As a person not in the legal field, all of this sounds absurd. Law firms agreeing to do work without written agreements/contracts?Some of it just bulletpoints in an email? None of iit s legal but they agreed to it? This is absolutely nuts.
P i’m thinking there’s agreements will be found out when someone does some deep digging like the “Panama papers“ it’s money going to offshore bank accounts that’s how the mafia does business
The other issue is that the firms retain the right to decide which cases they will take. They could decide to not take any at all. I seriously doubt the “agreement” is legally binding or consistent with Ruled of Conduct re fee agreements
I guarantee you these law firms will not provide hundreds of millions of pro bono services. They will pretend they never heard the name Trump at the first opportunity. Probably during his perp walk.
2/ I was just shown one of todays “agreements” or rather what the lawyers at the firm were shown and it tends to confirm my suspicions. There are three bullet points but even in this version it’s fuzzy what’s a description of the agreement and what’s literally the agreement.
3/ by which I mean like, okay this #2 is this a description of what you agreed to or is this the literal text that you made an agreement on the basis of? Totally unclear. Also unclear who the parties are though the language that is maybe? the agreement seems to be personally with Donald Trump.
Since Trump alluded to using the pro bono when he leaves office, it seems that he, at least, believes he is (corruptly) entitled to the services personally.
It is entirely possible (though not necessarily smart) to ‘agree’ to a bunch of incomprehensible shit knowing that it is legally meaningless and unenforceable in court. Lawyers do do this, often when drafting items that one or both parties really really want to see in the agreement.
Why would Trump, of all people, need a watertight contract? He would ignore it and do what he wants anyway. He is a party to the agreement and the sole arbiter. Who’s gonna disagree? Go to court over a disagreement about how to interpret the agreement? Come on.
I suspect Politico is using “signed” extremely colloquially there - I think they are saying that those firms are all in the group that got announced today
It's like the Biden investigation in 2019 that Trump wanted from Ukraine. He wanted the announcement. And here he wants to declare that these firms have bent the knee, stopped representing adverse parties and, like Michael Corleone, he wants to be able to some day call them for a favor.
This is what I’ve been thinking too. Any “agreement” would likely be unenforceable as a matter of public policy, not to mention that the alleged terms we keep hearing about are so vague and ambiguous as to be unenforceable as well.
I'm concerned about the millions in pro bono legal assistance they have committed. It's probably vapor, but there might be some material assistance involved.
I'm really not. There's no way its enforceable - its more like the sanctions could be reimposed at any time. In a few months there will be several court opinions that make exceedingly clear that this whole scheme is unlawful, and the promise to provide pro bono services will (likely) ignored.
It all seems so handwaving. It's not a legal document. It's just an "agreement" that Trump personally agrees to not issue a (probably illegal) executive order. Right? So what happens if they change their minds and refuse? Did they kneecap their ability to bring suit against a future illegal EO?
With DJT - Actual written agreements are not reliable either. Maybe the law firms’ “strategy”’is to simply avoid conflict today, and push it down the road. Knowing that “every day is a new reality” wit DJT.
I recall the first time around he said he'd pay everyone's atty's bills, if any were incurred. He didn't. I suspect, as you appear to, that the representation will be used only for him and his family.
"Who are the parties to the agreements? Are they with the government of the United States or Donald Trump? I think it must be the latter since I’m not sure how you would legally structure such agreements. But that’s another matter. Where are the agreements? Why can’t we see them?"
I read the Columbia “ deal “ I think it was a Bluesky/Substack link. That one is more suspicious with the President’s link to the Israelí Army but it seems a standard mob type where they took $400,000 or so and then agreed to return it with horrific terms. They are all pretty straight mob grabs
Agreed— I asked this earlier, right after Skadden folded; I would think law firms, of all organizational types, would insist on a contract. Verbal-only agreement seems even more dangerous than what they’ve already done.
I am assuming that Trump is trying to force deals with these law firms so that when he’s out of office, they are forced to represent him for free, and refused to prosecute him (for all his crimes), but what is to stop them from saying they changed their mind, once he’s out of office?
