Story · March 19, 2025

Paul Weiss Says Client Dropped Firm After Trump Executive Order

Legal backlash Confidence 5/5
★★★☆☆Fuckup rating 3/5
Major mess Ranked from 1 to 5 stars based on the scale of the screwup and fallout.
Correction: An earlier filing said one client ended Paul Weiss’s representation after the March 14 executive order. The filing does not establish broader client fallout or industry-wide damage.

Paul Weiss told a New Jersey federal court on March 19, 2025, that a client dropped the firm after President Donald Trump signed an executive order aimed at the firm five days earlier. In the filing, the firm said Steven Schwartz terminated Paul Weiss as defense counsel because of the March 14 order. The filing does not say more about the client’s reasons beyond that link to the order.

The White House order threatened Paul Weiss with security-clearance reviews, restrictions on access to federal buildings, and possible review of federal contracts involving the firm. The administration later replaced that order with a new one on March 21, 2025, after Paul Weiss said it would adopt a set of policy changes, including a political-neutrality policy for client selection and hiring, a commitment to $40 million in pro bono legal services during Trump’s term, and changes to its diversity policies.

The court filing matters because it is a dated, public record showing a concrete client consequence after the order took effect. It does not establish how many other clients, if any, reacted the same way. But it does show that the White House action quickly became more than a symbolic fight between the president and a law firm: at least one client treated the order as a reason to walk away.

Proof attached

Sources used for this report

These are the source links stored with this report when it was published. Open them directly to inspect the underlying reporting or primary document.

Reader action

Follow the court record

Read the filed complaint, order, or opinion and follow the docket as the case develops. Share the primary documents when explaining what the court has—and has not—decided.

This card only appears on stories where there is a concrete, lawful, worthwhile step a reader can actually take.

Comments

Threaded replies, voting, and reports are live. New users still go through screening on their first approved comments.

Log in to comment


No comments yet. Be the first reasonably on-topic person here.