‘I Felt Ashamed.’ Why One Lawyer Resigned When His Firm Caved to Trump

Summary

Summary of "‘I Felt Ashamed.’ Why One Lawyer Resigned When His Firm Caved to Trump" – The Daily

Introduction

In this compelling episode of The Daily, hosted by Michael Barbaro, the New York Times delves into the increasing tension between prominent law firms and former President Donald Trump. The episode, released on April 7, 2025, centers around the story of Thomas Sip, a dedicated lawyer who made the courageous decision to resign from his prestigious firm, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP (commonly known as Skadden Arps), when it capitulated to Trump's executive orders targeting law firms that opposed his administration.

Trump's Campaign Against Law Firms

Michael Barbaro opens the discussion by highlighting Trump's aggressive use of executive orders aimed at punishing law firms that have represented his opponents or investigated his actions. Since his presidency, Trump has systematically targeted top-tier law firms, including renowned names like Paul, Weiss, Jenner & Block, and Perkins Coie, applying pressure to force these firms into settlements that align with his administration's interests.

Barbaro explains, "Donald Trump has used executive orders to wage war on law firm after law firm" (00:39). These executive orders effectively blacklist firms, preventing them from interacting with the federal government and jeopardizing their ability to represent major corporate clients. This campaign has led many firms to either comply with Trump's demands or resist and face significant backlash.

Skadden Arps' Settlement with the Administration

Skadden Arps, one of the most respected and profitable law firms globally, found itself at the heart of this conflict. The firm, renowned for its pro bono work and diversity initiatives, reached a settlement with the Trump administration, mirroring agreements struck by other firms like Perkins Coie. The settlement required Skadden to provide $100 million in pro bono legal services to causes favored by Trump and to hire Scadden Fellows with conservative viewpoints (20:34).

Interview with Thomas Sip

The episode features an in-depth interview with Thomas Sip (02:27), a lawyer who recently resigned from Skadden Arps in protest of the firm's decision to comply with Trump's executive orders. Sip shares his personal and professional journey, emphasizing his strong sense of justice and dedication to the principles he believed Skadden Arps stood for.

Thomas Sip’s Background and Motivation

Sip recounts his early life experiences, moving from Japan to the United States as a child and grappling with issues of identity and belonging. These formative experiences instilled in him a profound sense of justice and a desire to contribute positively to American society. He explains, "I believe that there's still hope and I owe it to America, I think, to stay here and speak out on this issue" (31:41).

His dedication led him to a prestigious career at Skadden Arps, where he engaged in significant pro bono work, focusing on causes such as homelessness, immigration, and police misconduct. Sip highlights the firm's strong pro bono program, which allowed him to balance his high-pressure corporate work with meaningful charitable efforts (10:24).

The Deterioration of Firm Ethics

However, the turning point came when Skadden Arps decided to settle with the Trump administration, committing substantial pro bono resources to causes aligned with Trump’s agenda and promising to eschew what the administration labeled as "illegal DEI hiring practices" (19:37). This agreement marked a significant shift in the firm's ethical stance, prompting internal unrest among its lawyers.

Sip describes the internal atmosphere during this period, noting that many attorneys felt betrayed and powerless. "We felt like things are moving really fast, and we felt voiceless" (16:22). The firm's leadership argued that the agreements would not change the firm's core values, but Sip was unconvinced, believing that compliance with Trump's demands fundamentally altered the firm's identity and mission (30:33).

Decision to Resign

Faced with this ethical dilemma, Sip chose to take a stand. He meticulously drafted his resignation letter, articulating his disillusionment with the firm's decision to prioritize political capitulation over legal integrity and democratic principles. In his heartfelt resignation, Sip writes, "Skadden is on the wrong side of history. I could no longer stay, knowing that someday I would have to explain why I stayed" (23:01).

The act of sending the resignation email was a pivotal moment for Sip, symbolizing his commitment to his principles despite the personal and professional risks involved. "It felt like that maybe 100 times more, though, because I knew that that was a pivotal moment in my life" (25:15).

Reactions and Implications

Sip’s resignation highlights a broader crisis within the legal profession, where law firms are being coerced into compromising their ethical standards under political pressure. His departure serves as a stark reminder of the potential erosion of the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law.

