Donald J. Trump (Donald J.
Public interest groups focused on immigration rights collaborated against the order and summoned Gibson Dunn, a major law firm that owns the resources to help take over the White House. In January, Gibson Dunn, who works with the group, sued the Trump administration for seeking legal help for immigrants facing deportation.
Two months later, Gibson Dunn changed the tune.
While lawyers at New York’s elite law firms have already drafted another lawsuit with the public interest group, Gibson Dunn said it cannot be named on this latest case.
The five said Gibson Dunn's lawyer explained that if the company is publicly linked to a lawsuit trying to restore unaccompanied immigrant children's legal representatives, it is fear of arousing Trump's anger. Gibson Dunn isn't the only big law firm to shy away from immigration litigation.
Mr. Trump has targeted numerous large law firms since March, with his executive orders to weaken his business by banning representation of clients before the federal government. Many big companies have chosen to reach a deal with the White House to avoid Mr. Trump’s executive orders targeting them. Other companies challenged them in court.
Gibson Dunn has not received such an executive order, nor has he reached a deal with Mr. Trump.
But Gibson Dunn's warnings about recent immigration lawsuits suggest that companies that aren't directly targeted by Trump are refusing to participate in legal work that challenges his agenda.
Michael Lukens, executive director of the Amika Center for Immigration Rights, is one of the public interest groups in immigration cases that worked with Gibson Dunn, admits he “sees the industry to shy away from the immigration career of Bono.” But he praised Gibson Dunn for his years of support.
Groups like the Amica Center have long relied on large law firms to provide young lawyers and paralegals who can help prepare cases for free. Traditionally, unpaid work is designed to help the poor and unprepared.
This was a huge change compared to Mr. Trump’s first term, when many large law firms often challenged the government. Skadden Arps’ foundation provides funding for scholarship programs, enabling young lawyers to work for public interest groups. In June 2017, an article published on the Skadden Foundation website celebrated the work of a researcher that helped challenge Mr. Trump's orders to ban people from several major Muslim countries from entering the United States. That same year, Skadden launched an online platform to quickly combine low-income immigration with legal services.
Some public interest groups expect Scadaden to be a reliable partner in immigration cases during the second administration. But since a deal with the White House in March to avoid the execution of the order, law firms have refused to join the public interest group, filing lawsuits over the lawsuit, challenging one of Mr. Trump’s immigration policies.
Davis Polk is another big law firm that helped people get stuck in Mr. Trump’s immigration policy during his first term. In January 2017, the company deployed some lawyers to Kennedy International Airport, and people they were looking for family members were detained as part of the Muslim ban.
But shortly after Trump won reelection, a well-known nonprofit organization asked Davis Polk whether the law firm would study the legitimacy of Mr. Trump’s immigration proposal. The group's lawyers said the company just said no, and the group asked to speak without identifying her team.
The lawyer interpreted Davis Polk's response as “expected obedience,” partly because law firms have done similar jobs in the past. The company has not yet targeted an executive order or settled with the White House.
Sirine Shebaya, executive director of the National Immigration Program, is a nonprofit that litigates immigration cases and pushes its rights, saying the nearest hub of large companies is part of the indifference effect of Trump's execution of orders.
“It is becoming increasingly difficult to get law firms to file a lawsuit against Pro Bono,” Ms. Shebaya said.
The White House did not respond to a request for comment.
Mr. Trump made it clear that he did not want elite law firms to do work that undermined his agenda. In the execution order, he criticized the company for representing clients he disliked and engaged in “harmful activities” through “strong unpaid practices.”
Instead, he has been demanding that the companies he settled in work in causes that benefit his government, such as veterans affairs and fighting anti-Semitism.
Last week, Mr. Trump signed an executive order saying law firms could be invited to defend the accused of brutality.
Public interest groups that are aware of the pressures facing major law firms are cautious about companies criticizing rejected immigration cases. Officials from some of these groups said they hope that when Mr. Trump’s pressure starts to ease, the law firm will become partners with them again.
“We only have 100 days and it's really scary that the Trump administration has had incredible success in evacuating some of its legal oppositions,” said attorney Deepak Gupta. Attorney Deepak Gupta said his company has fired members on behalf of the National Labor and Industrial Relations Commission and sued the Trump administration on behalf of the union of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Currently, public interest groups are looking for new partners. One of them is Boston-based attorney David Zimmer, who recently started his own company with two other long-time lawyers. Mr Zimmer, who left the big law firm Goodwin Procter, a partner focused on appeals, said he had been in contact with public interest groups seeking help from Bono Bono in his immigration cases.
“We opened the door in March and have been asked to deal with cases that big companies no longer want to be related to it,” Mr Zimmer said.
Democracy advances and citizenship, two large public interest legal groups have also said they are trying to add employees to the gap left by large law firms that refuse to work on cases. Democracy Forward has recently hired many lawyers who have previously worked in the Department of Justice and the Consumer Financial Protection Agency.
Democratic Forward is one of the main lawyers in 59 cases targeting the government. According to the New York Times Tally, the cases are one of about 350 lawsuits to challenge Trump’s administration policies.
“The large law firms that often defend the rule of law have been reluctant to take on any mantle,” said Skye Perryman, CEO of Democracy Forward. “We are seeing an exponential increase in demand for our work and we will continue to encourage private bars.”
Seamus Hughes Contribution report.
