Category: News Feeds

Biglaw
Firm
Delays
Bonuses
And
Raises:
What’s
the
matter
with
Lewis
Brisbois?
Willkie
Might
Be
Next
On
The
Chopping
Block:
No
way
Willkie
will
cave!
About
That
Maybe:
Another
$100M
in
pro
bono
payola
for
the
“Art
Of
The
Deal”
president.
Damn
it.
A
Goodbye
Worth
Sipp-ing
To:
Another
Former
Skadden
associate
speaks
truth
to
power.
Spurned
Group
Targets
Michigan
Law
Review:
They

really
need
you
to
know
that
they
were
good
enough
to
get
in.

Ed.
Note:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature

Trivia
Question
of
the
Day!

How
much
money
has
Elon
Musk
reportedly
spent
on
the
Wisconsin
state
supreme
court
election
—
which
makes
it
the
most
expensive
state
court
race
in
history?

Hint:
That’s
in
addition
to
$8
million
spent
by
other
groups
linked
to
Musk.

See
the
answer
on
the
next
page.

Earlier
today
we
learned
that
Biglaw
firm
Willkie
Farr
was
preparing
to
be
the
next
Biglaw
firm
targeted
by
Donald
Trump’s

likely
unconstitutional
Executive
Orders.
But
they
weren’t
tapping
litigators
to
draft
a

slam
dunk
complaint
against
the
administration.
Turns
out
they
were
busy
groveling
to
the
administration.

According
to
social
media
posts
from
Donald
Trump,
Willkie
has
committed
$100
million
in
pro
bono
services
to
causes
aligned
with
“conservative
ideals.”
Similar
to
these
other
deals
with
the
devil
by
other
Biglaw
firms
(Paul
Weiss
and

Skadden),
they
firm
has
disavowed
their
DEI
initiatives.
In
exchange,
the
firm
will
avoid
one
of
the increasingly
common Executive
Orders
targeting
Biglaw,
and
the tremendous
harm that
can
bring.

The
firm
reportedly
earned
Trump’s
ire
for
hiring
the
former
Second
Gentleman
Dough
Emhoff
and
two
former
investigators
for
the
congressional
committee
on
the
January
6th
attack.
The
firm
is
also
known
for
representing
clients
in
opposition
to
far-right
allies,
notably
Georgia
poll
workers, Ruby
Freeman and Shaye
Moss,
who
took down
Rudy
Giuliani.

According
to
social
media
posts,
some
partners
at
the
firm
were
caught
unaware
by
the
firm’s
capitulation.

If
this
surrender
to
Trump
is
received
at
Willkie
similarly
to
how

attorneys
at
Skadden
and

Paul
Weiss
took
the
news,
there’s
a
lot
of

anger
boiling
at
the
firm.
And
if
partners
weren’t
consulted
in
the
decision?
Well,
there
may
be
some
high
profile

resignations
from
the
firm.

This
is
the
text
of
the
email
sent
firmwide
in
the
wake
of
the
settlement
with
Trump.

Dear
All
Colleagues,

We
learned
that
the
President
intended
to
issue
an
Executive
Order
targeting
Willkie
similar
to
the
orders
issued
against
multiple
firms
in
the
past
weeks,
threatening
to
imperil
our
clients’
rights
and
those
of
our
Firm.

We
were
invited
to
contact
the
Administration
on
Sunday,
and
they
outlined
a
proposed
alternative
to
receiving
an
Executive
Order.
After
determining
that
the
three
principles
on
which
an
agreement
would
be
based
are
consistent
with
our
Firm’s
longstanding
practices,
we
engaged
in
discussions
to
see
if
an
acceptable
resolution
could
be
reached.