Sip criticizes his former firm’s leadership, asserting that agreeing to these deals undermines the profession and democracy itself. "These law firms are agreeing to these deals when they know that there's no legal basis for any threatened executive order... They're aiding... this existential threat against the profession, the independence of the judiciary and our democracy" (29:53).

Broader Impact on the Legal Community

The episode also covers the reactions within the broader legal community. While hundreds of firms have supported Perkins Coie by suing the administration to stop the executive orders, many have refrained from endorsing such actions, including Sip’s former firm, Skadden Arps Foreign. This divide raises critical questions about the future of legal ethics and the autonomy of law firms in the face of political intimidation.

Sip expresses hope that collective action can reverse the current trajectory, emphasizing, "If everyone could, you know, stand up and speak up about this, then we can turn this back. I think we can save it still" (31:41).

Conclusion

Thomas Sip’s story is a poignant illustration of the personal and professional challenges faced by lawyers in an increasingly politicized and hostile environment. His resignation from Skadden Arps underscores the critical need for integrity and ethical steadfastness within the legal profession, especially when confronted with external pressures that threaten democratic principles.

By sharing his journey, Sip not only highlights the ethical quandaries within major law firms but also calls for a collective reaffirmation of the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary. His actions serve as an inspiring example of standing up for one's beliefs, even at significant personal cost, and underline the enduring importance of legal integrity in safeguarding democracy.

Notable Quotes

• Thomas Sip (02:27): “I really appreciate it.”
• Thomas Sip (20:34): “Personally, I felt ashamed to work at Scadden, and that's such a new experience because of how prestigious a law firm is.”
• Thomas Sip (23:04): “So what I had written was a draft of resignation letter.”
• Thomas Sip (27:14): “I quit because of what's going on in America right now.”
• Thomas Sip (29:53): “I just don't think that's true. These law firms are agreeing to these deals when they know that there's no legal basis for any threatened executive order.”

Key Takeaways

• Ethical Dilemmas in Law Firms: The episode sheds light on the intense ethical pressures faced by top law firms under political duress, questioning the balance between maintaining business interests and upholding democratic principles.

• Personal Integrity: Thomas Sip’s resignation exemplifies the profound personal sacrifices individuals make to remain true to their values, serving as an inspiration for integrity in professional life.

• Impact on Democracy: The coercive tactics employed by Trump’s administration against law firms pose significant threats to the independence of the judiciary and the broader democratic framework, as highlighted by Sip’s experiences and actions.

Final Thoughts

“I Felt Ashamed.” is a deeply engaging and thought-provoking episode that not only narrates Thomas Sip’s personal journey but also invites listeners to reflect on the broader implications of political interference in the legal profession. It underscores the crucial role that integrity and ethical standards play in preserving the foundations of democracy and the rule of law.

Transcript

[Tracy Mumford]

This podcast is supported by Betterment.

[Betterment Ad Voice]

Don't just imagine a better future. Start investing in one with betterment. Whether it's saving for today or building wealth for tomorrow. We help people and small businesses put their money to work. We automate to make savings simpler. We optimize to make investing smarter. We build innovative technology backed by financial experts. For anyone who's ever said, I think I can do better, so be invested in better with Betterment. Get [e-mail] investing involves risk performance not guaranteed.

[Michael Barbaro]

From the New York Times, I'm Michael Balbaro. This is the Daily.

[Thomas Sip]

This is an absolute honor to sign.

[Deal Ad Voice]

The president signed an executive order singling out Perkins Coey.

[Thomas Sip]

What they've done is just terrible. It's weaponization.

[Michael Barbaro]

Over the past few weeks, Donald Trump has used executive orders to wage war on law firm after law firm.

[News Voice]

Those who made the list are a.

[Hannah Dreier]

Real murderer's row, including Covington and Burling.

[Tracy Mumford]

Paul, Weiss, Jenner and Block.

[Podcast Host Voice]

Big law, White shoe firm. Some of the best lawyers in the country.

[Michael Barbaro]

Specifically targeting those whose current or former lawyers have investigated him, sued him, or represented his enemies in court. But rather than fighting Trump, the Trump.

[Podcast Host Voice]

Administration reached a settlement with the Skadden, Arps, Slate and meager firms.

[Michael Barbaro]

Many of those firms have buckled.

[Thomas Sip]

President Trump yesterday rescinded an executive order targeting prominent law firm Paul Weiss.

