Trump’s Dismantling of Big Law DEI Succeeded Despite Probe’s End

A federal agency’s failed investigation into diversity programs at large law firms has the legal industry’s top players on their heels, even as the Trump administration’s threats so far have proved hollow.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission said Monday it closed a probe of 20 top law firms with no action and little insight about their hiring programs. Most of the targeted firms did not provide the wide-ranging information the agency sought in an inquiry spurred by President Donald Trump, the EEOC said in a court filing in a case contesting the EEOC’s requests.

Still, firms by and large have been cowed by the investigations and other broadsides from the White House. A rapid pullback from diversity efforts shows that Trump’s bark is as good as his bite to get powerful entities to bend to his will.

“What they are hoping is that if they engage in enough threats, bluster, and bullying that organizations are going to get so scared that they are just going to abandon all their DEI programs on their own,” said David Glasgow, a lawyer who counsels firms on diversity.

Five major law firms that struck deals with the White House last year—pledging to back off of diversity initiatives and kick in a total of $600 million in free legal services—said they did so at least in part to resolve the EEOC inquiries. The firms and several others, including many not targeted in the probe, axed diversity programs and disbanded affinity groups, among other changes aimed at staying out of the line of fire.

The EEOC and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The EEOC backed off its DEI probe in response to a suit filed by law students who said their personal information could have been included in requested materials. Other threats still loom: Federal Trade Commission Chairman Andrew Ferguson last month warned more than 40 law firms of “serious concerns” about their participation in a popular diversity rating.

Undoing DEI

Andrea Lucas, then the EEOC’s acting leader, on March 17, 2025 sent letters to 20 law firms requesting hiring and contact information for all law students or attorneys who applied for jobs since 2019. Some of the world’s largest firms were among those who received inquiries, including Kirkland & Ellis, Latham & Watkins, and Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom.

Big Law firms responded to the letter in various ways. Goodwin Procter handed over parts of the requested information and told the EEOC it suspended its relationships with some diversity programs. Goodwin did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Several other firms made moves to downplay or dismantle diversity programs. DLA Piper scrapped its affinity groups altogether, while Skadden discontinued affinity group events for the last half of the 2025. Reed Smith, which along with Skadden was hit with an EEOC inquiry, said it would “retire” DEI branding for its hiring and promotion initiatives.

The moves came as Trump also targeted five law firms with executive orders, citing their diversity efforts and ties to lawyers the president perceives as enemies. Four firms successfully challenged the orders in court, although the cases are on appeal. The fifth firm, Paul Weiss, reached a deal with the White House to have the order rescinded.

Six other firms later followed the Paul Weiss approach. Kirkland, Latham, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, Milbank LLP, and A&O Shearman reached similar deals with the White House, which resolved their EEOC inquiries.

Perkins Coie, which is defending its win against a Trump executive order in appellate court, declined to disclose any information requested by the EEOC.

‘Delicate Balance’

Firms that have walked back diversity efforts are not likely to rev those efforts back up in the short term. They face a challenge, according to Bryson Malcolm, a New York legal recruiter.

“How do you communicate to talent that you care that they’re there without sharing with the Trump administration or the public that you still care?” he said.

“It seems like they care but they don’t want anyone else to know,” said Malcolm. “It’s a scary time and everyone is relying on subtext.”

“There’s a very delicate balance between being careful outwardly but then sending the wrong signal to talent,” he said.