While
the
agreement
ultimately
reached
with
the
Administration
focuses
on
activities
that
are
already
in
place
at
our
Firm,
similar
agreements
at
peer
firms
have
been
publicly
criticized,
and
there
is
heightened
conversation
across
our
industry
as
law
firms
grapple
with
the
consequences
of
potential
Executive
Orders
and
the
impact
for
their
clients,
their
employees
and
their
businesses.
In
making
this
difficult
decision,
we
concluded,
after
due
consideration
of
the
implications
of
each
possible
course
of
action,
that
accepting
the
Administration’s
final
proposal
was
the
path
that
best
serves
our
clients’
needs
and
protects
the
Firm’s
various
stakeholders,
avoiding
potentially
grave
consequences.

As
mentioned
above,
the
agreement
has
three
principles.
First,
we
will
continue
to
follow
the
law
related
to
our
employment
practices.
Second,
we
will
continue
to
represent
clients
on
both
sides
of
the
aisle
and
with
a
wide
range
of
ideological
views.
Third,
we
will
continue
to
represent
underrepresented
individuals
and
groups
that
are
not
only
important
to
the
Administration,
but
to
Willkie—this
includes
veterans,
Gold
Star
families
and
victims
of
religious
discrimination.
These
are
all
longstanding
practices
at
Willkie,
so
the
agreement
does
not
require
us
to
change
course.

We
know
this
news
is
not
welcomed
by
some
of
you
and
you
would
have
urged
a
different
course
of
action.
Needless
to
say,
this
was
an
incredibly
difficult
decision
for
Firm
leadership.

If
you
receive
questions
from
clients,
please
direct
them
to
the
appropriate
relationship
partner.
Should
you
receive
an
inquiry
from
the
media
or
another
third
party,
please
do
not
respond
and
send
the
information
to [the
firm’s
chief
marketing
officer].

Thank
you
for
your
continued
hard
work
and
dedication
to
the
Firm
and
our
clients.

The
Executive
Committee

Willkie
attorneys
and
other
employees,
how
do
you
feel
about
the
firm’s
decision?
Feel
free
to
sound
off by
email,
by
text
message
(646-820-8477),
or
by
tweet
(@ATLblog).
An
insightful
response
—
we’ll
keep
you
anonymous
—
could
find
its
way
into
an
update
to
this
story.

---

Kathryn
Rubino
is
a
Senior
Editor
at
Above
the
Law,
host
of

The
Jabot
podcast,
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
AtL
tipsters
are
the
best,
so
please
connect
with
her.
Feel
free
to
email

her
with
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments
and
follow
her
on
Twitter

@Kathryn1 or
Mastodon

@[email protected].

Ed.
note:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature,

Quote
of
the
Day.

Some
of
the
New
York
firms
are
literally
and
figuratively
more
transactional,
and
some
of
the
other
firms
are
more
interested
in
taking
a
risk
to
preserve
the
rule
of
law—to
push
back
what
they
see
as
presidential
abuse
of
power.
[It
wasn’t]
surprising
that
firms
that
do
deals
for
a
living
do
a
deal.

—
A
legal
industry
observer,
in
comments
given
to
the

American
Lawyer,
on
why,


in
response
to
Trump’s
executive
orders
targeting

Paul
Weiss
and

Skadden
—
firms
focused
on
M&A
—
may
have
chosen
to
broker
deals
with
the
Trump
administration,
while

Perkins
Coie,

Jenner
&
Block,
and

WilmerHale
—
firms
with
strong
litigation
practices
—
may
have
chosen
to
file
suit
against
the
Trump
administration.

---

Staci
Zaretsky is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law,
where
she’s
worked
since
2011.
She’d
love
to
hear
from
you,
so
please
feel
free
to

email
her
with
any
tips,
questions,
comments,
or
critiques.
You
can
follow
her
on Bluesky, X/Twitter,
and Threads, or
connect
with
her
on LinkedIn.

It
didn’t
take
long
after

SFFA
v.
Harvard
before
the
right
set
aim
to
widen
what
the
holding
makes
unconstitutional.
There
have
been
several
feints
against
law
reviews
with
shady
standing
issues,
like
when

Stephen
Miller
tried
to
sue
NYU
Law
Review
on
behalf
of
someone
who
didn’t
even
apply
or
when
FASORP
tried
to
sue
Northwestern
on
behalf
of
White
professors,
who
again,
didn’t
even
apply.

