As the legal community pulls together to oppose President Donald Trump’s executive orders targeting white shoe law firms, frustrations are flaring for some conservative lawyers.
Previously unreported emails obtained by NOTUS pull back the curtain on conversations taking place behind the scenes. Conservative lawyers, including a few who helped the president pursue debunked and unsubstantiated claims that the 2020 election was stolen, aired their grievances with what they view as “stunning” hypocrisy within the legal community.
“Where were the concerns from anyone here about the rights of ALL types of clients to have counsel when, after the 2020 election, there were organized pressures against Big Law firms to state they would NOT represent Pres Trump in any post-election contests?” wrote Cleta Mitchell, a central character in Trump’s efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election, which were ultimately rejected by courts.
“This is infuriating. The hypocrisy is stunning,” Mitchell wrote.
Mitchell was responding to a thread on a listserv that included other lawyers representing tax-exempt organizations. John Pomeranz, general counsel at the progressive group Community Change and 501(c)(4) nonprofit Community Change Action, had reached out requesting support from “right-leaning organizations” or individuals representing them on a statement “expressing concerns about attacks like those on Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, etc.”
The responding emails reveal a growing tension within the legal community — and the conservative legal movement — around Trump. When reached for comment by phone, Mitchell said NOTUS could print what she wrote in the listserv “in total.”
“And I can tell you that I find it appalling that a group of lawyers would sit on their hands — and I say that about the American Bar Association, the Federalist Society, all of ‘em have just sat and said nothing for four years,” Mitchell told NOTUS, referencing the conservative legal organization that’s been credited with much of the Republican Party’s gains in the judiciary.
“I mean, it’s okay for Marc Elias to file as many election contests as he wants. But no, no, no, we’re not supposed to do that. President Trump’s not supposed to do that,” Mitchell continued. Elias is a prominent Democratic elections lawyer whose extensive resume includes a recent stint with former Vice President Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign.
“That just struck a real nerve with me,” Mitchell added.
Trump has issued several executive orders aimed at prominent law firms in recent weeks, revoking security clearances and cutting off access to federal buildings for firms who have previously challenged him or hired individuals who have investigated him. While two firms so far have struck a deal for relief in exchange for tens of millions of dollars in pro bono legal work and other concessions, legal giants Perkins Coie, WilmerHale and Jenner & Block are fighting back in court.
“It will not surprise you to learn that although there are a lot of left-leaning organizations and lawyers interested in joining such efforts, it is proving harder to find those willing to add their names to such statements among lawyers and organizations that tend to support the administration’s policy agenda,” Pomeranz, who spoke on a Federalist Society panel with Mitchell in 2014, wrote to the listserv.
James Bopp Jr., a conservative lawyer who worked with Trump’s 2020 campaign, argued any bipartisan statement must also condemn efforts by Democrats and The 65 Project — a “dark money” group that worked to name, shame and even disbar Trump-affiliated lawyers who helped challenge the results of the 2020 election, including Bopp and Mitchell — “to do what John is concerned about now.”
“Otherwise this is just selective partisan outrage that has become way too common,” Bopp wrote. “I hope we are not pass [sic] the point when we make common cause against government wrongs, no matter who is the current victim.”
Pomeranz pushed back, arguing there is “a difference between these unprecedented efforts to directly use the purported power of the presidency to penalize law firms for alleged misconduct in their representation of clients the president dislikes and using the existing system for seeking sanctions against lawyers who, at least in the view of the complainants, have repeatedly brought frivolous and vexatious actions in the court.”
“I doubt that I can persuade you, however, so I’ll just mark you as ‘not interested’ on this one,” Pomeranz wrote.
Pomeranz declined to comment when contacted by NOTUS, but did emphasize that he was speaking as an individual and not on behalf of his organization. Bopp declined to comment, saying NOTUS could quote from what he wrote to the listserv.
Mark Fitzgibbons, president of corporate affairs at the conservative ad firm American Target Advertising, responded.
“The disappointment of those of us center-right who have frequently united in left-right coalitions was the lack of outrage by others” even as the existing system sought to sanction certain lawyers as John described, Fitzgibbons wrote.
“I hope we can share the same foxhole another time,” Fitzgibbons, who did not immediately respond to a request for comment, added.
Then Mitchell chimed in.
“Really? And everyone kept quiet and sat on your hands when the lawfare was perpetrated against me, John Eastman, JeffClark [sic], and hundreds of other lawyers who faced bar complaints for their representation of Pres Trump? Costing lawyers thousands and in some cases millions of dollars? Lawyers even now facing criminal charges at the hands of Democrat AGs and prosecutors in 4 states, because they represented Pres Trump or the slate of Trump electors. Do you even know about any of that? Does any of that bother you? Any of you?” Mitchell wrote.
“But NOW you’re worried about unseemly pressure against lawyers and law firms? After keeping quiet the past four years? Who spoke out about The 65 Project?” Mitchell continued.
“Spare me the ‘we just want to make sure that basic American principles of jurisprudence are respected.’ That trampling happened repeatedly over the past four years and I don’t recall a single memo or discussion about opposing that as long as it involved going after President Trump and his lawyers,” Mitchell wrote.
The emails demonstrate the extent to which Trump has fractured the legal world. Lawyers, like Mitchell, are frustrated not only with the white shoe law firms asking for support against Trump’s latest order but also with conservative legal organizations like the Federalist Society.
There has also been enormous frustration with legal giants Paul Weiss and Skadden, which reached deals with the White House. The American Bar Association and other bar groups issued a statement last week condemning the Trump administration’s “efforts to undermine the courts and the profession” and urged attorneys to “stand for the rule of law.”
“We will not stay silent in the face of efforts to remake the legal profession into something that rewards those who agree with the government and punishes those who do not. Words and actions matter. And the intimidating words and actions we have heard and seen must end. They are designed to cow our country’s judges, our country’s courts and our legal profession,” the groups wrote.
—
Taylor Giorno is a reporter at NOTUS.