EXPOSED as Cowards! (w/ Sen. Richard Blumenthal)

Summary

Bulwark Takes: Law Firms Who Folded To Trump EXPOSED as Cowards! (w/ Sen. Richard Blumenthal) – May 12, 2025

In the May 12, 2025 episode of Bulwark Takes, host Sam Stein engages in a compelling discussion with U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut. The episode delves into the controversial stance of certain prominent law firms in relation to former President Donald Trump, examining the ethical and legal implications of their actions. Below is a comprehensive summary of the episode, highlighting key discussions, insights, and notable quotes.

---

1. Introduction to the Topic

[01:28]
Sam Stein opens the conversation by introducing the central theme: the dichotomy between law firms that capitulated to Trump’s pressures and those that resisted. He sets the stage for a deep dive into the morality and legality of these firms' actions.

Notable Quote:
Sam Stein: "We are going to be talking about law firms, those that have capitulated to Donald Trump and those that have not capitulated, and the explanations that they're giving and also just sort of the morality around it now."

---

2. Senator Blumenthal's Initial Reaction

[02:18]
Senator Blumenthal expresses profound disappointment and anger upon learning that Paul Weiss, a highly reputable law firm known for its strong stance on constitutional and civil rights, chose to negotiate and ultimately settle under pressure from President Trump’s executive order.

Notable Quote:
Senator Richard Blumenthal: "I was absolutely astonished that a law firm with the reputation and the storied history of Paul Weiss... would agree or even consider agreeing to this Shakedown from the President United States."

---

3. Understanding the Executive Order

[03:33]
The discussion shifts to the specifics of the executive order targeting these law firms. Stein clarifies that the order proposed revoking security clearances for lawyers, barring them from government buildings, and threatening government contractors who engaged these firms.

Notable Quote:
Senator Richard Blumenthal: "These actions were blatant violations of the First Amendment rights of free expression, the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, the Fifth Amendment right to due process."

---

4. Lack of Collective Resistance from Other Law Firms

[04:48] – [06:32]
Stein probes into the surprising lack of solidarity among other law firms in defending those targeted by the executive order. Blumenthal responds by highlighting both the fear and the absence of collective action, albeit mentioning a few firms like Perkins Coie and Wilmer, Cutler, Sussman, and others that did stand firm and are now winning their legal battles against Trump.

Notable Quote:
Senator Richard Blumenthal: "The blunt truth is, Sam, they just rolled over... Perkins Coie... They are winning in court."

---

5. Critique of Firms' Preemptive Compliance

[07:07] – [08:10]
Blumenthal criticizes law firms for their preemptive compliance with Trump’s demands, invoking lessons from Tim Snyder's "On Tyranny" about not yielding to authoritarian pressures in advance.

Notable Quote:
Senator Richard Blumenthal: "These law firms are obeying in advance. And I will just emphasize... do not obey in advance."

---

6. Correspondence with Capitulating Firms

[08:10] – [10:12]
Stein brings up the letters Blumenthal and his colleague, Representative Jimmy Raskin, sent to law firms that have entered into settlements with Trump. The firms’ responses have been inadequate, offering vague assurances without formal agreements detailing their commitments.

Notable Quote:
Senator Richard Blumenthal: "It's astonishing... They enter into these agreements... without anything in writing."

---

7. Potential Backlash Against Compliant Firms

[10:12] – [12:55]
The conversation explores the repercussions for firms that have agreed to Trump’s terms. Blumenthal suggests that companies like Microsoft distancing themselves from these compliant firms highlight a broader mistrust and potential loss of clients who prioritize ethical stances over political appeasement.

Notable Quote:
Senator Richard Blumenthal: "I know people who have decided to leave those law firms as clients... there's the Microsofts of the world that say... why would I want to hire a law firm that is so uncourageous."

---

8. Upholding the Tradition of Trial Lawyers

[12:55] – [15:17]
Blumenthal underscores the importance of standing up for unpopular causes, drawing parallels to historical figures like John Adams. He criticizes firms that yield to threats, emphasizing the noble tradition of trial lawyers who defend constitutional rights regardless of personal or financial costs.

Notable Quote:
Senator Richard Blumenthal: "These guys who succumb to this kind of threat and bullying... I wouldn't want them as my lawyers."

