Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Law Firms Made Deals With Trump. Now He Wants More From Them. [View all]LetMyPeopleVote
(164,273 posts)41. Trump's deals with big law firms could be 'unravelling': NYT reporter
trump never honors his agreements/contracts and so this is not surprising
Trump's deals with big law firms could be 'unravelling': NYT reporter
— Morgan Fairchild (@morgfair.bsky.social) 2025-04-16T19:29:31.936Z
www.rawstory.com/trump-law-fi...
Link to tweet
However, it seems that Trump and his White House are taking a far more expansive view of the agreements and the Times reports that the administration could even try to force the firms to represent Trump or his allies in criminal cases free of charge.
"The emerging gap between what the firms initially thought they agreed to and what Mr. Trump says they can be used for shows how the deals did little to insulate them from his whims," the Times reports. "Further demands on the firms from Mr. Trump could raise the potential for conflicts with paying clients and could further fuel internal dissension."
This uncertainty is compounded by the fact that it's not known if the deals the firms reached with Trump were formal written agreements or handshake deals.
Harold Hongju Koh, a professor of international law at Yale Law School, tells the Times that he thinks that the firms did not properly understand the type of administration they were dealing with when they decided to cave to Trump's threats.
"They thought they made one-shot deals which they would fulfill, he said. But the administration seems to think that they have subjected these firms to indentured servitude.
"The emerging gap between what the firms initially thought they agreed to and what Mr. Trump says they can be used for shows how the deals did little to insulate them from his whims," the Times reports. "Further demands on the firms from Mr. Trump could raise the potential for conflicts with paying clients and could further fuel internal dissension."
This uncertainty is compounded by the fact that it's not known if the deals the firms reached with Trump were formal written agreements or handshake deals.
Harold Hongju Koh, a professor of international law at Yale Law School, tells the Times that he thinks that the firms did not properly understand the type of administration they were dealing with when they decided to cave to Trump's threats.
"They thought they made one-shot deals which they would fulfill, he said. But the administration seems to think that they have subjected these firms to indentured servitude.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
47 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

Once you pay the Danegald, you never get rid of the Dane, you stupid assholes. n/t
malthaussen
Apr 16
#12
Trump can't be trusted to honor a deal. He renegotiated NAFTA with Canada and Mexico in 2018.
surfered
Apr 16
#15
Pretty soon they'll be defending concentration camps and mowing the lawn at Mar-a-Lago on the weekends.
Gaugamela
Apr 16
#18
Wait wait wait - don't these "Prestigious" law firms think they are the smartest guys in the room - ALWAYS??
NoMoreRepugs
Apr 16
#19
Also, how do these deals not expose the lawyers to treason the same as everyone else in F47s regime?
in2herbs
Apr 16
#30
Bend the knee w/Trump and get your heads chopped off ...should be alarm bells blaring
NotHardly
Apr 16
#27
How are the lawyers in these lawfirms helping F47 not subjecting them to treason the same as anyone else
in2herbs
Apr 16
#28
These companies destroyed their reputations, and will lose a tremendous amount of business because of it.
patphil
Apr 16
#34
Appeasing an authoritarian near turns out well. They take it was a sign of weakness (which it is) and will
Martin68
Apr 16
#39
Leavitt claims the deals are "fully binding"; article says it's unclear if they were signed written
muriel_volestrangler
Apr 16
#40
And law students are refusing to work for those firms. They screwed up royally. nt
Blasphemer
Apr 16
#44