Why Are Kirkland & Ellis Lawyers Heading for the Exits?
Jacqui Coombe, LawFuel contributor
If you thought Kirkland & Ellis only made headlines for eye-watering profits and lateral partner shopping sprees, think again. The world’s most lucrative law firm is now starring in a new drama: The Great Associate Exodus. And spoiler alert-it’s not just about billable hours or the “fun” of 2 a.m. deal closings.
Kirkland & Ellis have crushed it with their $8.8 billion billings, but they also recently concluded a deal with the Trump administration that’s left more than a few associates reaching for their LinkedIn passwords.
Instead of challenging a hotly debated executive order-one that takes aim at law firm diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs-Kirkland opted for compliance.
The firm agreed to scale back its DEI initiatives and earmark $100 million in pro bono work for government-approved causes. Cue the sound of a thousand raised eyebrows in legal circles.
The Departures: Not Your Typical “I Need More Work-Life Balance” Story
The latest wave of Kirkland & Ellis departures isn’t about burnout or a sudden desire to “spend more time with family.” These are lawyers walking out on principle, and they’re not shy about saying so.
AbovetheLaw looked at some of the departees, including Maggie Hagen whose LinkedIN post called out the “dangerous precedent” set by Kirkland’s decision, warning that caving to political pressure chips away at the legal profession’s independence.
Kevin Decker lamented that Kirkland & Ellis, of all firms, wouldn’t stand up to government interference-a move he sees as part of a broader attack on the rule of law, writing on LinkedIN –
“Last week, I joined the growing list of lawyers who have decided to leave firms that have chosen to cooperate with the President. I am disappointed by the decision of the world’s most powerful and successful law firm not to fight back against this unlawful incursion, especially when other firms are already doing so successfully. This is part of a larger attack on the rule of law, along with efforts to nullify constitutional protections of due process, birthright citizenship, presidential term limits, and more. “
Harold Grigsby III took it personally, noting that Kirkland’s once-vaunted commitment to DEI was a major reason he joined. Now? Not so much.
What’s the Big Deal for Biglaw?
This isn’t just a Kirkland & Ellis problem. When the most powerful firm in Biglaw decides it’s easier to play ball with the government than to defend its own values, it sends a message-one that’s echoing through the halls of every Am Law 100 shop.
The upshot is thast while prestige and paychecks might keep the lights on, they won’t keep everyone in the building when core values get tossed out with yesterday’s redlines.
Kirkland & Ellis has always been a magnet for ambitious lawyers, big deals, and bigger bonuses – a top tier ‘prestige law firm’ by any standards – including ours.
But as the latest exodus shows, even the legal world’s biggest brand isn’t immune to a culture clash-especially when that clash is about something bigger than profits.
The ongoing fight by BigLaw firms facing off against executive orders continues to gather steam, but so too are the associates who are voting with their feet.
If you’re a lawyer who likes your legal news with a dash of snark and a side of substance, keep an eye on Kirkland & Ellis.
It’s intriguing to see folks leave Kirkland & Ellis over principles. Might be a big red flag signalling deeper issues within Biglaw. Anyone pondered how this might reshape client perspectives or is the legal industry just going to brush this under the carpet?
Good point, Alex. Do you think this might start a trend across other firms, or is it a one-off?
Honestly surprised to see lawyers taking such a stand. In tech, you hear about pushing back against questionable ethics all the time but law always seemed more… I dunno, resistant? Props to them.
Lawyers leaving on principle? What’s next, bankers giving away money? Haha, just kidding. But seriously, it’s kinda refreshing.
While the gestures are notable, one has to wonder about the actual impact. Will their departure truly influence Kirkland & Ellis, or is it a symbolic gesture drowned out by the firm’s global presence?
Symbolic or not, it’s a strong message. It’ll be interesting to see if this sparks discussions within other firms about their own practices and principles.
This is actually inspiring! Seeing professionals stand up for what they believe in, despite the cost, gives hope to those of us about to enter the field. We’re not just about billing hours.
It’s always fascinating to observe moments of principled stands within professional sectors. What will be even more interesting is observing the long-term fallout and whether it alters any aspect of legal industry practices.
Do you think this could lead to a shift in how firms approach governmental relations or is it just a blip on the radar?
It’s hard to predict, but shifts often start with what initially appears as blips. Time will tell if this is one of those turning points.