And if they don’t? If they claim…. accurately… that they were illegally compelled. Who will represent this Admin in the absofuckinglutely needed Nuremberg trials in the aftermath of this nonsense?
Right. I mean, if they say forget it, we decided we’re not gonna represent you, who is going to represent Trump to sue them for not representing him? I don’t think he really thought this through.
Prosecuting this admin will be better for a career than clerking for the GOP 5 among the Supremes. There's a village called Nuremberg in Pennsylvania. Just saying... Defense we can leave to li'l Lennie Leo.
They are written… there are a few out there … if you look at Trump’s tweets, a couple of times he’s basically tweeted the whole agreement (they’re pretty short).
The Admin is getting away with an awful lot of BS. Whether it's Musks results, the identity of the countries in line to tariff talk withTrump or these law firms' agreements, no one has produced anything in writing or memorialized where we can see. Knowing the players it could all be bullsh.
When a mafia boss forces you to sign an "agreement," is that agreement enforceable?
Asking for a friend who is signing an agreement forcing giveaway of profits from all nation's natural resources in exchange for paying back another president's contribution without strings to their defence.
and regardless, Trump knows these firms will never let these actual documents see the light of day, so he's free to throw them under the bus whenever he wants for not upholding their end of the bargain
Idk if I'd trust his characterization in terms of the minute but what does "provide $125 million in pro bono or free legal work" mean? Are they required to take on (or precluded from taking on) specific types of cases? How many billable hours = $125MM? How granular are the reqs.?
They are certainly being forced to agree to the conditions under duress.
Even if they are detailed agreements in writing the threats by the US Government to use lawfare against them if they aren't signed makes the contracts null and void.
I HAVE wondered if perhaps some of those surrendering law firms secretly planned to simply tell him to pound sand if he ever comes to them for "pro bono" work. ESPECIALLY if it's after he's out of office.
Maybe they are planning to stiff HIM for a change.
It would be awesome to see. But that's not the point. Why would anyone approach them now as a potential client? Even if they did turn around and stiff Trump, that doesn't change.
And how can an agreement between the whitehouse and a law firm be for the enduring benefit for trump personally in the future? None of it makes any sense.
So how is he enforcing them if they are ignored? Does he send Don Jr to muss people up? If it's not in his official capacity then he can't send his DOJ goons.
I had a similar thought. But that “sure thing” capitulation has catastrophic implications for their reputations. So why would they go that route? What am I missing?
I think that's key. These are literally under duress and in exchange for withdrawing things that are pretty clearly either illegal or certainly abusese of power.
There’s something else that no one has been able to answer for me. As I understand it, private firms can’t simply offer to do government work for free. It’s a violation of the antideficiency act.
I suspect we'll see DOJ call on some of the firms when all of the competent and principled lawyers have left DOJ and the Solicitor General's office. The SG has lost half its lawyers, and the SG was one of Trump's private lawyers, not a SCOTUS specialist, so they will need help.
Well… let’s see. Did Don Corleone have Tom Hayden draw up paperwork for agreements with the other families? Nah. Hmmm… am I now saying these compromised big law firms are now part of Trump‘s clan? You tell me.
It’s a really good point. The reporting we’ve seen (which could be wrong) about the contents of some of these “agreements” suggests they’re honestly pretty nothing-burgerish.
Comments
Everything in the Felonious diarrhea world is insane lies
Surely the lawyers know if they specifically agreed to something or what it might be.
What are you saying? The lawyers don’t know? They are playing coy? Both sides are pretending they agreed to what they want to pretend?
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/04/11/trump-big-law-deals-033630
I think it’s a bad strategy. But seems common.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/04/11/law-firms-trump-law-student-recruiting-00007900
https://www.brennancenter.org/issues
https://prinetsy.com/trump-truth-really-upsets-most-people
Asking for a friend who is signing an agreement forcing giveaway of profits from all nation's natural resources in exchange for paying back another president's contribution without strings to their defence.
Even if they are detailed agreements in writing the threats by the US Government to use lawfare against them if they aren't signed makes the contracts null and void.
Maybe they are planning to stiff HIM for a change.
Pay no attention to the load bearing wall paper.
"This is when they're contract is due."
put another way, its not mine " 😷 "