[News Voice]

Milbank joins firms Wilkie, Farr and Gallagher, which also cut a deal. The question left in the air, of course, is who's next?

[Michael Barbaro]

Negotiating deals that give Trump much of what he wants and forcing thousands of the lawyers who work at those firms to make a choice. Remain at firms that have capitulated or quit in protest. Most have chosen to stay. Thomas Sip chose to quit today. I asked him to explain why. It's Monday, April 7th.

[Hannah Dreier]

Yeah, come on in. Put on these headphones. These, I think? Yes, those.

[Thomas Sip]

Okay.

[Hannah Dreier]

Comfy?

[Thomas Sip]

Yeah.

[Michael Barbaro]

Good.

[Hannah Dreier]

Thomas, welcome to the Daily.

[Thomas Sip]

Thanks for having me.

[Hannah Dreier]

I'm getting the small sense that this is a nerve wracking experience for you even before it started. I'm just seeing it on your face.

[Thomas Sip]

Yeah, it definitely is.

[Hannah Dreier]

We have been trying here at the Daily for a few weeks to understand what it's like to work at one of the law firms that's now at the center of President Trump's campaign of retribution. And to have watched from within those firms as one by one by one, these very big and powerful firms have capitulated to the presidents pretty unusual demands. And it may not shock you to learn this, but attorneys at these firms are pretty reluctant to Talk about that. And you are the rare exception. So thank you for being the exception.

[Thomas Sip]

I really appreciate it.

[Hannah Dreier]

I want to start by asking you to explain, Thomas, how it is that you came to be a lawyer in the first place and ended up at this very prestigious firm where you worked until just a few days ago. Skadden, Arps. What's that story?

[Thomas Sip]

So, going all the way to the start. I was born in Japan to an American father and a Japanese mother, and my family moved to the United States when I was 10. My parents separated shortly after, and so I was learning English in middle school and also learning about what it means to be an American, because before that, I was really, you know, just like a native Japanese kid and was through that experience, including of suddenly becoming this sort of racial minority because I'm mixed race and coming to understand the social fabric that's kind of unique to the United States, especially compared to a relatively homogenous country like Japan.

[Hannah Dreier]

Right.

[Thomas Sip]

And, you know, growing up with my single mom who doesn't speak fluent English, and getting all those sort of experiences, I think started to put me on the path that I'm on now.

[Hannah Dreier]

Can you just explain that?

[Thomas Sip]

Yeah. I mean, there were difficult days, for sure. I think even though this week has been very difficult for me, I still look back and think of some of the days that I experienced as a kid in middle school, whether it's not being able to make friends, being made fun of for my accent, and stuff like that that really, I think started to form, like that sense of injustice that I think fuels me sometimes. Right.

[Hannah Dreier]

What was the first real injustice you can remember as an immigrant, not really knowing English, navigating this new world?

[Thomas Sip]

I think there was a time when I was in math class, and, you know, math is the same, so I could answer the questions, and I think one of the answers was 33. And you could probably tell that I paused even before I said it. And it's because back then, I would have pronounced it differently because I couldn't pronounce th. And the whole class laughed, even though it's the right answer. But then I would go home, and I would close my door, put my book bag down, and just practice words that I couldn't pronounce. Like 33. I'd just say it over and over and over again. Other words like world, these basic words that come up in everyday dialogue. And that was part of my experience. But at the same time, I moved to the United States, you know, in 2008, and during that election, and there's all this conversation in America about hopefulness and about, you know, this being a country where there's a place for. For anyone. Right. And so I was also absorbing that as well.

[Hannah Dreier]

So at the precise moment that you are struggling with your identity and recognizing that you are different from other people, and it sounds like feeling, at times, a lot of shame around that. You're seeing the United States elect Barack Obama. Like you, the product of a biracial marriage, and somebody who, in that campaign you're describing, invites the whole country to have this really honest conversation about identity and about race.

[Thomas Sip]

And he talks about. And this is from his 2004 DNC speech, but it's one of my favorites. And he talks about being, like, a skinny kid with a funny name. I remember other parts of the speech, too, because it just sticks with you. In high school, I joined a debate team to practice public speaking. Try to get over that fear. That was part of also, I think, my path to being a lawyer. And in college, I was studying political science at the University of Texas, and I had this wonderful opportunity to be an intern at the United States Senate. Wow. This was probably basically like a decade after I moved to the United States, and suddenly I'm walking through the halls of Congress with my little yellow Senate intern badge and running into senators and congressmen, getting to sit in on important hearings. And it was during that time that I really decided I want to be a part of this project here in the United States.

