Actually, it’s terrifying.
A core function of lawyers in our society is to give everyone equal access to the law irrespective of their believes, interests, or motives. Without them, the public and all of its entities, institutions and organizations become slaves and victims of laws rather than beneficiaries of them, with an elite and corrupted professions using their knowledge and skills to distort democracy rather than protect it.
The relentless ideological corruption of academia is slowly but surely corrupting the professions it is trusted to train, with lawyers being a striking example. Now law students are increasingly taught that their interests, not their clients, should be the focus of their passions, and those interests have been dictated by progressive and leftist agendas, with the aim of transforning a profession designed to be equally accessible to all into a tool of dominance by one side of the political spectrum over the others.
This developments is the reason ethics alarms must sound over the students of both Yale and Harvard Law Schools condemning a major law firm’s choice of clients. They are trying to build a national law student boycott of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison until the firm drops ExxonMobil as a client. Climate change, you know. As we increasingly see, the environmentalist cult is being used to justify weakening democratic institutions and principles.
A pledge is circulating declaring that top students will no longer interview for summer associate positions or work at the firm until Paul, Weiss, and of course there will be other firms, no longer represent the oil and gas giant, and, inevitably, other energy companies. Providing Exxon with competent representation in a series of climate change lawsuits makes firms complicit in the planet’s destruction. Thus the legal system must be rigged against them.
The last sentence is my fair and accurate translation of the objective behind the pledge, which reads,
“As future lawyers, we have a choice. Will we commit ourselves to enabling corporations to continue putting human civilization at risk of climate catastrophe? Or will we dedicate our careers to making a positive impact in our communities and helping build a more just and sustainable future?”
Wrong, you arrogant, indoctrinated, totalitarian fools. Your future profession exists to make a positive impact on communities by giving all citizens and legal entities the benefit of the rule of law and the core principles articulated in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.
Paul Weiss chairman Brad Karp defended the firm’s work for Exxon in a prepared statement:
“We are proud of the outstanding work we do for a wide range of commercial and pro bono clients in their most challenging and high-profile matters, including our recent defense of ExxonMobil in a securities fraud case in which the court found, after trial, that plaintiff’s claims were entirely without merit. Paul, Weiss is committed to free speech and debate, just as we are committed to the principle that we represent our clients and safeguard the rule of law zealously and to the best of our abilities.”
This episode is just a continuation of the canary dying in the mine episode I wrote about here, when Harvard Law Students interfered in Harvey Weinstein’s rights to a defense by attacking Dean Ronald Sullivan, who was one of his lawyers. Here are some highlights of that post for those of you who don”t take advantage of links. First, the principle at stake, which this blog exists, in part, to explain, promote and protect:
I have vowed…that if I accomplish nothing else with this blog, I will do my best to put a stake through the ignorant and destructive idea that lawyers only represent clients they agree with, admire, or personally support. Here its is again, the ABA rule that is quoted somewhere in every jurisdiction’s attorney conduct regulations. Let’s do it really big this time:
ABA Model Rule 1.2(b): “A lawyer’s representation of a client, including representation by appointment, does not constitute an endorsement of the client’s political, economic, social or moral views or activities.”
Got that? Memorize it Print it out and carry it in your wallet, and hand it to your ignorant loud-mouth family member who complains about those scum-bag lawyers who represent bad people. Post it on social media and in online comment sections where people are bloviating about the same. idiotic misconception.
Harvard undergrad and law students are attacking law school Dean Ronald S. Sullivan and demanding that he resign because he joined the team of lawyers defending Harvey Weinstein, the Godfather of #MeToo, who is facing multiple charges of sexual harassment, rape, and sexual assault. Because the Dean is black, the Association of Black Harvard Women wrote in a public letter, “You have failed us.” Law student Danu Mudannayake wrote in a petition, “Do you really want to one day accept your diploma from someone who … believes it is OK to defend such a prominent figure at the center of the #MeToo movement?” You mean from someone who understands what it means to be a lawyer? You shouldn’t get a degree, Danu, until you complete a 500 word essay explaining why what you just wrote should disqualify anyone from admittance to the bar.
That applies to the law students pressuring Paul Weiss.
Facts: TaxProf Blog