239
this post was submitted on 29 Mar 2025
239 points (100.0% liked)
/r/50501 Mirror
665 readers
1012 users here now
Mirrored /r/50501 Popular Posts
founded 1 month ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
"Effectively banning" an entire law firm from court houses and federal buildings for political reasons is a huge overreach of executive authority and doesn't even sound constitutional! They used lies and biased statements to justify it. My argument to you is: What use is a law firm that gives up that easy and refuses to fight for the rule of law?
It may be, but none of that matters when the so-called "checks and balances" are not being applied expeditiously.
I'm not here to defend their behavior. It's important for anyone that chooses to think critically to try and understand motives. It's easy to armchair quarterback and harder to put yourself in their position and truly evaluate the choice in front of them.
What options are available to them to "fight for the rule of law"? The executive branch, responsible for enforcing laws, is the offending party. The judicial branch moves too slowly to mitigate the significant damages that would be incurred while that fight is taking place. And the legislative branch has implicitly endorsed this behavior by not serving as a check against overreach.
Even if the law firm wins the case, their clientele will have moved on and they will likely have laid off a significant portion of their workforce.
These partners have dedicated their lives to their firms. 3,000+ billable hours each year for their entire careers. I sincerely hope you never have to choose between not only your livelihood, but that of your entire workforce, and your principles because I guarantee you, it won't be an easy decision.
There is no relief in sight unless the populace demonstrates that this is all unacceptable. Why would they choose otherwise?
Because some people have principles, and can recognize the longterm consequences of their decisions.
Choosing between your economic wellbeing and your principles is a difficult and tragic choice. But let's be honest, the partners that choose their wallet over their ethics are dishonorable, and they are now willing tools of the fascist regime.
They are one step away from being Nazis, and they should be treated as such.
I don't disagree. It's why I believe attorneys in these organizations should quit as I initially said. And why the populace must demonstrate that this behavior is unacceptable, also as I've said. Law firms aren't coming to save us though for reasons I've outlined above.
The people need to empower men and women of principle and in positions of authority to enact positive change. Our country has a history of leaving activists out to dry with little meaningful public pushback. Right now, no one is rescuing those retaliated against and it's a growing list: https://www.axios.com/2025/03/21/trump-retaliation-revenge-biden-security-clearance
What I'm hearing is partners of law firms don't want to take the risk of defying Trump without being certain of public support. Sounds like partners are happy to rake in the big bucks for their services, but when the going gets tough they bail.
You make the decision that upholds your professional ethics. Every single time. End of.
Otherwise, fuck off and go flip burgers or something!