The Bill Has Come Due

An Open Letter to the Big Law Firms that Bent the Knee

Feb 16, 2026

Trivia Question of the Day: Who are all these smiling, middle-aged white men?

Here are your possible responses:

A. The Board of Trustees at the Derek Zoolander Center for Kids Who Can’t Read Good and Who Wanna Learn to Do Other Stuff Good Too

B. The faculty at the Baird School for Boys

C. The (current)^[i] managing partners of the nine Big Law firms that “settled” with the Trump Administration

If you answered “C”, then give yourself a gold star. If you answered “A” or “B”, you’re wrong, but I like your sense of humor.

I won’t rehash here in any great detail last year’s settlements between the Trump Regime and these law firms. For that analysis, including why those law firms aren’t likely only being used for truly pro bono work, please go to my YouTube channel (Katie Phang News) and check out my latest episode where I break it all down:

Bottom-line: nine of the largest and most profitable law firms in the world voluntarily agreed to provide close to ONE BILLION DOLLARS (channeling my best Dr. Evil pinky finger to mouth when typing this) in pro bono legal services in support of causes that Convicted Felon Donald Trump deems worthy. In the annals of Big Law, you will not find a similar burst of altruism. Frankly, I don’t think you would find voluntary benevolence on such a scale in modern capitalism, but I digress.

As usual in Trump World, there are contradictory narratives about what happened. The story the Trump Administration tells is tidy and almost civic-minded. In one of many statements about these deals, the Administration described them as “ending the Weaponization of the Justice System and the Legal Profession” and “the Age of Partisan Lawfare in America is OVER.”

The Big Law firms saw it differently. For example, in a joint public statement, Kirkland Ellis, Latham & Watkins, and A&O Shearman stated:

“We have resolved this matter while upholding long-held principles important to each of our firms: equal employment opportunity; providing pro bono assistance to a wide range of underserved populations, and ensuring fairness in the justice system; and representing a broad spectrum of clients on various matters.”

Cadwalader characterized the deal as “consistent with the principles that have guided [the firm] for over 230 years.” Perhaps my favorite response came from Jeremy London, the executive partner at Skadden, Arps. In an internal firm e-mail, London told the firm’s employees that “[t]his agreement does not change who we are.” Sure, Jan.

Let’s be clear: the public statements and internal emails don’t pass any smell test. Any beat cop will tell you that the likely scenario was the major equity partners at these firms wanted to protect their moneymaking machine at all costs.^[ii] If you’re a transactional partner with a $100 million portable book of business, you’ll go to whatever firm keeps your money printing machine operating, moral compass be damned.

Fair enough. But then let’s not be hypocrites and put lipstick on this pig. What do I mean? For years, these mega law firms publicly tout their pro bono commitments as voluntary, principled, and central to their identity. Annual reports describe the tens of thousands of pro bono hours provided, while recruiting materials emphasize that pro bono work is not a coerced, but moral choice.

I ain’t buying this because when you enter into a “settlement” with THIS administration, what you’re signaling is that when the money-making machine is threatened, pro bono work is just another form of currency to be traded. And another important contradiction: when these firms represent clients, they routinely advise to resist improper government pressure. But when the pressure turns inward? Duck and cover.

The outcome of all of this on our country is to be determined. In 1920s Italy and 1930s Germany, the major economic, political, and religious institutions all believed that placating the Fascists would not result in terrible consequences. I need not remind you dear reader how that all turned out.

So we get to the purpose of this column: I’m sending an open letter to each of these law firms asking for straightforward information about their settlements with the Trump Administration. You can find the letter here:

[I also cc’ed the heads of the pro bono practices/services at these law firms for good measure.]

I would like the senior partners at these firms, the heads of their pro bono practices, and their public relations folks to share with all of us the details of their compliance with their “settlements.” And, no, I don’t have subpoena power or the ability to coerce compliance from the firms. All I can do is write a follow-up column about the responses I get – or DON’T get – and then share it with you. Frankly, I have a bet with my husband that the firms will send me a coordinated response that is substantively non-responsive (he’s a cynic). I’d like to think if these firms are so proud of the work they’re doing on behalf of the Administration, there should be no problem in sharing all of the details.

So watch this space!

P.S. If you’re an employee at one of these firms and wish to anonymously share with me what’s happening, please feel free to reach out on Signal: @ksp.93

^[i] When I originally conceived of the idea for this column, Brad Karp (friend/confidante to Jeffrey Epstein) was still the head of Paul, Weiss. He has since resigned as the Chair, but remains employed at the firm, with, I suspect, a very high salary.

^[ii] It’s recently been reported that the powers that be at Paul, Weiss call this formidable group of partners “The Deciding Group.” Honestly, I’m unimpressed. My little girl could have come up with a better name. I asked my ChatGPT what it thought and it gave me the following response: “You’re right. ‘The Deciding Group’ sounds like a municipal zoning committee that meets at 7:30 a.m. and ruins lives quietly. It has no menace, no mystique, no ‘we end careers before lunch’ energy.” ChatGPT then gave me several suggested names, including the following: “The Council, The Gatekeepers, The Bench, The High Table. and The Final Word.” My personal vote is for The High Table.