Just one day after Paul Weiss’ deal, Columbia University disclosed policy changes under the threat of losing billions of dollars in federal money. A week later, the venerable law firm of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom cut a deal of its own before it could be hit by an executive order. Before that, ABC News and Meta reached multi-million-dollar settlements to resolve lawsuits from Trump.

“The more of them that cave, the more extortion that that invites,” said Ty Cobb, a White House lawyer in Trump’s first term who has since become a sharp critic. “You’ll see other universities and other law firms and other enemies of Trump assaulted and attacked into submission because of that.”

Some within the conservative legal community, by contrast, say the Republican president is acting within his right.

“It’s the president’s prerogative to instruct the executive branch to do business with companies, law firms or contractors that he deems trustworthy — and the converse is true too,” said Jay Town, a U.S. attorney from Alabama during Trump’s first term. “The president, as the commander in chief, can determine who gets a clearance and who doesn’t. It’s as simple as that.”

Some targets have not given in, with two law firms since the Paul Weiss deal suing to block executive orders. Yet no matter their response, the sanctioned firms have generally run afoul of the White House by virtue of association with prosecutors who previously investigated Trump.

If the negotiations have been surprising, consider that Trump telegraphed his approach during the campaign. “For those who have been wronged and betrayed, I am your retribution,” he told supporters in March 2023.

Less clear was: Retribution for what exactly? Against whom? By what means?

The answers would come soon enough.

Fresh off surviving four federal and state indictments that threatened to sink his political career, and investigations that shadowed his first term in office, Trump came straight for the prosecutors who investigated him and the elite firms he saw as sheltering them.

His Justice Department moved almost immediately to fire the members of special counsel Jack Smith’s team and some prosecutors who handled cases arising from the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021.

The White House followed up with an executive order that stripped security clearances from the lawyers at the law firm of Covington & Burling who have provided legal representation for Smith amid the threat of government investigations. Covington has said it looks forward to “defending Mr. Smith’s interests.”

A subsequent order punished Perkins Coie for its representation of then-Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton during the 2016 campaign and its part in funding opposition research on Trump that took the form of a dossier containing unsubstantiated allegations about Trump’s ties to Russia.

Its business hanging in the balance, Perkins Coie hired Williams & Connolly, a Washington firm with an aggressive litigation style, to challenge the order. A federal judge said the administration’s action sent “chills down my spine” and blocked portions of it from taking effect. That decision could have been a meaningful precedent for other beleaguered firms.

Except that’s not what happened next.

The chairman of Paul Weiss said it, too, was initially prepared to sue over a March 14 order that targeted the firm in part because a former partner, Mark Pomerantz, had several years earlier overseen an investigation into Trump’s finances on behalf of the Manhattan district attorney’s office.

But the firm also came to believe that even a courtroom victory would not erase the perception among clients that it was “persona non grata” with the administration, its chairman, Brad Karp, later told colleagues in an email obtained by The Associated Press.

The order, Karp said, presented an “existential crisis” for a firm that has counted among its powerhouse representations the NFL and ExxonMobil. Some of its clients signaled they might abandon ship. The hoped-for support from fellow firms never materialized and some even sought to exploit Paul Weiss’ woes, Karp said.

“It was very likely that our firm would not be able to survive a protracted dispute with the Administration,” he wrote.

When the opportunity came for a White House meeting and the chance to cut a deal, he took it, pledging pro bono legal services for causes such as the fight against antisemitism as well as representation without regard to clients’ political affiliation. In so doing, he wrote, “we have quickly solved a seemingly intractable problem and removed a cloud of uncertainty that was hanging over our law firm.”

The outcry was swift. Lawyers outside the firm ridiculed it. More than 140 Paul Weiss alumni signed a letter assailing the capitulation.

“Instead of a ringing defense of the values of democracy, we witnessed a craven surrender to, and thus complicity in, what is perhaps the gravest threat to the independence of the legal profession since at least the days of Senator Joseph McCarthy,” the letter said.

Within days, two other firms, Jenner & Block and WilmerHale, were confronted with executive orders over their affiliation with prosecutors on Robert Mueller’s special counsel team that investigated Trump during his first term. Both sued Friday. WilmerHale, where Mueller is a retired partner, said the order was an “unprecedented assault” on the legal system. After hearing arguments, judges blocked enforcement of key portions of both orders.

Yet that very day, the White House trumpeted a fresh deal with Skadden Arps in which the firm agreed to provide $100 million of pro bono legal services and to disavow the use of diversity, employment and inclusion considerations in its hiring practices.

