Amanda Terkel and Jennifer Bendery over at Huffington Post paint an even fuller picture of the misstep that was taking on the DOMA defense case at King & Spalding. News has gotten around about the part Coca-Cola may have played...
But the real shockwaves may have taken place within the firm, where, according to one insider, employees were at each other's throats over its decision to take on the case.
A source at the firm described the “mayhem” that ensued after employees learned King & Spalding agreed to defend DOMA.
“Management was divided, people were threatening to quit,” the source said. In addition, it was unclear if members of the firm’s Diversity Committee had been consulted ahead of time about taking on the case.
Bizarre, if true that the Diversity Committee was not consulted prior to signing on. It seems that would be exactly the benefit of having a diversity committee: to provide an opinion on a matter that is, ahem, diverse from the prevailing majority view.
I admit, I actually was a little surprised at the breadth and scale of the pushback K&S received, but I myself could have told them to expect it to not be unsubstantial.
The Huff piece paints a picture of a firm under fire from literally all quarters; clients, employees, the LGBT community of Atlanta who were making plans to protest their offices. The pressure sprang from both grass roots and the top organizations. From the grassroots came the very sweet story of Pam Rymin, an Atlantan straight ally and litigation paralegal at another firm. Rymin sent a rather withering email to a K&S managing partner she knew chastising the firm for taking the case. The email went viral in Atlanta. She expressed it was at odds with the firm's expressed progressive values.
"Their hypocrisy is over the top. Why would you want your firm to be associated with defending discrimination? Surely K&S is sufficiently profitable that it doesn’t need the hourly work that badly. It’s also quite a slap in the face to your GLBT employees." Rymin added.
Rymin was moved to write the email in defense of her gay coworker. She said:
"I have attached a photograph of a coworker who traveled to Connecticut to marry last year. Their commitment is as real as mine to my husband and doesn’t threaten me in any way. Engaging in efforts to further allow bigotry and hatred to hide behind the cloak of the law is despicable.
Way above the grassroots, LGBT advocacy org Human Rights Campaign confirmed to Greg Sargent at the WaPo that they had reached out to clients and expressed their concern. They stress they did not suggest or pressure any client to drop K&S. HRC's Fred Sainz told Sargent:
“We are an advocacy firm that is dedicated to improving the lives of gays and lesbians. It is incumbent on us to launch a full-throated educational campaign so firms know that these kinds of engagements will reflect on the way your clients and lawschool recruits think of your firm.”
Conservatives and not so conservatives are in
full-on meltdown because gay people
exercised their First Amendment Rights were mean, fascist old bullies. They now fear for the poor Gitmo detainees right to get top-drawer representation. Who knew they were so concerned for the right of accused terrorists to get a fair shake out of the legal system? That's new.
Also, the gays are engaged in the new McCarthyism. Well, except without the benefit of actually having any actual Governmental power behind them. There's that.
I don't know what they're all bitching about. K&S flat-out admitted they poorly vetted the case. These are standard questions you might ask in vetting, is this case going to help or hurt your public image? Will your firm be gathering or shedding prestige by being associated with this case? Is there a consensus among your employees, partners? Or might this case prove to be a divisive and incongruous to good working relationships? I guess they found out a little late the answer to those questions.
At the end of the day, the case still has the same lawyer, and he's found safe harbor at Bancroft, PLLC. The firm in the past has filed amicus briefs for the following groups:
Amicus Brief for Kids First Coalition, Christian Coalition of America, Concerned Women for America, Enough is Enough, Morality in Media, Inc., National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, National Fraternal Order of Police, National Law Center For Children and Families, and We Care America.
I recognize at least a good handful of these organizations as being some of the most regressive and repugnant anti-gay groups in America. Some of them you can find on the Southern Poverty Law Center's
list of 18 Anti-Gay Hate Groups. So it seems like this firm is a much better fit for Clement to defend the right of government to practice de jure discrimination against LGBT Americans. His partners will no doubt fully support his agenda, unlike the staff at K&S.
And I suspect if Bancroft, PLLC has filed briefs on behalf of Concerned Women of America and the Christian Coalition of America, when the LGBT community tries to exert pressure on them, like the Honey Badger, they won't give a shit.
Everyone wins.