Are Law Firms More Powerful Than the President?
The Rise of Lawfare and the Elite Legal Firms Testing American Power
Hi friends,
We know the judiciary has been abusing its power. Though the Supreme Court has made a couple of decent rulings (See list below.), it’s uncertain whether it will rule with the Constitution on remaining issues.
We know the legacy media has not been providing factual or unbiased reporting. With more and more independent media and individuals using platforms that don’t censure, those old ‘powers’ are dying.
Even through political power shifts in Washington (and elsewhere), another kind of power remains—unelected, unaccountable, and often overlooked: the legal elite.
How do large, entrenched firms like Skadden Arps and Perkins Coie use lawfare to influence elections, suppress opposition, evade oversight, and even affect judicial rulings on the Constitution?
Knowledge is power. Share what you know with others.
Overview
Below are facts on the coordinated legal and institutional tactics—commonly referred to as lawfare—used to obstruct, punish, or delegitimize political opposition, particularly focused on President Donald J. Trump, his allies, and broader conservative efforts, even to terrorizing parents and categorizing them as terrorists.
One example of such ‘legal elite’ is Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP. My research grew and transitioned from one case into the broader topic of how lawfare has become politicized, protected, abused—and effective. Let’s look at Skadden’s historical and current role in high-profile cases, FARA violations, and partisan litigation campaigns.
The growing concern is not just the frequency of legal attacks, but the power imbalance favoring elite law firms and the long-term difficulty of reforming a system that serves entrenched interests.
In this Substack:
1. Introduction to Lawfare
2. Skadden Arps Overview
3. Notable Legal Actions and Cases
4. FARA and Foreign Influence Concerns
5. Media, Narrative Control, and Double Standards
6. The Indestructibility of Lawfare?
7. Who Holds the Power—and Why It’s So Hard to Change
8. Countermeasures: What Can Be Done
9. Appendix: Related Cases and Developments
1. Introduction to Lawfare
Lawfare refers to the weaponization of the legal system to target political opponents. Tactics include politically motivated investigations, selective prosecution, regulatory harassment, and coordinated lawsuits designed to bankrupt, smear, or sideline targets.
2. Skadden Arps Overview
Global elite law firm with deep ties to Washington, D.C., biased judges, and international actors.
Provided legal services in high-profile lawfare actions under the guise of neutral “rule of law” initiatives.
3. Notable Legal Actions and Cases
Former FBI counterintelligence chief involved in Trump-Russia investigation.
Later convicted for working with a Russian oligarch.
Undermines integrity of original Trump-Russia narrative.
Sources:
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/former-fbi-counterintelligence-chief-charles-mcgonigal-sentenced-50-months-prison
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/16/nyregion/fbi-agent-charles-mcgonigal-sentenced.html
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/charles-mcgonigal-sentenced-former-fbi-official-russia-case/
FARA Enforcement Case – Skadden Settlement
DOJ press release: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/skadden-arps-agrees-register-foreign-agent-and-pay-46-million-settlement
Skadden failed to register foreign lobbying tied to Ukraine while assisting in a report targeting political enemies.
Catherine Engelbrecht and True the Vote
Legal harassment and contempt charges stemming from work on election integrity.
Skadden indirectly linked via broader litigation coalitions opposing conservative voting rights watchdogs.
Targeted prosecution under campaign finance law. He pled guilty and was later pardoned.
Skadden not directly involved but included here as part of broader DOJ tactics aligning with lawfare strategy.
4. FARA and Foreign Influence Concerns
Skadden’s retroactive FARA registration followed scrutiny over work with Paul Manafort and the pro-Russian Ukrainian government.
Raised alarms about law firms conducting foreign lobbying disguised as legal analysis.
Selective enforcement: Conservative figures often prosecuted under FARA, while Democrat-aligned firms receive fines or retroactive filings.
5. Media, Narrative Control, and Double Standards
Mainstream media largely ignored or downplayed Skadden’s FARA violation.
Heavy coverage when conservatives face lawfare (e.g., Steve Bannon, Rudy Giuliani).
Charles McGonigal story, despite its importance, was underreported compared to earlier Trump-Russia allegations.
Operation Mockingbird context: historic precedent for intelligence-community-influenced media messaging.
6. The Indestructibility of Lawfare?
Despite rising public awareness, very few reforms have succeeded in curbing lawfare. Its architects operate through legitimate legal channels, shielded by institutional prestige, media complicity, and selective enforcement. Even when challenged, cases like Perkins Coie v. Trump Administration show that victory in court doesn’t reverse the structural advantage.
7. Who Holds the Power—and Why It’s So Hard to Change
Elite law firms hold so much power because they have the experience to say the right things, the connections to judges and regulators, and the influence to shape how laws are applied. When they make a legal argument—like using the 14th Amendment to remove a candidate from the ballot—they usually pick a court where the judge is sympathetic to their side. This is called “judge shopping.” The firm can choose where to file the case, and that choice often decides how the case begins and ends.