Trump has expressed satisfaction with his pressure campaign, issuing a directive to sanction lawyers who are seen as bringing “frivolous” litigation against the government. Universities, he marveled, are “bending and saying ‘Sir, thank you very much, we appreciate it.’”

As for law firms, he said, “They’re just saying, ‘Where do I sign?’ Nobody can believe it.’”

Uptown from Paul Weiss’s Midtown Manhattan home base, another elite New York institution was facing its own crucible.

Trump had taken office against the backdrop of disruptive protests at Columbia University tied to Israel’s war with Hamas. The turmoil prompted the resignation of its president and made the Ivy League school a target of critics who said an overly permissive campus environment had let antisemitic rhetoric flourish.

The Trump administration this month arrested a prominent Palestinian activist and legal permanent resident in his university-owned apartment building and opened an investigation into whether Columbia hid students sought by the U.S. over their involvement in the demonstrations.

In a separate action, the administration pulled $400 million from Columbia, canceling grants and contracts because of what the government said was the school’s failure to stamp out antisemitism and demanding a series of changes as a condition for restoring the money or for even considering doing so.

Two weeks later, the then-interim university president, Katrina Armstrong, announced that she would implement nearly all of the changes sought by the White House. Columbia would bar students from protesting in academic buildings, she said, adopt a new definition of antisemitism and put its Middle East studies department under new supervision.

The university’s March 21 rollout of reforms did not challenge the Trump administration’s coercive tactics, but nodded to what it said were “legitimate concerns” raised about antisemitism. The White House has yet to say if it will restore the money.

The Columbia resolution was condemned by some faculty members and free speech advocates.

“Columbia’s capitulation endangers academic freedom and campus expression nationwide,” Donna Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, said in a statement at the time.

Armstrong on Friday night announced her exit from the position and her return to her post atop the school’s medical center.

Columbia is not Trump’s sole target in academia. Also this month, the administration suspended about $175 million in federal funding for the University of Pennsylvania over a transgender swimmer who last competed for the school in 2022.

Trump had not even taken office on Jan. 20 when one legal fight that could have followed him into office abruptly faded.

In December, ABC News agreed to pay $15 million toward Trump’s presidential library to settle a defamation lawsuit over anchor George Stephanopoulos’ inaccurate on-air assertion that the president-elect had been found civilly liable for raping writer E. Jean Carroll.

The following month, Meta, the parent company of Facebook, agreed to pay $25 million to settle a lawsuit filed by Trump against the company after it suspended his accounts following the Jan. 6 riot.

The agreement followed a visit by Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg to Trump’s private Florida club to try to mend fences. Such a trip may have seemed unlikely in Trump’s first term, or after the Capitol siege made him, briefly, a pariah within his own party. But it’s something other technology, business and government officials have done.

The administration, meanwhile, has taken action against news organizations whose coverage it disagrees with. The White House last month removed Associated Press reporters and photographers from the small group of journalists who follow the president in the pool and other events after the news agency declined to follow Trump’s executive order to rename the Gulf of Mexico; a suit by the AP is pending.

And the administration has sought to dismantle Voice of America, a U.S. government-funded international news service. On Friday, a federal judge halted plans to fire more than 1,200 journalists, engineers and other staff who were sidelined after Trump ordered a funding cut.

___

Republished with permission of The Associated Press.

Strong turnout among Democrats so far and remarkably robust fundraising by a public middle school teacher are making one of Florida’s special congressional elections next week tighter than expected for a prominent Republican hoping to replace a GOP incumbent in a comfortably red district.

State Sen. Randy Fine — a Republican firebrand who has openly feuded with Gov. Ron DeSantis and earned an endorsement by President Donald Trump — is facing a Democratic candidate, Josh Weil, 40, of Orlando.

Weil, a teacher at Kissimmee Middle School and single dad of two sons, has raised nearly 10 times more money than Fine, including more than $7 million from donors who gave less than $200 each, generally considered a sign of grassroots enthusiasm among prospective voters. A new political poll this week of likely voters conducted for Florida Politics showed the race within the survey’s margin of error — effectively a tie.

In early and mail voting so far, through Wednesday, about 12% of the district’s roughly 270,600 active, registered Republican voters have cast ballots — compared to 20% of the district’s roughly 141,500 Democrats, according to real-time tracking by Fresh Take Florida, a news service of the University of Florida College of Journalism and Communications.

Even DeSantis is saying that he expects Fine to underperform in the district compared to his own and Trump’s re-elections there — but DeSantis still expects Fine ultimately to win. “The district is so overwhelmingly Republican that it’s almost impossible for someone with an ‘R’ by their name to lose that district,” DeSantis said.

