Context on the Paul Weiss-Trump Deal
In March 2025, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP—often referred to as Paul Weiss—became the target of an executive order issued by President Donald Trump. The order sought to bar the firm from government contracts, revoke security clearances for its lawyers, and restrict access to federal buildings due to the firm’s representation of clients in cases against the administration (including work on the New York hush-money probe). Firm Chairman Brad Karp described this as an “existential crisis” for the 1,000+ lawyer firm, which relies heavily on government-related work.
To resolve the threat, Paul Weiss negotiated a settlement just six days later. Key concessions included:
- Halting all diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies.
- Committing $40 million in pro bono services over several years, focused on areas like veterans’ affairs and immigration reform (though critics noted the vagueness and potential alignment with administration priorities).
- Other commitments, such as acknowledging past “wrongdoing” by a former partner in Trump-related investigations.
Trump rescinded the order shortly after, praising the deal on Truth Social. Karp defended it as necessary to protect clients and the firm’s survival, emphasizing it aligned with the firm’s “long-standing principles.”
Backlash and Ongoing Fallout
The deal sparked immediate and sustained criticism within the legal community, viewed by many as capitulation to political pressure and a betrayal of Big Law’s role in upholding the rule of law. Key reactions included:
- Alumni Protest: Over 140 Paul Weiss alumni signed an open letter to Karp, calling the deal a “permanent stain” on the firm and accusing it of prioritizing profits over principles.
- Resignations: At least 10 partners, including those with Democratic ties, left the firm. Some formed a new boutique focusing on tech clients like Meta and Google; others joined firms that challenged Trump in court.
- Broader Legal Critique: Groups like Common Cause and commentators in outlets like The New York Times and The New Yorker argued it emboldened further attacks on law firms, transforming Big Law from a “noble profession” into profit-driven entities.
- Ethical Questions: Some raised concerns about the firm’s ability to represent clients impartially post-deal, with rivals like Skadden facing similar scrutiny but opting for litigation instead.
Karp has maintained the decision was pragmatic, noting initial hopes for industry unity that didn’t materialize, and accusing competitors of poaching clients during the crisis.
The November 8, 2025, NY Bar Foundation Event
On the evening of November 8, 2025, Karp spoke at the New York Bar Foundation’s annual gala in Manhattan, an event honoring pro bono contributions from the legal community. During his remarks—part of a panel or address on the firm’s work—Karp reflected on the “incredibly painful” year following the executive order. He reiterated that the firm was “targeted by the current administration” and had “ultimately resolved that existential threat” through the deal. Karp then highlighted Paul Weiss’s subsequent pro bono efforts, including work on immigration, veterans’ rights, and public interest cases, positioning them as a positive outcome of the resolution.
The speech quickly drew protests and heckling from attendees, many of whom appeared to be lawyers or activists opposed to the deal. A notable incident involved a single attendee repeatedly shouting “for Trump?” as Karp detailed the pro bono projects, implying they benefited the administration rather than countering it. Security briefly intervened, but the disruptions continued intermittently, creating an awkward atmosphere at the black-tie event. Organizers reportedly urged calm, but the heckling underscored lingering resentment eight months after the deal.
Reactions to the Event
- Supporters of Karp: Some in the legal blogosphere and conservative-leaning commentators decried the protesters as entitled or disruptive, arguing the deal saved jobs and enabled ongoing pro bono work. One X user called the behavior “mind-boggling” and akin to “college activism,” questioning its appropriateness at a professional gala.
- Critics: Legal reporters and progressive voices amplified the incident as evidence of unresolved tensions, with one noting it highlighted Big Law’s vulnerability to political coercion. No formal response from Paul Weiss or the NY Bar Foundation has been issued as of November 9, 2025.
- Media Coverage: The event was covered in real-time by outlets like Law.com, Bloomberg Law, and Politico, with X posts from reporters like Erica Orden (@eorden) providing eyewitness accounts.
This incident reflects the deal’s enduring controversy, especially as Trump’s second term progresses and similar pressures on law firms persist. If you’d like more on specific aspects, such as the full alumni letter or related court challenges, let me know!