FASORP
is
back,
and
this
time
they’re
targeting
Michigan
Law.
Somehow,
the
organization
found
a
way
to
email
everyone
at
the
school
a
glove
to
the
face,
accusing
their
Law
Review
of
unconstitutional
racial
preferencing
and
threatening
to
doxx
whoever
they
ultimately
find
to
be
unworthy.

Here’s
a
snippet
of
the
email:

Doubtless
there
are
some
1Ls
who
have
been
intending
to
trumpet
their
demographic
characteristics
in
the
“personal
statements”
that
they
submit
to
the
Law
Review,
in
the
hopes
of
obtaining
a
diversity
bonus
and
stealing
a
place
on
the
journal
from
a
more
deserving
student
with
better
grades
and
better
scores
on
the
writing
competition.
We
strongly
suggest
that
you
reconsider
this
strategy,
despite
the
past
success
of
others
who
have
used
their
race,
sexual
proclivities,
or
gender
non-conforming
behavior
to
obtain
positions
on
the
Law
Review
that
they
did
not
deserve.
FASORP
will
subpoena
every
personal
statement
in
discovery,
and
if
we
uncover
evidence
that
you
obtained
your
spot
on
the
Law
Review
through
race
or
sex
preferences
then
you
be
exposed
as
a
DEI
hire
on
social
media.
FASORP
will
also
notify
your
future
employers
that
your
Law
Review
credential
is
tainted
and
should
be
disregarded.

First
things
first:
what’s
with
all
this
harping
on
skipping
over
students
with
better
grades?
Surely
the
FASORP
bros
read
the
prospective
applicant
packet
before
they
typed
up
all
this
whining.
Full
disclosure,
I’m
basing
what
follows
on
a

Michigan
Law
Review
application
packet
from
2014
and
am
making
the
assumption
that
the
text
of
more
recent
application
packets
has
been
consistent.
With
that
out
of
the
way,
the
Law
Review
goes
out
of
the
way
to
make
it
clear
that
grades
aren’t
the
big
determinant
when
it
comes
to
selection:

The
Law
Review
has
no
GPA
cutoff.
An
applicant’s
performance
in
the
Writing
Competition
is
a
more
significant
factor
in
the
selection
process
than
her
GPA.

The
Law
Review
application
process
is
blind.
Student
reviewers
will
only
see
an
applicant’s
Competition
ID
number.
No
member
of
the
Law
Review
will
know
what
combination
of
factors,
including
grades,
led
to
any
individual’s
acceptance
to
the
Law
Review.

Besides
the
writing
competition
scores,
the
Law
Review
clearly
states
two
other
factors
that
applicants
will
be
evaluated
for:
a
strong
work
ethic
and
a
cooperative
and
enthusiastic
attitude.
Now,
I’m
going
to
say
this
as
plainly
as
I
possibly
can
for
all
the
readers
out
there:
writers
can
mention
(or
give
grounds
for
inferences
about
)
race
without
trying
to
appeal
to
some
“diversity
bonus”
as
FASORP
is
trying
to
frame
it.
For
example,
here’s
a
series
of
examples
I
whipped
up
that
FASORP
and
the
like
may
see
as
“clear”
racial
smoking
guns
that
are
just
people
trying
to
give
examples
of
things
that
would
show
their
strong
work
ethic
or
cooperative
attitude:

• I’ve
  been
  a
  member
  of
  the
  Girl
  Scouts
  ever
  since
  I
  was
  a
  pre-teen.
  That
  instilled
  in
  me
  a
  sense
  of
  communal
  belonging
  and
  a
  value
  in
  sharing
  the
  work
  load
  with
  my
  friends.
  And
  while
  I
  didn’t
  expect
  it
  to
  shape
  me
  this
  far
  out
  in
  my
  life,
  I’ve
  noticed
  how
  that
  training
  has
  encouraged
  me
  and
  members
  of
  my
  study
  group
  to
  remain
  focused
  in
  our
  study
  sessions.

