During his second term, President Donald Trump is aggressively attacking major law firms for representing his political foes. Trump’s tactic is to remove security clearances for firms he considers adversarial, thus making it harder for them to do their work on behalf of clients. Some major firms are fighting Trump in the courts, including Perkins Coie. Others are making concessions to Trump, including Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison and Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom. Full disclosure: this journalist’s mother was employed by Skadden, Arps during the 1980s.CNN’s Michael Smerconish, who practiced law in Philadelphia before becoming a prominent conservative/libertarian media figure, discussed this trend during a Saturday morning, April 5 broadcast. And he finds it troubling that Trump is being allowed to “dictate” who major law firms do or don’t represent.READ MORE: ‘Message was clear’: DC insider rips Trump for ‘terrifying the legal profession into submission’ “Trump knows that his only true opposition could come from the bar, and that’s why he’s used executive orders — sometimes as threat, sometimes as actuality — against several top firms,” Smerconish explained. “Financially devastating orders that would say the government won’t contract with businesses represented by these firms. And it bars access to federal buildings, which apparently means lawyers couldn’t go into federal courthouses or have meetings with government lawyers.”Smerconish continued, “This is a core legal principle: lawyers aren’t to be punished for their clients or their zealous advocacy. They’re protected by the First Amendment, which the executive orders seem to contravene. Think about that: It’s akin to denying a surgeon an operating room, or telling a pilot they can’t board the airplane.”The CNN host noted that Perkins Coie “worked with Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign” in 2016 and is now fighting back against Trump, while others are making concessions to Trump. And those concessions, Smerconish said, are not good for the legal profession.”The message unsaid but implied is that these firms are not going to take on work against the Trump Administration,” Smerconish argued. “Thus, it appears these firms are letting the president dictate who they’ll represent. And now that they’re knuckled under once, why wouldn’t the president make them do it again?…. So, it’s all a gut-check — a true character check for the legal profession. Stand up for yourself, your colleagues, the Constitution, the rule of law — or surrender your role and subordinate your role to the preferences of the president. “READ MORE: Experts ‘watch in horror’ as Trump wages ‘full frontal attack on the legal profession’Watch the full video below or at this link.
– YouTube
www.youtube.com
