Paul Weiss: a $40 million capitulation, and a chair's own words describing why

EO rescinded after the firm agreed to roughly $40 million in pro bono commitments aligned with administration priorities; no court ruling since the firm did not sue

An executive order suspended Paul Weiss's security clearances and building access, citing a former partner's pro bono role in January 6-related civil suits. Rather than litigate, the firm's chair negotiated directly with the White House, pledging roughly $40 million in pro bono legal services for causes the administration favors; Trump then rescinded the order.

Firm chair Brad Karp defended the deal publicly, writing that the firm's work requires 'productive interaction and engagement with the federal government' and that the order's effects would otherwise 'destroy the firm', a candid, on-the-record account of a firm choosing to pay rather than fight.

A Lawfare analysis co-authored by James Pearce, a former DOJ Criminal Division appellate and public-integrity attorney, set out how the deals could be framed as Hobbs Act extortion: 'Under the Hobbs Act, the prosecution's argument would be that the Trump administration extorted the law firms by accepting pro bono legal services, knowing that the law firms promised such services in the hope that President Trump would be influenced not to issue an executive order targeting the firms.' It is legal analysis, not a formal charge.

Documented

Resolved by capitulation, not court ruling; a Lawfare analysis set out a possible Hobbs Act extortion theory

EO 2025-03-14; deal announced within days; order rescinded