• My
  uncle
  was
  a
  Pastor
  at
  First
  African
  Baptist
  Church.
  Each
  Sunday,
  his
  sermons
  came
  off
  as
  effortless,
  but
  in
  the
  days
  prior,
  I’d
  see
  him
  spend
  days
  preparing
  for
  sermons,
  rehearsing
  them,
  and
  editing
  his
  notes.
  That
  taught
  me
  that
  polished
  work
  takes
  a
  lot
  of
  elbow
  grease.
  I’ve
  carried
  that
  sentiment
  with
  me
  ever
  since.
  It
  was
  especially
  helpful
  in
  helping
  me
  win
  my
  first
  Urban
  Debate
  League
  Debate
  Tournament.

• As
  a
  female
  veteran,
  I’ve
  overcome
  a
  lot
  of
  what
  you
  could
  call
  high-stakes
  team
  work
  exercises.
  From
  them,
  I’ve
  learned
  that
  the
  best
  leaders
  are
  the
  ones
  that
  get
  their
  hands
  dirty
  and
  work
  with
  you.
  Commanders
  who
  bark
  orders
  might
  get
  the
  job
  done,
  but
  on
  balance
  they’re
  really
  bad
  for
  morale.
  That’s
  why
  I
  do
  what
  I
  can
  to
  make
  sure
  that
  whoever
  is
  on
  
  my
  team
  is
  able
  to
  keep
  a
  level
  head
  and
  buckle
  in
  for
  the
  hard
  times
  without
  letting
  the
  stress
  get
  to
  their
  heads
  and
  weigh
  
  us
  all
  down.

Based
off
of
these
faux
personal
statement
excerpts,
you
can
assume
that
these
applicants
are
members
of
a
protected
class.
The
third
example
just
comes
out
and
says
it,
but
you
can
infer
from
the
first
example
that
the
applicant
is
a
woman
and
from
the
second
that
the
applicant
is
Black.
You
can
also
infer
from
these
three
examples
that
these
would
be
people
you’d
be
willing
to
work
150
hours
with
on
top
of
your
usual
law
school
course
load
as
the
application
packet
warns.
Now,
why
in
the
hell
would
you
pick
someone
with
a
higher
writing
competition
grade
and
a
poor
to
average
personal
statement
when
you
could
pick
from
one
of
the
candidates
above
—
even
if
they
didn’t
score
the
highest
on
the
written
component?

Put
differently,
what
if
the
people
with
higher
written
scores
got
thrown
in
the
“generally
unpleasant
to
be
around”
bucket?
What
if,
and
stick
with
me
now,
their
immediate
tendency
to
conclude
that
there
must
have
been
some
plot
to
steal
what
was
rightfully
theirs
is
symptomatic
of
their
curmudgeonly
entitlement?
There’s
no
guarantee
that
the
three
fake
students
above
would
get
in
on
just
the
personal
statement
alone
—
and
I’m
sure
there
are
a
bunch
of
applicants
at
Michigan
whose
compelling
stories
and
good
writing
scores
go
hand
in
hand
—
but
to
paint
the
application
process
as
a
mechanical
assessment
of
highest
GPAs
and
highest
writing
scores
doesn’t
just
miss
the
point,
it
shows
a
failing
to
appreciate
the
criteria
for
acceptance
that
the
Law
Review
is
going
for.
Because
again,
even
if
they
didn’t
get
the
highest
score,
by
completing
the
application,

they’ve
shown
that
they
can
do
the
work.
Sounds
qualified
to
me!
And
to
that
you
might
say,
“Well
if
I
were
the
one
making
the
decisions,
I
would
have
picked
someone
else!”
Here’s
the
kicker,
you
aren’t!
And
hating
from
outside
of
the
club
just
makes
you
look
more
insufferable.
In
fact,
you
might
be
better
off
channeling
some
of
that
spite
into
soft
skills
so
that
you’ll
have
better
odds
the
next
time
you’re
in
the
running
for
a
gig
that
has
camaraderie
as
a
make
or
break
component.

You
can
read
the
full

threat
message
on
the
next
page.

