The Erosion of Legal Ethics: When Law Firms Serve Power Over Principle
- Kris Vansanten
- 3 days ago
- 1 min read
Updated: 2 days ago
Opinion:
Recent events have cast a spotlight on the troubling role of major law firms in enabling corporate misconduct. Law professor Elise Bernlohr Maizel’s analysis of the opioid crisis reveals how firms like Davis Polk & Wardwell provided legal cover for companies such as AmerisourceBergen, facilitating harmful practices contributing to the ruining of thousands of lives.
A similar pattern emerges in the Nyrstar case, where legal advisers appeared to prioritize the interests of controlling shareholders over the company’s well-being. This behavior exemplifies the principal-agent problem, where agents (lawyers) act in the interest of powerful insiders rather than the corporate entity they are meant to serve.
The recent $125 million pro bono agreement between A&O Shearman and the Trump administration further underscores this issue. The deal, which included commitments to drop diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies, sparked internal dissent and raised questions about the firm’s ethical compass (see also my previous post on this topic)
These instances highlight a disturbing trend: law firms aligning with powerful clients at the expense of ethical standards and public trust. It’s imperative for the legal profession to reaffirm its commitment to serving the law and the broader public interest, rather than merely acting as enablers for those in power.
𝘕𝘰𝘵𝘦: 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘰𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘱𝘪𝘦𝘤𝘦 𝘢𝘪𝘮𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘧𝘰𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘤𝘶𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘯 𝘭𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘭 𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺.
This article may be behind a paywall due to intellectual property rights, in which case we are legally unable to provide full access.
