Skadden Associate Says Peers Have Role in Standing Up to Trump

President Donald Trump’s aggressive actions toward law firms, most recently against Jenner & Block, have been met mostly with silence from Big Law. Two firms targeted by executive orders have taken public stances: Perkins Coie sued the Trump administration, while Paul Weiss cut a deal. But other large firms have kept quiet, perhaps fearing they might be next.

Most individual partners have also stayed mum. But associates are speaking out, including more than 1,500 associates who have signed an open letter condemning the Trump administration’s “all-out attack aimed at dismantling rule-of-law norms.”

The associates signed the letter anonymously, providing only their firms and class years. But one organizer behind the letter has stepped forward publicly: Rachel Cohen, a 2022 graduate of Harvard Law School and third-year finance associate in the Chicago office of Skadden.

Cohen discussed the letter and how it came together with multiple news outlets and on social media, including LinkedIn and TikTok. And last Thursday, after news broke of Paul Weiss’ agreement with Trump, she kicked things up a notch.

In a letter shared with everyone at Skadden, she provided “conditional notice” of her resignation, “revocable if the firm comes up with a satisfactory response to the current moment.” She then listed specific steps the firm could take toward that end.

Cohen posted screenshots of her letter on LinkedIn, where it promptly went viral. But as of now, it hasn’t prompted any action by the firm—other than acceptance of her two-week resignation notice.

In an interview on Monday, Cohen told me she had a positive experience at Skadden. She enjoyed her work as a finance lawyer, the company of her colleagues, and the extensive opportunities for pro bono work—which she spent as much as 30% of her time on, focusing on immigration issues.

But she felt that remaining at the firm was untenable if Skadden was unwilling to take a public stand in favor of the rule of law and in opposition to the Trump administration. And it’s not just Skadden, Cohen said; the refusal to speak out is a problem throughout Big Law right now.

“These partnerships are totally abdicating their moral duty and responsibility,” she argued. “They’re acting as if they did not spend the past few decades holding themselves out as places committed to justice and the rule of law. You can’t spend decades proclaiming your dedication to these values, as a form of reputation management, and then abandon them when it’s most important.”

The threat of associates leaving might have exerted significant influence over firms in years past. But associate hiring has plummeted recently, and today it’s a buyer’s market for legal talent. Haven’t associates lost their leverage?

“Some partners might think, ‘It’s a tough market—what are associates going to do?’ But many of their best associates are the ones who are most likely to be concerned about these issues and willing to push back,” Cohen said.

She added that while she never expected Skadden to act in response to her resignation as just one associate, she hoped her highly public departure would encourage other associates, whether at Skadden or other firms, to reflect on how they might work collaboratively to promote change. When associates band together, they don’t have to go as far as Cohen did to have an impact.

For example, Cohen said, associates at some of the 20 firms under investigation by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for DEI-related hiring practices are considering “recruiting strikes”—not interviewing candidates or encouraging them to join their firms—until firms confirm that they won’t cooperate with the EEOC investigations (Skadden is one of the firms under investigation). With early recruiting ramping up soon, this could be quite timely.

Another possible approach, suggested by former Orrick partner Pat Gillette on LinkedIn, would be a one-day work stoppage. “A day without associates billing will definitely have an impact, but it won’t break the bank,” she wrote. “It will, however, send a message.”

Addressing associates, Gillette told them that “your firms cannot afford to have you all—the engine that makes the firm work and drives the firm profits—disgruntled. You have the power to disrupt the business—to make the firm feel your power and your outrage.”

Apart from the open letter coordinated by Cohen, associate organizing thus far has been taking place behind the scenes. And almost all associates involved in these efforts have remained anonymous.

I say “almost all” because on Monday I also interviewed Ramon Ryan, a managing associate in Orrick’s US Supreme Court and appellate practice group. He and other associates in the group have been urging the firm to take a stand—and they won’t respond to associate surveys from industry publications, the basis for closely followed industry rankings, until Orrick takes action. (Although Ryan is working with other associates on this effort, he spoke only on his own behalf.)

I confirmed with Ryan that we were talking on the record. He said yes: “If I’m not willing to speak out and put myself on the line, I can’t really tell Orrick that they need to do that too.”

“For me, as a Black and queer associate, reading about firms like DLA Piper disbanding affinity groups and removing pronouns from email signatures has been pretty scary,” Ryan said. “And it’s pretty scary to be met with silence from our own firms.”

So far, Orrick hasn’t announced any actions, internally or externally. Ryan said that partners have responded “professionally and politely, expressing that they understand our concerns and are giving these issues a lot of consideration.” We should know more about where Orrick stands later today; firm chair Mitch Zuklie scheduled a “town hall” with associates for this afternoon, to discuss “what various Executive Orders mean for our firm and how we might respond.”

“We’re definitely hoping Orrick will do the right thing,” he told me. “In the past, they have. We’re hopeful that will continue—and the firm doesn’t get bullied into doing something like what Paul Weiss did.”

“Many law students who entered Big Law—and people like me, who came to Orrick after clerking—were looking for firms that spoke to our values,” Ryan said. “We joined these firms on the assumption that they would stick with those values. So to see something like what Paul Weiss did is disturbing. It’s a firm going back on this promise of, ‘Hey, come join us, because we share your values and want to work with you and support you.’”

“I get that keeping our heads down might be a tempting choice—but given the urgency of the situation, there can’t be any bystanders,” Ryan concluded. “We’ve seen in the past what happens when these things go unchecked. Right now, the rule of law is all we have that’s keeping us from authoritarian government.”

David Lat, a lawyer turned writer, publishes Original Jurisdiction. He founded Above the Law and Underneath Their Robes, and is author of the novel “Supreme Ambitions.”

Read More Exclusive Jurisdiction