[Hannah Dreier]

And when you say this project, what do you mean?

[Thomas Sip]

It's a march towards justice, the betterment of everyone. I think there are these core principles that are unique to the United States in many ways. If it's not unique, then it's something that the United States really has the potential, maybe more than any other country on Earth, to embody, which is that this is a place where anyone can come, work hard and be an American.

[Hannah Dreier]

Yeah. I'm getting from you a real sense of idealism and a real, pure admiration for what the United States represents.

[Thomas Sip]

Yeah. I'm not blind to the errors in the past. And I know that the United States has not been and still is not a perfect country, but I really still believe that when the United States is doing the right things, the whole world is a better place because of it.

[Hannah Dreier]

So talk about how this all translates into your decision to become a lawyer, to enter this industry.

[Thomas Sip]

Well, so picking back up where I was a Senate intern in D.C. i'm looking around and seeing that a lot of the people with the cool jobs in D.C. tend to have Law degrees or they're actively practicing law. So I figured it was the next best step afterward. And so I go to law school straight out of college. I get into a lot of law schools and I'm balancing offers. The exercise a lot of incoming law students have to do when they're admitted is balanced the prestige of the law school versus how much money they're offering you. And I chose Columbia Law School because they gave me a pretty good balance. And, you know, like many other law students, I cover the balance with student loans. And that starts. Take us to the next steps. As a 22 year old trying to pay off a six figure debt, I was drawn toward a higher salary, among other things. All the law firms, the big law firms, almost by definition, pay the same scale salary. So the way that these law firms distinguish themselves from each other oftentimes is in things like how their pro bono program operates, how their billable hours requirement operates, how invested they are into diversity initiatives, and how actively their affinity groups recruit on law schools. And I chose Skadden because it had the prestige.

[Hannah Dreier]

I'm just going to explain to people.

[Thomas Sip]

Yes.

[Hannah Dreier]

By Skadden, you mean. Skadden Arps.

[Thomas Sip]

Skadden Arps, yes.

[Hannah Dreier]

Big, big law firm has an office here in New York, has offices, I think, all over the world. It's one of the firms that we think of when we think of this concept of big law law firms that do a huge amount of work in corporate America.

[Thomas Sip]

That's right. And Skadden really advertised two things, its pro bono program and its diversity initiatives. With regard to the pro bono programs, Skadden had a rule basically that said that you can count an unlimited number of your pro bono hours towards your billable hours requirement. And the billable hours kind of represents two things. If you meet the requirement, you get a bonus at the end of the year. So that's more money. And then you're also in good standing. Right. You're doing enough work, you're meeting your hours. And it was a big deal that Skadden does that, because not many other firms do.

[Michael Barbaro]

Right.

[Hannah Dreier]

And if I know my law firm culture well, what that means is that charitable legal work that this firm does counts against you being a successful lawyer there. Which probably means to a young, idealistic lawyer like you, it means that, yes, while you're going to work at a big, hard charging corporate law firm, that that law firm is putting pro bono work, work for people who can't afford lawyers at the center of its culture.

[Thomas Sip]

Yeah, no, exactly. And I worked on. I'm just gonna speak probably on this, but matters related to unhoused people, immigration and police misconduct.

[Hannah Dreier]

Hmm. Did you win any of those cases? Did you win all those cases?

[Thomas Sip]

I can't say.

[Hannah Dreier]

But the smile on your face makes me think that you might have prevailed on behalf of some of those clients. When we were texting today because I needed you to get here on time, you mentioned that you live essentially next door to the law firm, and that doesn't seem like an accident.

[Thomas Sip]

Yeah, that's right. I decided to pay a little bit more in rent for a slightly worse apartment just so I can be close to the office.

[Hannah Dreier]

How close?

[Thomas Sip]

I'm talking like a five minute walk.

[Hannah Dreier]

So you could just be there all the time?

[Thomas Sip]

Yeah, obviously, you know, at a big law firm like this, it's challenging work. It's long hours, high pressure environment. You're closely scrutinizing, you know, the grammar in all of your sentences that you write, even in internal emails and all that stuff, because it, you know, it can affect your reputation and your credibility, but at the same time, in those long hours and in this high pressure environment, you make friends with really quickly. And there are great mentors out there, too, who I learned from. So actually, I liked going into work every day. If you ask people who I worked with, I'm sure they'd tell you I was often there very early and late. But that's partly because I just want to say good morning and good night to everyone in my hallway.