The race for Florida’s 6th Congressional District is one of two special House elections that will culminate on Tuesday. The district runs from St. Augustine to Daytona Beach along the state’s East Coast. Fine and Weil are vying to replace Mike Waltz, who resigned to become Trump’s National Security Adviser — and has become embroiled in the scandal in Washington over military plans accidentally shared in a chat group with a magazine journalist.

The other race is the Florida’s 1st Congressional District in the Panhandle, a reliably Republican region that hasn’t elected a Democrat since 1995. Jimmy Patronis, Florida’s Chief Financial Officer and former state Representative, is competing against Democrat Gay Valimont, who lost a race for the same seat in November by 32 percentage points.

Valimont has outraised Patronis in the race, raising almost $6.5 million in campaign contributions and spending about $4.3 million. Trump endorsed Patronis, who raised more than $2.1 million and spent about $1.3 million.

In an interview, Patronis said the two congressional elections in Florida could embolden Democrats in the House to undermine Trump’s political agenda. The GOP holds a slim 218-213 margin over Democrats there.

“This is (Democrats’) Alamo,” he said. “If they can win the Florida Panhandle seat, if they can win the District 6th seat of Volusia County, they stop Congress.”

Patronis said he supports Trump’s immigration goals and wants to complete the border wall Trump proposed. He also supports limits on government spending.

Valimont has focused her campaign on veterans’ care in the Panhandle, which has among the highest concentration of veterans in the U.S. She said the Trump administration’s cuts to federal employment will make veteran care even worse, especially with perceived threats to Medicare and Medicaid. She said voters have also complained to her about expensive property insurance — an industry Patronis regulated — and the cost of living.

“I’m going to go and fight against all of these bad decisions on the part of our President,” Valimont said. “We are being ruled by an oligarch, and that’s not American.”

The seat in the Panhandle opened after former U.S. Rep. Matt Gaetz resigned in an unsuccessful effort to become Trump’s Attorney General.

Four hundred miles away, Fine acknowledged in an interview that he is a divisive figure in American politics.

The No. 1 threat to America — more so that a foreign adversary — is the country’s inability to spend within its means, Fine said. He also sees himself as someone who doesn’t mind “calling out evil.” He’s enthusiastically embraced Trump’s plans to deport immigrants in the U.S. illegally.

“I’m not interested in sitting around the drum circle and talking about how we can all get along. I want to kick them out of the country,” Fine said. “So, that’s divisive, and I’m proud of it.”

Fine scored political points after the arrest of a canvasser, Arlecia Brown, 35, of Palm Coast working on behalf of Weil’s campaign. Brown is facing burglary and theft charges in Flagler County over a stolen bicycle. Weil called the case an unacceptable incident, and added, “The individual is no longer authorized to do any work on behalf of our campaign.”

Weil emphasized the high prices that Trump promised during his own campaign to reduce.

“People who are struggling to afford groceries are in a situation that millionaire casino executives can’t necessarily relate to,” Weil said. “I’m a single parent of two boys on a teacher’s salary. I felt it firsthand when we would go to Walmart to buy groceries, and the boys would fill up a shopping cart… I just can’t afford it.”

___

This story was produced by Fresh Take Florida, a news service of the University of Florida College of Journalism and Communications. The reporter can be reached at [email protected]. You can donate to support our students here.

Post Views: 0

We’ve got a FEMA faceoff, as different parts of the federal government are arguing over whether to keep the Federal Emergency Management Agency intact, move it out of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), or abolish it altogether.

And Florida folks are playing an outsized role.

U.S. Reps. Byron Donalds and Jared Moskowitz are supporting a bipartisan plan to set up FEMA as a stand-alone agency, arguing that moving it away from DHS will make FEMA more efficient and better able to respond to disasters.

Under that proposal, FEMA’s head would be part of the President’s Cabinet and report directly to President Donald Trump. Moskowitz previously served as Florida’s Director of the Division of Emergency Management, operating a similar agency at the state level. Donalds, a close Trump ally, is running for Governor next year with the President’s support.

But that support may not extend to Donalds’ joint plan with Moskowitz to keep FEMA alive. Trump’s hand-picked Homeland Security Secretary, Kristi Noem, doesn’t want FEMA moved out of her agency. She wants FEMA axed altogether.

Reports emerged this week that Noem told a Trump Cabinet meeting that she was “going to eliminate” FEMA.

