Law Firm Cowardice on DOMA
Mega law firm King & Spalding, which had agreed to serve as counsel to the House of Representatives in defending the Defense of Marriage Act, has decided to drop the case -- apparently caving in to pressure from gay-rights groups.
Over at NRO, Ed Whelan has some choice words for the craven law firm, but the most withering critique comes from King & Spalding partner (and former Solicitor General) Paul D. Clement, who immediately resigned from the firm, tendering a resignation letter that said:
I resign out of the firmly-held belief that a representation should not be abandoned because the client’s legal position is extremely unpopular in certain quarters. Defending unpopular positions is what lawyers do. The adversary system of justice depends on it, especially in cases where the passions run high. Efforts to delegitimize any representation for one side of a legal controversy are a profound threat to the rule of law.
There speaks a fine lawyer, unlike most of today's lawyers who never seem to understand that a lawsuit is not about them. It's about the client.
- Comment (11)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Re: Law Firm Cowardice on DOMA
Hear, hear for Mr. Clement.
And you're right, Adam. There is a word for his former partners at King & Spalding: cowards.
Re: Law Firm Cowardice on DOMA
This really is fascinating to me. Has anyone tried to defend the law firm on principled grounds? I'm trying to imagine what the argument would be, and I'm having difficulty coming up with it.
Aug '10
Re: Law Firm Cowardice on DOMA
Once they took on the case they should have stuck with it. What do they know now that they didn't know in the first place?Advocacy practiced exclusively within the comfort zone is pathetic.
Edited on Apr 25, 2011 at 4:15pmDec '10
Re: Law Firm Cowardice on DOMA
We should remember that the first institution to fold on DOMA is the US Dept. of Justice.
Paul Clement made a quick but excellent decision. He'll be hired by someone as a rainmaker and as a skilled and principled lawyer to boot.
May '10
Re: Law Firm Cowardice on DOMA
Jerry Broaddus:
Paul Clement made a quick but excellent decision. He'll be hired by someone as a rainmaker and as a skilled and principled lawyer to boot. · Apr 25 at 4:19pm
Paul Clement is one of the finest lawyers of our generation. He was snatched up instantly by former Bush administration Assistant AG, Professor Viet Dinh, and his boutique DC firm Bancroft Associates.
May '10
Re: Law Firm Cowardice on DOMA
(1/2) On such an intellectually engaged forum as Ricochet, I would like to (perhaps timidly) defend King and Spaulding. I think we need to save our condemnation for those who deserve it.
I know a few outstanding lawyers at K&S and, especially rare for the legal profession, many of them are politically conservative. I know they are just as distraught and concerned about the turn of events as many Ricochet members are. K&S was put in an impossible situation; they were being harassed and threatened by left-wing activists (instigated by none other than Nancy Pelosi). In the world of big law, remaining low-key and respectable is highly valued and the firm was being singled out by the left-wing. Much like Target in Minnesota and countless other commercial endeavors that have been threatened by the left, it can be difficult to handle this pressure.
K&S may have been able to handle this better. Worse still, the responsibilities of the legal profession make their decision very problematic. K&S, however, has felt the repercussion. They lost one of the finest lawyers of a generation.
Edited on Apr 25, 2011 at 6:09pmMay '10
Re: Law Firm Cowardice on DOMA
(2/2) The real villains of this story are the political activists who feel justified in attacking private concerns for holding (or just defending) political beliefs they disagree with. Our society is in big trouble when activists can single out private individuals for harassment in the name of political gain. The entire goal of these left-wing activists was to use political correctness as a cudgel to bludgeon anyone who might oppose their views. Paul Clement and K&S were their victims. Paul Clement has shown himself to be especially admirable in his response. His resignation letter should be added to every Legal Ethics course in the country.
If attorneys cannot represent their clients without fear of repercussions then our entire system of justice is in jeopardy. When civility has broken down to the point that harassment can be freely used as a political weapon, we have a bigger problem than one law firm's decision to employ a great lawyer.
Thank God for small refuges like Ricochet where we can discuss politics with civility.
Edited on Apr 25, 2011 at 5:42pmMay '10
Re: Law Firm Cowardice on DOMA
If this violates our rules, please let me know and I will delete. Once you have read every article and comment on Ricochet today, if you still want more intellectual stimulation I would highly suggest Jonathan Adler's piece on Volokh, "Paul Clement and the New McCarthyism." I think this is one of the finest responses available on the matter.
Jun '10
Re: Law Firm Cowardice on DOMA
I agree with much of your posts, but K & S can't escape a bit of scathing criticism. Having been a partner in a large law firm, I cannot conceive that K & S agreed to take such a high profile case without a senior law firm management OK. But then when the criticism came, they folded like a cheap tent. They should have had the guts to stand by their original decision. The reason leftists are able to take advantage of this kind of situation is that the gutless let them.
Clement is great because he refused to become a victim.
Edited on Apr 25, 2011 at 6:52pmOct '10
Re: Law Firm Cowardice on DOMA
Interesting comment over on NR Online from daniel1975 (http://bit.ly/fFWRRn):
"From what I have read, I don't think that the law firm withdrew because of intimidation or because they were gagged by activists.
It seems that the contract agreement would have put them in an awkward position, as it contained a provision that prohibited all King & Spalding attorneys and non-attorney employees from any advocacy to "alter or amend" DOMA. And that would amount to breaking labor laws in California for example, where King & Spalding also have offices.
Most articles fail to note that, making it seem that this was exclusively an ideological rift. And considering that he was immediately hired by Bancroft, I think what we have here is an arranged law firm/lawyers kabuki dance where King & Spalding protect their interests, Bancroft gets a star lawyer and Clement can keep his word. And they all had legitimate reasons to do as they did."
Thoughts?
May '10
Re: Law Firm Cowardice on DOMA
Via Instapundit: The Left decides who is entitled to lawyers.