---

9. Conclusion and Final Thoughts

[15:17] – [15:39]
The episode wraps up with Stein acknowledging the personal connection to one of the discussed firms and thanking Senator Blumenthal for his insights. Blumenthal reiterates his commitment to upholding the rule of law and supporting firms that resist authoritarian pressures.

Notable Quote:
Senator Richard Blumenthal: "Great work."

---

Key Takeaways

• Ethical Standards: The episode highlights a stark contrast between law firms that maintain ethical standards and those that yield to political pressures.

• Legal Implications: Blumenthal emphasizes that the executive order targeting law firms was unconstitutional, violating multiple amendments.

• Professional Integrity: There is a strong advocacy for lawyers to uphold the rule of law and resist pressures that compromise their professional integrity.

• Consequences of Capitulation: Complying with authoritarian demands can lead to loss of credibility and clients, as seen with firms associated with Trump facing backlash from companies like Microsoft.

• Support for Resilient Firms: Firms that stood against Trump's pressures are being lauded and supported, serving as examples of professional courage and adherence to constitutional principles.

---

This episode of Bulwark Takes serves as a critical examination of the legal community's response to political intimidation, advocating for steadfast adherence to legal and ethical standards in the face of authoritarian challenges.

Transcript

[Rakuten Advertiser]

Are you ready to rock? Big Savings Rakuten's Big Give Week is a festival of savings with 15% cash back at hundreds of stores. We're talking 15% cash back at Ulta, Adidas, LG Electronics, Ray Ban, KitchenAid, Expedia, Hotels.com, levi's, Stanley and more. Shoppers in the know get the best savings when they use Rakuten. They shop the brands they love and earn cash back on top of deals. Big Give Week is only once a year and the cash back rates are the roof. Shop for fashion and your pets while getting 15% cash back on it all. You'll get cash back sent directly to your PayPal and it feels so good whenever it hits your account. Join for free today and get a $20 welcome bonus. Hurry. Big give week ends May 12th and there won't be an encore. Go to rakuten.com or download the Rakuten app that's R A K U t e n rakuten.com.

[Lowe's Advertiser]

Don'T miss the biggest Maytag sale of the year at Lowe' you'll find the Maytag appliances you need when you need them at a great price. Plus, when you buy two select laundry appliances, you'll get up to a $100 bonus via instant rebate. Shop Maytag at Lowe's. We help you save. Offer valid through 531. See store for pricing and offer details. Advertise savings on all major maytag appliances through maytag.com and participating retailers. Prices may vary. Additional terms and conditions apply.

[Sam Stein]

Hey everybody, it's me, Sam Stein, managing editor at the Bulwark, and I am joined today by Senator Richard Blumenthal, my state of Connecticut. We are going to be talking about law firms, those that have capitulated to Donald Trump and those that have not capitulated, and the explanations that they're giving and also just sort of the morality around it now. Senator, thank you so much. Thank you. Really.

[Senator Richard Blumenthal]

I appreciate being on with you. Thank you, Sam, for having me.

[Sam Stein]

Okay, so let's talk in sort of broad strokes to begin with. What was your original reaction when you saw Paul Weiss, which was the first firm really, to enter into negotiations with Donald Trump and then to decide to settle with Donald Trump after they were targeted by an executive order from Donald Trump?

[Senator Richard Blumenthal]

Sam, I'll be really bluntly honest with you, I was speechless. Literally. I was absolutely astonished that a law firm with the reputation and the storied history of Paul Weiss standing strong for constitutional rights, the civil rights movement, would agree or even consider agreeing to this Shakedown from the President United States. And of course, it gave as an excuse that it was afraid of losing clients or even some of its leading partners. And I was equally appalled that other firms in the legal profession, reportedly Sullivan and Cromwell, would try to poach their business or their personnel. So I was then angry. I'll be really honest. I was angry because not only is the President violating the law and attacking the rule of law, extortionately shaking down this law firm, but the lawyers are submitting to it in a way that I think is absolutely shameful and disgraceful.

[Sam Stein]

Now, the. The executive order, just to be clear, would have revoked some security clearances for lawyers at the firm. It would have prohibited some of them from entering government buildings. And then most significantly, I think it would have said that government contractors really couldn't have used the firm or would have been threatened if they had used the firm. Those do seem, frankly to be existential threats to a firm. Do you disagree with that?