[Hannah Dreier]

So when did you start to understand, Thomas, over the past many weeks that Scadden had entered the president's crosshairs?

[Thomas Sip]

So on March 17, when the EEOC, which stands for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, basically published this letter listing 20 law firms, including my own, saying that these law firms are essentially under investigation for their practices related to diversity.

[Michael Barbaro]

Right.

[Hannah Dreier]

I believe the claim was that these law firms may have practiced discrimination through the application of diversity, equity, and inclusion practices.

[Thomas Sip]

Right. And I think it was the following weekend, on that Sunday in the afternoon, one of my friends from the firm sends me this tweet. Basically, it's a thread, you know, Posted by Dinesh D'Souza.

[Hannah Dreier]

The right wing activist.

[Thomas Sip]

The right wing activist basically discussing how Skadden is representing a client against him related to this widely debunked conspiracy theory documentary about the 2020 election.

[Hannah Dreier]

Right. That D'Souza had made.

[Thomas Sip]

Yes. And Elon Musk tweets on that thread saying something along the lines of, scadden, this needs to stop. So there's a letter and then there's this tweet. And while all this is happening. There are other law firms that are dealing with similar things, including Perkins Coie, who was hit with a executive order earlier in the month.

[Hannah Dreier]

Right. And these executive orders, I think it's worth reminding listener they can feel to the law firms that are being hit with them like death sentences, because they explicitly prevent these firms like Perkins Coie from interacting with the federal government. And so, and we talked about this on the show, if these firms represent any corporation or entity that needs the federal government, and many big companies do, suddenly they can't really effectively represent them. And in that sense, the people who work at these firms fear that they may go out of business.

[Thomas Sip]

Right. Yeah. And Thursday comes around, my friend again sends me an article that the New York Times published, basically stating that Scadden was in talks with the administration to avert an executive order. And this was after Paul Weiss, which is essentially a peer firm, made a deal, including for $40 million, pro bono commitment to causes that the President agrees with.

[Hannah Dreier]

So what are you and the people you work with thinking as you're watching this happen?

[Thomas Sip]

We're not necessarily surprised, but we're still shocked. And during that preceding week, there had been pockets of the law firm trying to organize some sort of request for a response. Nothing publicly, but at least internally seeking clarity and hoping to provide at least some input into what the attorneys who actually work there feel about what's going on and how so many of us believe that it's unconstitutional.

[Hannah Dreier]

The executive orders.

[Thomas Sip]

Right.

[Hannah Dreier]

You want to communicate that to your bosses?

[Thomas Sip]

Yes. During this month, there are law firms that are fighting back. Right. There are law firms that take on representation of the law firms being targeted, which puts them at risk. But they're willing to say, hey, we know what's right. And we see that that's being celebrated within the legal community. And this is not a difficult legal question. There's no legal basis for what the president's doing. It's complete abuse of power. And so we want our firm to stand up for that. And, you know, a lot of associates, I think even partners would feel betrayed by an agreement. So that's what we're trying to, you know, express. But we're feeling like things are moving really fast, and we felt voiceless.

[Hannah Dreier]

So what happens next?

[Thomas Sip]

So then it's Friday. There's this email thread that got around to parts of the firm, and the discussion is basically, should attorneys still have access to the firm wide distribution list, which is basically these mailing lists that allow attorneys to ask questions broadly to the rest of the firm or you know, communicate broadly. And so when I see that, I realized at that point that's pretty likely that there's going to be a deal and that it's going to be one that the attorneys don't like.

[Hannah Dreier]

Hmm.

[Thomas Sip]

And, you know, within hours, I think we again find out from the news and from, you know, President Trump's. I think it's like true social. Yeah. That there is this agreement and then we hear from the firm, they have done a deal. Yeah.

[Michael Barbaro]

We'll be right back.

[Deal Ad Voice]

Scaling a global team shouldn't be hard. Luckily, Deal makes it easy. With payroll, hr, IT and compliance on one platform, there are zero barriers, no third party payroll, fewer compliance headaches, and massively reduced admin overload. See why over 35,000 customers trust deal to hire, pay and manage teams in 100 countries. To learn more, visit deal.com NYT that'S-E-E-L.com NYT Deal your Forever People platform.