That’s stronger language than she has used before. But even Trump has floated eliminating the agency. So perhaps he’s finally putting those words into motion as part of his effort to completely dismantle parts of the federal government.

What does that mean for Florida, one of the most disaster-prone areas of the country? Well, likely nothing good. And the fact that Donalds and Moskowitz are working across the aisle to maintain some version of the agency shows there are major stakeholders who agree.

But does the President?

Now, it’s onto our weekly game of winners and losers.

Winners

Honorable mention: Kevin Marino Cabrera. Cabrera flew through his Senate confirmation hearing with flying colors as he prepares to become the U.S. Ambassador to Panama.

Trump picked Cabrera for the role late last year, and it appears he’s closing in on a start date for the position.

It’s an important one, given Trump’s insistence on the U.S. growing its influence over the Panama Canal, if not outright seizing control.

Cabrera faced questioning over those tensions regarding the shipping channel, leaning on his experience as a Miami-Dade County Commissioner, serving a region where shipping is integral.

Cabrera also worked as Florida State Director for Trump’s 2020 campaign. But his hearing featured Cabrera playing a more diplomatic role rather than echoing Trump’s often bombastic approach.

Expect him to clear his upcoming Senate vote easily.

Almost (but not quite) the biggest winner: Fiscal sanity. The first versions for the House and Senate budgets were released this week, and both chambers are looking to rein in spending.

The Senate’s proposed budget comes in at $117.36 billion. That’s a cut of $1.3 billion from spending levels during the last fiscal year.

The House gets even more cut-happy. They are outlining a budget of just under $113 billion, coming in even lower than the Senate and below Gov. Ron DeSantis’ proposed $115.6 billion budget.

This is just the beginning of the process, so we’ll see where these final numbers land. But both chambers — and the Governor, for that matter — are showing they are aware of the need to get Florida’s finances in order.

Last week, we spotlighted comments from the Miami-Dade County Mayor that some austerity may be coming after years of cash influx aided in part by federal COVID legislation.

Well those problems could exist at the state level as well, especially given the federal government’s, let’s say, unorthodox economic policy these first few months. Even members of the administration are signaling there will be a “transition” period and “corrections” in the economy as Trump continues toying with tariffs.

So who knows what’s on the horizon. And yes, Florida is flush with cash reserves. But to keep it that way, they’ll need to avoid continuing to hike spending every year regardless of the economic realities.

The biggest winner: Daniel Perez. In addition to his role overseeing the House’s budget proposal, Perez also stood out in The Process this week for taking two bold stances.

One got attention due to its catchiness as a Republican-on-Republican showdown, as the House voted Wednesday to override four DeSantis vetoes issued following the 2024 Session.

Lawmakers first raised the specter of such a move as GOP legislative leaders and DeSantis were locked in a showdown over a Special Session regarding immigration. That clash ended in compromise, but the House’s review of those vetoes continued forward.

“This Session, we have focused on restoring the institutional role of the Florida House of Representatives,” Perez said. And that independence is key to a well-functioning government. More than 9 times out of 10, GOP leaders in the Legislature will agree with the Governor on policy. But it’s good to know that Perez’s words aren’t empty and that the Legislature is willing to demonstrate that they will stand up to some of DeSantis’ worst impulses.

Perez’s second attention-grabbing move does align with a DeSantis policy position. Perez is moving forward to cut the state sales tax from 6% to 5.25%. That would save spenders close to $5 billion each year, per Perez.

Florida’s affordability crisis goes well beyond some extra dollars at the store. We’re still waiting for meaningful, effective reforms to help the housing market and fix the insurance crisis.

But Perez and Senate President Ben Albritton have promised movement on those issues as well. And combined with this push on dropping the sales tax, Florida lawmakers may yet be successful in stopping Florida from turning into New York or San Francisco and being synonymous with unaffordability.

Losers

Dishonorable mention: Cory Mills. Mills is facing an ethics probe, adding to personal problems already plaguing the lawmaker and making it increasingly difficult to follow through with his promise to mount a Senate Primary challenge to Republican U.S. Sen. Ashley Moody in 2026.

The House Ethics Committee announced Thursday that members will review whether Mills broke any rules by holding contracts with the government while serving in the House.

“Prior to being sworn in to Congress, Rep. Mills made a series of public statements regarding his business dealings with U.S. law enforcement agencies and foreign governments over the years,” read a report from the Office of Congressional Conduct, formerly the Office of Congressional Ethics.