Earlier:

Northwestern
Law
School
Sued
For
Having
ONLY
83
Percent
White
Faculty

---

Chris
Williams
became
a
social
media
manager
and
assistant
editor
for
Above
the
Law
in
June
2021.
Prior
to
joining
the
staff,
he
moonlighted
as
a
minor
Memelord™
in
the
Facebook
group Law
School
Memes
for
Edgy
T14s.
 He
endured
Missouri
long
enough
to
graduate
from
Washington
University
in
St.
Louis
School
of
Law.
He
is
a
former
boatbuilder
who
cannot
swim, a
published
author
on
critical
race
theory,
philosophy,
and
humor,
and
has
a
love
for
cycling
that
occasionally
annoys
his
peers.
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at [email protected] and
by
tweet
at @WritesForRent.

Ed.
note:
This
is
the
latest
in
the
article
series, Cybersecurity:
Tips
From
the
Trenches, by
our
friends
at Sensei
Enterprises,
a
boutique
provider
of
IT,
cybersecurity,
and
digital
forensics
services.

Another
week
and
another
data
breach
hit
the
press
with
thousands
of
victims’
medical
records
accessed
by
attackers.
Bassford
Remele,
a
Minnesota-based
law
firm,
announced
that
it
had
experienced
a
data
breach
starting
last
summer.
According
to
the
breach
notice
on
its
website,
between
July
29,
2024,
and
September
4,
2024,
an
unauthorized
party
may
have
accessed
and
potentially
compromised
sensitive
personal
information
in
its
systems.
It’s
unclear
what
type
of
information
was
accessed.

However,
according
to
the
notice,
certain
information
provided
by
healthcare
organizations
to
which
Bassford
Remele
provides
legal
services
may
have
been
accessed,
including
Social
Security
numbers
and
medical
record
information.
Notices
have
been
sent
to
the
affected
individuals.
It
appears
that
the
breach
was
detected
when
Bassford
Remele
discovered
that
unauthorized
emails
had
been
sent
from
a
third-party
application
purporting
to
be
from
an
employee’s
email
account.

Also
recently
in
the
news,
Scott
County,
Iowa,
confirmed
that
an
employee’s
email
was
accessed,
exposing
medical
records,
Social
Security
numbers,
and
other
patient
data
for
over
4,300
victims.

The
ongoing
alert
of
data
breaches
will
indefinitely
continue,
keeping
many
partners
and
firm
managers
up
at
night.

This
is
a
good
time
for
a
few
recommendations
on
steps
that
firms
can
take
immediately
to
improve
their
email
security
posture,
with
recommendations
for
Microsoft
365
and
Google
Workspace,
which
was
likely
the
attacked
environment
for
both
reported
incidents
(and
most
attacks
nowadays):