[Podcast Host Voice]

My name's Hannah Dreier. I'm an investigative reporter at the New York Times. So much of my process is challenging my own assumptions and trying to uncover new information that often goes against what I thought I would find. All of my reporting comes from going out, seeing something and realizing, oh, that's actually the story. And that reporting helps readers challenge their own assumptions and come to new conclusions for themselves. This kind of journalism takes resources. It takes a lot of time. It takes a lot of reporting trips. If you believe that that kind of work is important, you can support it by subscribing to the New York Times.

[Hannah Dreier]

I just want to summarize what is in this deal that Scadden reached with President Trump. It promises to provide $100 million in pro bono legal services from Scadden to causes that both President Trump and the law firm both support. It calls for hiring what are known as Scaddin Fellows. Those fellows are at least some of them supposed to be focused on Trump friendly issues, and some of them have to be conservative in their ideological outlook. And then there's a part of the agreement that vows that Scadden will not engage in, quote, unquote, illegal DEI hiring practices. Broadly, this is the deal that every major law firm that has come to an agreement has reached with the President. So what is your reaction to this deal when you finally digest it?

[Thomas Sip]

Personally, I felt ashamed to work at Scadden, and that's such a new experience because of how prestigious a law firm is. And then suddenly, in the blink of an eye, in just a few days, hours, even my whole view of the firm has been completely tainted.

[Hannah Dreier]

Can you explain why? I mean, is it the fact that the firm agreed to this? Is it the specifics around pro bono work which I know is so important to you? What precisely is making you feel the shame?

[Thomas Sip]

You know, it's a mix of things. This is giving the president a PR win after being bullied. So it seems like I'm working at a firm that isn't as high caliber as it said it was. But more importantly than that, so many lawyers agree that what the president is doing is wrong. Trying to punish his enemies and then coerce any law firm who he perceives as an enemy to either himself or to his circle from being able to represent clients who might be against them. And this is happening in a much bigger political climate where there's fear spreading. When a judge makes a decision that goes against the president, there shouldn't be politicians calling for their impeachment.

[Hannah Dreier]

Right, but that's what's happening right now.

[Thomas Sip]

That's what's happening. This is a threat to our constitutional fabric, to our democracy, to our. To our civil liberties. People should be able to be represented by their lawyers freely. Judges should be able to make decisions, even if it goes against the president. And to see Scaddin be complicit to aid this attack. I was so ashamed to work there.

[Hannah Dreier]

So what did you do?

[Thomas Sip]

So on Sunday night, I start actually just writing down notes. And really, my questions, some of them are practical, like, how is this going to be enforced? What will actually look like?

[Hannah Dreier]

You're kind of writing to your bosses, right?

[Thomas Sip]

What do these words mean? And a lot of the questions, I started thinking about it and finding answers. And so the questions became statements. And I realized what I had written was a draft of resignation letter.

[Hannah Dreier]

So that's not necessarily what you set out to do?

[Thomas Sip]

No. And Monday comes around, and I have some conversations, you know, in the office with other attorneys and my friends and, you know, trusted mentors and colleagues. I just want to, you know, hear what people had to say and think, and everyone's distraught.

[Hannah Dreier]

Can I ask you to read from parts of the letter?

[Thomas Sip]

Yeah, of course. Dear colleagues and friends, I'm writing to let you know that I'm leaving this firm. There was a time when my employment here was so unlikely. For much of my early childhood, I was not a good student. I struggled to focus in class and take anything seriously. But even then, there was one subject I loved. History. I thought it was so wonderful to learn about all that came before me, about the triumphs and tragedies about the moments of individual bravery and collective complacency. I would often imagine myself faced with the same dilemmas. What would I do if I was there? Would I do the right thing? It always felt like there was no way to know. I believe, as I know many of you do, that what the current presidential administration is doing is wrong, that we are sliding into an autocracy where those in power are above the rule of law. Scadden's agreement with the Trump administration sent our country deeper down this descent. And then I finished. Skadden is on the wrong side of history. I could no longer stay, knowing that someday I would have to explain why I stayed.

[Hannah Dreier]

What did it feel like to hit send? I mean, listen to your breathing right now. It's like you're reliving it.

[Thomas Sip]

Yeah.