[Senator Richard Blumenthal]

I think that they would have been disadvantaging for the firm. But they are so plainly illegal, Sam, that my view is the firm had an obligation to resist them. Let's focus on what the President United States was threatening to do. Barring a law firm from accessing physically premises of the United States government, which belong to all of us as taxpayers, and then threatening to terminate their clients contracts with the government in retaliation for other clients or causes represented by Paul Weiss. I mean, it's almost unimaginable, or would have been before the President did it.

[Sam Stein]

Well, while politics was doing this, other firms obviously were talking. I mean, I know this because I know lawyers around town. I'm sure, you know, tons of lawyers around D.C. about what they could do to sort of preempt the next targeting of a firm. And what was shocking to me, and I'm curious if you could provide any insight into what you heard was going on, was the reluctance of other firms to go and represent those firms that are being targeted and frankly, to just rally around in sort of a collective action way, Paul Weiss's behalf or any other targeted firm. What we saw instead was a real reticence by these firms to put their names on any briefs or even to defend Paul Weiss in the court of law. What were you hearing behind the scenes with respect to those types of conversations?

[Senator Richard Blumenthal]

I was hearing a lot of hand wringing, a lot of furrowed brows, a lot of worries about business and about the President's intimidation, what the retaliation might be. But let's be very clear. There were law firms that stood up to the president. And those law firms are winning in court. Each of those law firms, and I want to name them, Sam, because I think they deserve to be elevated. Perkins, Coie, Jenner and Block, Wilmer, Cutler, Sussman, Godfrey, they all received these same threats that Paul Weiss did. They didn't receive executive orders, but it was the same kinds of threats. They have gone to court. Perkins Coy was represented by Williamson Conley. You're absolutely right that law firms were reluctant to represent the victims here.

[Rakuten Advertiser]

Right.

[Senator Richard Blumenthal]

But what the president did was pretty unthinkable constitutionally. And I don't need to tell you, but folks should understand that these actions were blatant violations of the First Amendment rights of free expression, the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, the Fifth Amendment right to due process. The President United States was just shredding the Constitution with lawyers. And again, I can't say it too often, have an obligation to obey the law and resist these kinds of right.

[Sam Stein]

And I guess, I guess that's what I'm getting at is did they not feel a sort of an ethical, professional obligation to say, no, we're not going to do this, or to even just say, yeah, we'll send an amicus brief on behalf of Perkins Cooey and defend them and come out into the defense? I didn't see as much of that as I had anticipated.

[Senator Richard Blumenthal]

The, the blunt truth is, Sam, they just rolled over. And by the way, they have rolled over even without an executive order. Yes, Perkins Coie received an executive, or rather Paul Weiss received an executive order, but the others in effect are obeying in advance. And I will just emphasize, because I'm a big fan of the book written by Tim Snyder, professor at Yale, called On Tyranny, that the first lesson of tyranny among 20 lessons for the 20th century is do not obey in advance. These law firms are obeying in advance.

[Sam Stein]

Now, you've put out letters with your colleague on the House side, Jimmy Raskin, asking those firms that have entered into advanced settlements with Trump, and we'll just stress they've, they've handed over about a billion or so dollars or pledged a billion or so dollars in pro bono services on a variety of different issues. You've asked them for explanations as to what kind of commitments they have made. I've seen the letters they've sent you. What is your read of their responses?

[Senator Richard Blumenthal]

My read of it in perhaps non legal language is blah, blah, blah.

[Sam Stein]

That's not legal language. That wouldn't suffice in the court. Okay.

[Senator Richard Blumenthal]

But it is essentially ducking and dodging non answers. Representative Raskin and I have said to them that we're unsatisfied. The answers are inadequate. And by the way, Sam, you'll appreciate this point. We asked them for written agreements. We asked them whether there were any written agreements.

[Sam Stein]

Are there written agreements? I have not seen. All I know is that Trump put a post out on Truth Social and they have been referring people to those posts and or their internal letters to their own staff. I've seen no formalized agreement.

[Senator Richard Blumenthal]

So far as we know, there are no formal written agreements, which is astonishing. We're talking about the biggest law firms in the world, supposedly the best. That's how they would tout their reputations and abilities. And they enter into this agreement that commits them, each of them, to $100 million in free legal services or more, without specifying what the causes or clients might be that the President would direct them to do. Suppose he wants them to sue a client that they already have. They've got to get rid of that client. Suppose he objects to a client that they are representing. You know, it's absolutely mind boggling. They would enter into these agreements without anything in writing.

