James Perry

For a firm that markets itself as “elite,” “prestigious,” and a guardian of the rule of law, Skadden’s recent posture in the face of Trump-era authoritarian pressure was a masterclass in moral surrender. When it mattered—when the legal profession was being tested on whether it would defend democratic norms or quietly accommodate their erosion—Skadden chose expediency. Instead of standing firm on principle, the firm appeared all too willing to fold, signaling that its vaunted prestige is less about courage and more about proximity to power. This is the uncomfortable truth: prestige without backbone is just branding. And Skadden’s brand took a serious hit when it became clear that preserving influence and client relationships outweighed any meaningful commitment to democratic accountability or the independence of the legal profession. For law students and young attorneys who still believe that the law is more than a revenue engine—who care about the future of the country their children will inherit—this firm should give you pause. A résumé line is cold comfort when history remembers who spoke up and who stayed quiet. Skadden is not alone. Firms like Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP and others that quickly accommodated the administration rather than challenging its excesses revealed an industry-wide failure of nerve. But leadership carries higher expectations—and Skadden failed them. If you want prestige defined by corner offices, billable hours, and institutional self-preservation, this firm will serve you well. If you want prestige defined by integrity, independence, and a willingness to defend democratic norms when it’s inconvenient—look elsewhere. History is unkind to institutions that confuse power with principle. Skadden had a choice. It made one.