1. 
   Enable
   Multifactor
   Authentication
   on
   all
   email
   accounts
   and
   make
   it
   a
   requirement
   for
   access.
   Even
   if
   an
   attacker
   has
   a
   user’s
   credentials,
   they
   wouldn’t
   have
   the
   second
   factor
   needed
   to
   access
   the
   account
   through
   the
   browser.
   While
   there
   are
   a
   few
   MFA
   methods,
   having
   users
   select
   Authenticator
   with
   push
   notifications
   is
   the
   best
   option
   moving
   forward.
   Due
   to
   security
   concerns,
   vendors
   are
   starting
   to
   eliminate
   the
   SMS/Text
   code
   option.
2. 
   Enable
   Conditional
   Access
   Policy
   for
   account
   logins
   with
   Microsoft
   365.
   This
   security
   feature
   is
   included
   if
   you
   have
   a
   365
   E3
   or
   higher
   subscription
   level.
   If
   you
   have
   a
   lesser
   subscription
   level,
   you
   must
   purchase
   Microsoft
   Entra
   ID
   P1
   licenses
   for
   your
   users
   to
   gain
   access
   to
   this
   feature.
   It
   allows
   fine-grained
   access
   control
   measures
   to
   be
   set
   for
   authenticating
   users
   to
   grant
   access
   for
   resources
   such
   as
   mailboxes,
   sensitive
   data,
   and
   applications.
   Options
   include
   requiring
   device
   security
   compliance,
   the
   location
   of
   the
   originating
   request
   from
   an
   approved
   area
   and
   indicating
   whether
   the
   user
   is
   on
   a
   home
   or
   office
   network.
3. 
   Turn
   on
   event
   auditing
   in
   Microsoft
   365
   or
   Google
   Workspace.
   This
   will
   enable
   investigators
   to
   view
   the
   activity
   performed
   or
   files
   and
   records
   accessed
   while
   an
   unauthorized
   user
   is
   logged
   into
   the
   mailbox
   or
   account.
   It
   takes
   up
   to
   60
   minutes
   for
   the
   changes
   to
   take
   effect.
   Administrators
   can
   search
   the
   audit
   log
   to
   view
   user
   and
   admin
   activity,
   with
   numerous
   filters
   available
   to
   fine-tune
   the
   searches.
   Audit
   logs
   help
   to
   track
   document
   access
   and
   demonstrate
   compliance,
   as
   well
   as
   mailbox
   activity.
4. 
   Integrate
   a
   Security
   Information
   and
   Event
   Management
   (SIEM)
   solution
   with
   your
   cloud-based
   email
   environment.
   In
   short,
   a
   SIEM
   is
   a
   cybersecurity
   solution
   that
   collects,
   analyzes,
   and
   correlates
   data
   from
   various
   sources
   within
   an
   IT
   environment
   to
   help
   organizations
   detect,
   investigate,
   and
   respond
   to
   security
   threats.
   SIEM
   agents
   should
   be
   pushed
   out
   and
   installed
   on
   all
   endpoints,
   including
   desktops,
   laptops,
   and
   servers.
   A
   comprehensive
   SIEM
   solution
   will
   also
   be
   integrated
   with
   cloud-based
   email
   providers,
   such
   as
   Microsoft
   365
   and
   Google
   Workspace.

   A
   SIEM
   is
   an
   active
   security
   solution,
   rather
   than
   a
   reactive
   one,
   alerting
   admins
   and
   users
   in
   real-time
   to
   any
   ongoing
   cybersecurity
   threats,
   control
   changes,
   or
   alerts.
   Preventing
   business
   account
   takeover
   attacks
   or
   stopping
   them
   within
   minutes
   or
   hours,
   rather
   than
   weeks
   or
   months,
   is
   critical
   to
   avoiding
   or
   minimizing
   harm
   to
   your
   clients
   and
   firm.

5. 
   Understand
   your
   Microsoft
   Secure
   Score.
   Microsoft
   Secure
   Score
   is
   a
   security
   analytics
   tool
   that
   provides
   a
   numerical
   value
   representing
   an
   organization’s
   security
   posture,
   indicating
   how
   well-protected
   its
   data
   is.
   A
   higher
   score
   means
   better
   security.
   It
   also
   tracks
   your
   score
   over
   time.
   Microsoft
   provides
   recommendations
   and
   changes
   that
   can
   be
   made
   to
   improve
   the
   score
   and
   overall
   security
   of
   your
   firm’s
   Microsoft
   environment.
   You
   can
   even
   filter
   recommendations
   for
   those
   included
   with
   your
   current
   subscription
   level
   without
   upgrading
   to
   a
   higher
   subscription
   offering.

These
are
just
some
of
the
steps
you
can
take
to
enhance
the
security
protections
of
your
firm’s
email
environment,
and
these
recommendations
only
make
up
a
part
of
your
firm’s
overall
security
posture.
A
firm’s
cybersecurity
measures
to
protect
information
systems
and
client
data
must
be
regularly
reviewed
and
updated,
as
cyberattackers’
methods
and
tactics
are
constantly
evolving.