“Government procurement records show companies owned by Rep. Mills have been awarded numerous federal contracts. These contracts primarily consist of purchase orders stemming from the manufacture and delivery of less than lethal ammunitions — products manufactured by the Member-owned entities Pacem Defense, LLC, Pacem Solutions International, LLC and ALS, Inc. — to federal law enforcement agencies and the U.S. Department of Justice.”

Mills said he plans to cooperate but slammed the claims he acted improperly as politically motivated.

Whether Mills was in the wrong here will be sussed out by the probe. But Mills is now navigating a proverbial minefield, promising to run for Senate in 2026 while this investigation continues and questions fly about his role in an incident police investigated as a potential assault.

Forget a promotion to the Senate, it’s reasonable that some voters may begin to ask whether Mills should serve in Congress at all.

Almost (but not quite) the biggest loser: Small-dollar Democratic donors. Last week, we gave Florida Dems a winner slot based in part on the jaw-dropping amount of money raised for Special Elections in two deep red congressional districts.

This week, a poll showed the Democrat in Florida’s 6th Congressional District in striking range of the presumed favorite, Republican state Sen. Randy Fine.

That gives even more hope to democrats frustrated with the Trump administration and seeing a razor-thin margin in the House. Every seat counts, and Democrats are now wondering if they can count either race in Florida’s 1st Congressional District or CD 6 as an upset.

Well, we’re now two days away from Election Day. So here’s where the rubber meets the road. Are Democrats going to pull off a miracle here?

Our verdict: No.

Young athletes learn early that winning isn’t everything. Maybe that’s true here as well, as cutting either of these races to an uncomfortable margin for Republicans can give Democrats some momentum heading into the Midterms and send a message about their displeasure with Trump.

But $10 million in a Trump +30 district in CD 6? Millions more in even redder CD 1?

We’re not saying Democrats shouldn’t have given this a shot. But without a win, a lot of this is wasted money. If they are after moral victories, they could have sent a message with much less.

As we said last week: “If these huge sums of money get wasted yet again, the rest of the country really needs to try to come to grips with the fact that Florida is a red state, and their green should go elsewhere.”

Unless a miracle happens Tuesday, we stand by that statement.

The biggest loser: Mike Waltz. Waltz is in hot water after this week. And if you somehow found yourself perusing this column within the vast sea of reading options across the World Wide Web, then you know why.

This story was so unbelievable even the reporter in the group chat couldn’t fathom it was real as it was happening, so we’re not going to bore you with a full recap.

The question everyone is wondering is: Does Waltz survive this?

After all, he was the one who added The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg to the chat in the first place. In a follow-up piece on this whole affair, Goldberg displayed much of the messages he received after laughable claims by the Trump administration that details about an impending attack that had not yet occurred were not classified.

So Goldberg released text and images of the conversation. Right at the top of the image of Goldberg’s perspective read, “Michael Waltz added you to the group.”

And Waltz has already said a staffer wasn’t responsible for adding Goldberg. So by process of elimination, our friends, that means Waltz did it.

Waltz has tried a bunch of silly tactics to get out of this, making it seem like some technical mystery that needs solving and taking needless shots at Goldberg, whose reporting Trump has hammered for years.

So again, does Waltz survive this?

Trump publicly has stood by him. Point for Waltz.

Privately, it’s reportedly a different story. And see it’s not just the Signal chat. Passwords belonging to Waltz were among a trove of public officials’ info uncovered by German outlet Der Spiegel. Waltz’s passwords were among that trove. Separate reporting also showed Waltz left his Venmo friends list viewable to the public.

That all adds to the drip-drip-drip of controversy Trump is always eager to avoid. It also had proved to override Team Trump’s strategy, as explained by adviser Steve Bannon, to “flood the zone with shit” — i.e. make so many button-pushing moves that the media and the public can’t catch up, allowing Trump to emerge scot-free from it all and accomplish his agenda.

Well, no luck here. This story broke through, and in a big way. And back to that Venmo list, it showed Waltz was friends with several media figures even, gasp, a CNN host.

That’s not controversial, nor should it be. But see, we’re still stuck on why Waltz had Goldberg’s number to begin with. We don’t have an inside info here, but if Trump begins to believe Waltz might be friendly with one of Trump’s many media enemies, that may do more to convince the President that Waltz needs to go than even this catastrophic security breach.

That is, as Trump might say, sad! But it’s the truth. And if that’s not enough, this story continuing to drag out and serve as a cudgel against this administration’s competence will.

Waltz better hope this story blows over soon. And the administration — Waltz included — would do well to stop trying to gaslight the public if that’s going to happen.

Post Views: 0