Since retaking the White House, Donald Trump has threatened sanctions against several big law firms. It's retribution for the president's many years of legal jeopardy parlayed into free work on his policy initiatives and right wing causes. Trump brought the white shoe outfits easily to heel with threats of EEOC investigations and denial of access to federal courthouses, personnel, and work. The sanctions are almost certainly unconstitutional. Retaliating against lawyers bringing legitimate claims chills the exercise of the rights the president is sworn to protect.
"And with no real competition or regulatory oversight to curb their excesses, the firms have jacked up their rates and billables even as they deceptively prattle on about 'visions and values'."
Major law firms hold themselves out as much more than professional service providers. They claim to be distinguished agents of positive social change. Paul Weiss, the first firm to bend at the knee before Trump, boasts of "a long history of commitment to civic-mindedness and corporate social responsibility." Kirkland Ellis claims to be "committed to advancing the communities in which we live and work, and we dedicate substantial energy, talent and resources to meaningful causes and initiatives that reflect our values and vision."
In reality, the big firms helped create a justice system few can afford. Some 90% of Americans are priced out of an attorney even for basic services like divorces. And Biglaw is happy to maintain the status quo. It's particularly interested in preserving the rules prohibiting attorneys from entering into business relationships with nonlawyers. The white shoe outfits are terrified of the Big Four accounting firms bringing on their own counsel and coopting clients. So while most Americans go without, Biglaw runs a very profitable cartel. And with no real competition or regulatory oversight to curb their excesses, the firms have jacked up their rates and billables even as they deceptively prattle on about "visions and values".
It's therefore no surprise that when their bottom lines were threatened by Donald Trump - true to form - that emphasis on "values and vision" disappeared. The firms could have sued to vindicate their rights and protect the Constitution - they're lawyers, and very good ones if you ask them - but they seem to have barely considered it. The self-congratulatory promises to serve a greater purpose meant nothing when a crisis arose. Biglaw was laser-focused on profits.
In short, it's time to see Biglaw for what it is: Businesses that follow the money. These expensively clad attorneys and counselors may hate the term, but they're "ambulance chasers" too.
Ironically, a common argument against allowing attorneys to work with nonlawyers is that the latter will be motivated only by profit and not the profession's "higher calling". Biglaw's capitulation to Trump's demands - as soon as losing dollars and talent became a possibility and with no fight at all - demonstrates that those firms are as interested in the bottom line as everyone else. And with the canard that white shoe outfits are about something other than profits laid bare, a key impediment to industry reform should disappear. Attorneys shouldn't be precluded from working with nonlawyers merely because the latter may be driven by making money. Aren't we all?
The Takeaway
The American justice system desperately needs reform. Attorneys should be able to work with nonlawyers to offer affordable service options. Lawyers are as profit-motivated as anyone else. And if profit-motivation is a disqualifier, Biglaw should be kicked out of the legal profession entirely. It's a fraught time for our justice system, and the major firms have the resources - both financial and human - to stand for something bigger than their businesses. If there is a "higher calling" for lawyers, who's better positioned to answer it?