Large firms like Skadden and Perkins Coie dominate due to:
Massive client bases and government contract leverage (https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/perkins-coie-government-contracts-lawyer-leaves-firm-it-battles-trump-order-2025-04-14)
Deep ties to regulators, judges, and political operatives
Control over key litigation pipelines, including election law, NGO lawsuits, and administrative filings
This grants lawfare practitioners near-monopoly power over constitutional interpretation, policy enforcement, and courtroom outcomes. Shifting away from these firms would require:
A pipeline of alternative firms with comparable experience and scale
Legal reforms or executive willingness to reassess access, clearance, and contract eligibility
A public-private legal infrastructure willing to confront political risk
8. Countermeasures: What Can Be Done
Transparency & Oversight: Investigations, exposés, and legislative hearings (https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/law-firms-trump-deals-clients-71b3616d)
Legislative Reforms: FARA updates, lawfare disclosure mandates (https://www.justice.gov/nsd-fara)
Bar Complaints: Ethics enforcement for weaponized litigation
Counter-litigation: Proactive suits against unconstitutional lawfare
Public Accountability: Naming/shaming firms, encouraging clients to shift
State AGs & Legislatures: Audit contracts, pursue coordinated responses
Strategic Investment: Build up non-partisan firms to compete
The task is monumental. Progress may require years, sustained funding, and legal innovation. But acknowledging the imbalance is the first step.
9. Appendix: Related Cases and Developments
Groff v. DeJoy – Religious liberty upheld at SCOTUS.
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health – Reversal of Roe v. Wade; aggressive lawfare response followed.
Little Sisters of the Poor – Repeated litigation over religious conscience exemptions.
Gates Vaccine Lawsuits – Ongoing global cases related to vaccine injuries and government contracts.
Whistleblower Retaliation (FBI) – Pattern of punitive actions against agents exposing misconduct.
NGO Influence Operations – Coordination between international nonprofits, law firms, and U.S. regulatory agencies.
USA v. Daniel Goodwyn – DOJ sentenced a non-violent Jan. 6 protester to 7 years in prison for “obstruction” despite no violent or property-related offenses. Example of lawfare via overcriminalization and selective prosecution. https://thefederalist.com/2025/06/09/bidens-department-of-justice-sent-a-texan-to-7-years-in-prison-for-no-crime/
Some rulings that seem in line with the Constitution.
Trump v. J. G. G.
Docket Number: 24A931
Court: US Supreme Court
Date: April 7, 2025
SCOTUS ruled in favor of the Trump administration. This ruling reaffirms a stronger executive hand under the Alien Enemies Act, at least when the procedural posture is correct.
Department of Education v. California
Docket Number: 24A910
Court: US Supreme Court
Date: April 4, 2025
SCOTUS ruled in favor of the government (Trump administration)
Advocate Christ Medical Center v. Kennedy
Docket Number: 23-715
Court: US Supreme Court
Date: April 29, 2025
Catholic Charities Bureau, Inc. v. Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission
Docket Number: 24-154
Court: US Supreme Court
Date: June 5, 2025
SCOTUS ruled in favor of Catholic Charities Bureau.
Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services
Docket Number: 23-1039
Court: US Supreme Court
Date: June 5, 2025
SCOTUS ruled in favor of Ames, discrimination of a heterosexual woman (favored a lesbian woman).
Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos
Docket Number: 23-1141
Court: US Supreme Court
Date: June 5, 2025
SCOTUS ruled that Mexico's complaint did not plausibly allege that the defendant gun manufacturers aided and abetted gun dealers' unlawful sales of firearms to Mexican traffickers.
Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County
Docket Number: 23-975
Court: US Supreme Court
Date: May 29, 2025
The Supreme Court clarified that NEPA requires agencies to focus on the environmental effects of the proposed project itself, not on separate projects that are distinct in time or place.
Some of the above cases may be back in court in the future.
This Substack is for informational and commentary purposes only. All claims are based on publicly available sources and are presented as political analysis, not legal conclusions. No assertion is made of unlawful conduct by any individual or organization unless supported by formal public record.
As always, do your own research; make up your own mind.
References to other sources do not necessarily reflect my opinions, and I make no claim to their veracity or completeness. I provide them for your consideration.
(AI may have been used in this article.)
God bless you, God bless President Trump and team, and God bless America!
Stay calm - President Trump is a businessman who operates strategically, and not everything will make sense at first. His plan to shrink government and Make America Great Again is a process, not an overnight fix. Trust the long game, not just the headlines.
Disclaimer:
This report is for informational and commentary purposes only. All claims are based on publicly available sources and are presented as political analysis, not legal conclusions. No assertion is made of unlawful conduct by any individual or organization unless supported by formal public record.
This message reflects my personal perspective on current events. While I strive for accuracy, please verify details through official sources linked above. If sharing, I encourage readers to include this disclaimer to ensure clarity.
United we stand. Divided we fall. We must not let America fall.
VoteTexas.gov, https://www.votetexas.gov/get-involved/index.html
Until next time…
Please share your thoughts in the comments. Or email me, and let’s have a problem-solving conversation. I hope we can create a caucus with positive, back-to-the-founders’-dream-for-America results. Have a topic you want to know more about?
Some housekeeping…
Going forward, you may need to check your spam folder. And please mark this address as ‘not spam.’ If the newsletter isn’t in your spam folder either, you should look in the Promotions tab.
You can always see everything on the website, RationalAmerican.org.
Thanks again for reading! I’m glad you’re here!