---

Michael
C.
Maschke
([email protected])
is
the
President
and
Chief
Executive
Officer
of
Sensei
Enterprises,
Inc.
Mr.Maschke
is
an
EnCase
Certified
Examiner
(EnCE),
a
Certified
Computer
Examiner
(CCE
#744),
an
AccessData
Certified
Examiner
(ACE),
a
Certified
Ethical
Hacker
(CEH), and
a
Certified
Information
Systems
Security
Professional
(CISSP).
He
is
a
frequent
speaker
on
IT,
cybersecurity,
and
digital
forensics
and
he
has
co-authored
14
books
published
by
the
American
Bar
Association.

Sharon
D.
Nelson
([email protected])
is
the
co-founder
of
and
consultant
to
Sensei
Enterprises,
Inc.
She
is
a
past
president
of
the
Virginia
State
Bar,
the
Fairfax
Bar
Association,
and
the
Fairfax
Law
Foundation.
She
is
a
co-author
of
18
books
published
by
the
ABA.

John
W.
Simek
([email protected])
is
the
co-founder
of
and
consult

Stop
me
if
you’ve

heard
this
one

before:
a
Skadden
associate,
disgusted
at
the
way
their
firm
groveled
to
Donald
Trump
—
offering

$100
million
in
pro
bono
payola
to
right-wing
causes
—
publicly
quits
the
firm.
Familiar?
Yeah,
well,
it’s
happened
again.

A
tipster
at
the
firm
shared
with
Above
the
Law
that
the
firm
was
in
defense
mode,
holding
meetings
with
groups
of
associates
to
reassure
them.
But
that
plan
backfired
spectacularly.

Skadden
NYC
litigation
practice
heads
set
up
meetings
[Monday]
to
discuss
the
Skadden
decision
/
memo
as
a
temperature
check.
The
first
meeting
was
with
first
through
fourth
year
associates,
where
one
well
respected
second
year
associate
gave
a
speech
about
how
the
firm
is
in
the
wrong
here
with
its
deal
with
the
administration,
the
room
cried,
clapped
and
roared.

I
am
ready
to
see
the
cinematic
version
of
this!
The
associate,
Thomas
Sipp,
followed
up
the
speech
with
a
departure
email,
available
in
full
below,
which
does
not
disappoint.
He
hits
all
the
high
notes,
from
the
firm
cuddling
up
with
authoritarianism:

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.
Skadden’s
agreement
with
the
Trump
administration
sent
our
country
deeper
down
this
descent.

To
the
disappointment
Sipp
feels
towards
the
firm:

[T]here
was
a
time
when
I
sincerely
believed
that
this
place
was
committed
to
its
true
pro
bono
causes
and
diversity
initiates,
even
though
these
thing
may
to
always
be
lucrative,,
because
it
believed
these
things
would
make
the
world,,
and
this
firm,
a
better
place.
Having
held
itself
out
as
a
champion
for
these
values,
for
this
firm
to
turn
its
back
on
them
so
suddenly
and
so
easily
was
shameful.
I
am
embarrassed
to
work
here.How
can
Skadden
represent
others
when
it
can’t
even
stand
up
for
itself?

Then
the
call
out
to
one
of
the
firm’s
least
defensible
and
most
big
brotherian
moves
in
this
mess:

It
has
also
become
clear
to
me
that
the
firm
no
longer
tolerates
open
discourse.
Ahead
of
Friday’s
announcement,
the
firm
took
preemptive
action
to
silence
critics
by
covertly
limiting
our
access
to
firmware
distribution
lists.
This
was
a
clear
effort
to
silence
criticism
of
the
firm’s
decision.

Before
ending
with
this
salvo:

Skadden
is
on
the
wrong
side
of
history.
I
could
no
longer
stay
knowing
that
someday
I
would
have
to
explain
why
I
stayed.

Kudos,
man.
And
I
wouldn’t
be
surprised
if
more
followed
suit.

---

Kathryn
Rubino
is
a
Senior
Editor
at
Above
the
Law,
host
of

The
Jabot
podcast,
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
AtL
tipsters
are
the
best,
so
please
connect
with
her.
Feel
free
to
email

her
with
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments
and
follow
her
on
Twitter

@Kathryn1 or
Mastodon

@[email protected].