[Hannah Dreier]

What was it like to send that.

[Thomas Sip]

Email if you heard my breath? It felt like that maybe 100 times more, though, because I knew that that was a pivotal moment in my life, maybe just as pivotal as coming to the United States in the first place, if I might add. I grew up with two sisters, a twin sister and a younger sister. And my parents asked us back in Japan whether we wanted to move to the United States so that we could learn English, actually was the reason why. And I remember just thinking, like, I was scared. I don't speak English, but I was the one from my sisters who said, I think we should, and my parents let us choose, you know, and it felt like that, too. I knew that I was closing some doors and, you know, a place like Skad and, like, for that 10 year old kid, he had no idea where he might end up. And I'm grateful for that experience. I think it's only possible in a country like the United States. And I really, really believe in it. I know not everyone can make this decision, including even those in my law firm. You know, there are people who have families who depend on their income, who can't just quit on a dime like I did without a job lined up. There are people who are here at the law firm on work visas because they're not United States citizens. And those people can't really speak out because of this climate of intimidation. Everyone has their own reasons, I think. And I just want to say thank you to all the people who read my resignation letter. There have been, I mean, you didn't.

[Hannah Dreier]

We should say, mean for this letter.

[Thomas Sip]

To become as public as it did.

[Hannah Dreier]

It kind of just happened.

[Thomas Sip]

Right. Well, and I knew that in putting in writing there was a risk, but, you know, I sent it to my immediate colleagues. And then it was posted online the following day.

[Hannah Dreier]

I'm sure you're aware that many people who have spoken out against President Trump and his policies have experienced at times ferocious blowback. It can be a life altering event. Is that something you're worried about now?

[Thomas Sip]

Yeah. And I was finally able to talk to my mother after resigning, telling her that I quit because I hadn't talked to her about my thoughts since it all happened so fast and she's back in Japan with the rest of my family. And I told her I quit. And she was like, do you have another job? And I was like, no, mom, you don't understand. This is in the news. And I quit because of what's going on in America right now.

[Hannah Dreier]

That's the question my mother would ask me.

[Thomas Sip]

Yeah. And she sort of didn't process it at first. And then she started to cry. She realized what's happening and she asked me to come back to Japan. And I said no, like, I can't and I won't. I made this decision because I believe that there's still hope and I owe it to America, I think, to stay here and speak out on this issue.

[Hannah Dreier]

Many of your colleagues are not leaving their jobs. And there's a spectrum of reasons that you've started to hint at about why they're not leaving. They may feel the way you feel and have two kids they have to put through college. They might not feel the way you feel. I'm thinking about reporting my colleagues did inside the upper echelons of Paul Weiss when that law firm did a deal with Trump. And it became clear that the majority of the people who run the firm, lots of them, felt that the best thing to do was to make a deal. And the reason that they articulated they felt that way is that in their minds, they had to protect the thousands of people who work at these firms. They may have hated the deal, some of them no doubt hate the deal, but they felt their job was to make sure that these firms survives lives through this period of time and that at the end of the day, what they're giving up is small compared to that survival. And the bosses at all these firms that end up capitulating to Trump, say some version of we are the same law firm after we did these deals, as we were before. In fact, in a company wide email, your former boss says just that, quote, this agreement does not change who we are.

[Michael Barbaro]

What do you make of that?

[Thomas Sip]

I just don't think that's true. These law firms are agreeing to these deals when they know that there's no legal basis for any threatened executive order. And to the extent that these firms feel an existential threat to the firm itself by capitulating, they're aiding, you know, this existential threat against the profession, the independence of the judiciary and our democracy, and everyone who depends on.

[Hannah Dreier]

Does change who the firm is.

[Thomas Sip]

Yes.

[Hannah Dreier]

In short, yes.

[Thomas Sip]

I think all these firms that are making these deals and defecting, they're worried about losing clients to a peer firm that's connected to the administration already. And these firms are betting on the president to succeed. Right. From a PR perspective, because they can say, look, it was a smart deal, but the smart deal is with this president who is trying to actively undermine our profession and our democracy. And, you know, for the firm to say, hey, it doesn't change who we are, I think it fundamentally does.

[Hannah Dreier]

You very clearly have a lot of faith in the US that's just been evident throughout this entire conversation. And your decision to quit seems to be grounded in a sense of what is the best version of what the US can be in your mind. But at this point, how confident are you, given everything you've just been through, that the version of the United States that seems to be at the center of everything you've done here is now.