[Sam Stein]

Their contention is that they've made no actual formal commitments to represent specific clients, but that they've read they've made commitments to do pro bono work in specific areas. It's an important distinction, Right? They may not want to represent a, they may scoff at representing, for instance, a coal company or a, you know, a private prison. Let's just throw that out there. But they did say they would work in the areas of combating anti Semitism, upholding fairness in the rule of law, and that they don't have to represent specific clients. Again, we don't know anything because we don't have actual written agreements. But I'm just sort of curious what your read of it is.

[Senator Richard Blumenthal]

Yeah, I mean, these agreements are whatever the President says they are, right?

[Sam Stein]

He could, he could turn around and say, no, I'm going to attack you again unless you do this.

[Senator Richard Blumenthal]

And that is a really important point, Sam. This kind of appeasement history teaches us never works with a bully. You know, whether it's Chamberlain in World War II or again and again, even with Ukraine and Putin. It just never works. And especially with Trump's history of bullying not only law firms, but as we've seen, universities, others whom he regards as adversaries or competitors. The man knows no limits. And even if there were a written agreement, arguably it wouldn't be worth much, but certainly without something specifying what the costs or clients would be. They've opened themselves to unlimited possible demands. But let's take anti Semitism, for example. Does that mean they're going to be required to sue universities and colleges? There's almost no limit to what they could be asked to do in the name of these very vague causes, veterans, antisemitism and so forth? Yeah.

[Sam Stein]

Now, the, the other side of this is, will this work for the firms? And there was a story about two weeks ago about Microsoft. Now, we don't know if it's causation, correlation, whatever, but Microsoft did drop a firm that had made an agreement with Trump and did pick up a firm that had fought Trump. As the company enters into a suit or a legal matter with the government, the reasoning, we surmise, is that Microsoft couldn't trust the firm that made the agreement, Trump, because they felt like the firm had already acquiesced and couldn't represent them in good faith. So it's possible that these agreements work against the firms that cut them. I would add as a question to you, would you advise, I don't know, companies, or maybe not companies, but democratic causes to say, hey, we cannot work with these firms that made agreements with Trump because they are already beholden to Donald Trump.

[Senator Richard Blumenthal]

I don't think I need to advise him. You know, I think it is right there in the open, fully disclosed, that they are beholden to Donald Trump and he will come down on them if he doesn't like what he does for, or the firm does for a client. And I just want to be very frank. I know people who have decided to leave those law firms as clients. So I think their apprehension about losing clients if they didn't succumb and surrender to this shakedown may actually backfire on them. Because, yes, there are the Microsofts of the world that say, you know, just as a matter of principle, why would I want to hire a law firm that is so uncourageous, so willing to surrender to Donald Trump, and so fearful of its own shadow and will not stand up? And again, I want to elevate the firms that decided to stand up again. Perkins, Coey, Jenner, Block, Wilmer, Cutler, Sussman, Godfrey. They're winning in court. I'd rather go with a firm that wins against the President, United States than one that puts its tail between its legs and says, oh, I'll do anything you want, Mr. President. You know, you just say, jump, and I'll say, how high? And I want to add one more point just on a personal note. You know, before I took this job as a US Senator, I was a trial lawyer. I was Attorney General of the State of Connecticut for 20 years. I was the US Attorney in Connecticut, the chief federal prosecutor. If you ask me what I am, I'll tell you. I'm a trial lawyer. I'm proud of being a trial lawyer. We take unpopular causes. We're willing to stand up and take a hit financially. John Adams represented the soldiers who committed the Boston Massacre. He was fearful about his reputation, but he said they deserve to be represented. That was pretty gutsy for him to do. And that's the tradition of trial lawyers. These guys who succumb to this kind of threat and bullying. In my view, I wouldn't want them as my lawyers.

[Sam Stein]

Well, I guess I'm obligated at this point to reveal or actually disclose, as I've had before, that my sister works for Gender Block. So there you go. Praise to that firm, I suppose. All right. Senator Richard Blumenthal, thank you so much for joining us. Keep us posted on any other correspondence you have with these firms and any other letters you get. We'd love to keep having you back on the show. Appreciate it. And appreciate the viewers for tuning in and subscribing. We will talk to you soon.

[Senator Richard Blumenthal]

Thank you for having me. Great work.