[Thomas Sip]

The version of the United States confident because of what so many people, strangers reaching out to me have said to me, which is that they're also scared. Everyone is scared. But if everyone could, you know, stand up and speak up about this, then we can turn this back. I think we can save it still.

[Hannah Dreier]

But are you a little bit worried that you're making the wrong bet and that maybe the law firms, as much as it might pain you to think about it this way, are making the sound bet in this moment?

[Thomas Sip]

Well, of course I'm worried. I guess I'm putting my career on the line for this. And I knew that going into this. I have student loans. I have a single mom who.

[Hannah Dreier]

And you just publicly picked a little bit of a fight with the president.

[Thomas Sip]

That's right.

[Hannah Dreier]

I wonder if this experience made you question going into law. I mean, law is one thing in theory, and then it's another thing in practice, especially at these big law firms. These are not nonprofits.

[Thomas Sip]

Right. And that's part of the decision I made when I was in law school, finding a job, my first job, and, you know, to ask your ultimate question. No, I don't. I don't regret becoming a lawyer and going to law school. It's a wonderful education. You know, Even my time at Scatten, I learned so much. And it's equipping me with skills, I think, to advocate for what I believe in and for others as well. And that's what lawyers do.

[Hannah Dreier]

Well, Thomas, thank you for coming in here and for telling us this story. We really appreciate it.

[Thomas Sip]

Thank you.

[Michael Barbaro]

On Friday, hundreds of firms threw their support behind the first firm to be attacked by President Trump, Perkins Coie, which has sued the administration to stop Trump's executive order against the firm. In a legal filing, the hundreds of firms wrote that Trump's crackdown on Perkins Coie and the entire industry poses a grave threat to our system of constitutional governance and to the rule of law itself. But many of the country's biggest and most profitable firms refused to sign the briefing, including Thomas former firm Skadden Arps Foreign. We'll be right back.

[Tracy Mumford]

Hey, I'm Tracy Mumford. You can join me every weekday morning for the headlines from the New York Times.

[News Voice]

Now, we're about to see a spectacle that we've never seen before.

[Tracy Mumford]

It's a show that catches you up on the biggest news stories of the day.

[Deal Ad Voice]

I'm here in Red Square.

[Tracy Mumford]

We'll put you on the ground where.

[Michael Barbaro]

News I just got back from a.

[Hannah Dreier]

Trip out to the front line and.

[Tracy Mumford]

Every soldier and bring you the analysis and expertise you can only get from the Times newsroom.

[Hannah Dreier]

I just can't emphasize enough how extraordinary this moment is.

[Tracy Mumford]

Look for the headlines wherever you get your podcasts.

[Michael Barbaro]

Here's what else you need to know. Today, a federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to bring back a migrant it mistakenly deported to a notorious prison in El Salvador by tonight, something the White House said in response that it has little power to do. That prompted the judge to declare that the administration's conduct, quote, shocks the conscience. But instead of trying to fix its error, the White House has instead punished a government lawyer who acknowledged the deportation was done by mistake by placing him on administrative leave over the weekend. And large scale protests against President Trump and his agenda were held in cities and towns across the United States over the weekend, attracting hundreds of thousands of demonstrators.

[Podcast Host Voice]

Donald Trump has got to go.

[Michael Barbaro]

Participants said they were marching to oppose Trump's policy policies toward federal workers, public education, immigration tariffs, and public health, and to fight back against Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency. Speakers at the rallies, including former Republican Congressman Eric Swalwell, said that Trump has become a disaster for the country and its finances.

[Protest Speaker Voice]

As you stand here right now, we have gone from a Trump slump to a Trump train wreck. Our 401ks are 201ks. Our costs at Walmart, Home Depot and Target are going up. And where is Donald Trump? He's golfing. So to Donald Trump, I say, get your ass off the golf course and face the people.

[Michael Barbaro]

Today's episode was produced by Olivia Natt, Shannon Lynn and Mooj Zaidy. It was edited by Patricia Willins and Michael Benoit, contains original music by Dan Powell and Marion Lozano and was engineered by Alyssa Moxley. Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsberg of Wonderly. Special thanks to Jessica Silver Greenberg. That's it for the Daily I'm Michael Barbara. See you tomorrow.