Biglaw

Foley & Lardner To Feel Wrath Of The Lincoln Project

The firm distances itself from partner Cleta Mitchell.

By Kathryn Rubino on January 04, 2021 4:46 pm

Cleta Mitchell (image via Foley & Lardner)

Free advice for all Biglaw firms: you will be held accountable in the court of public opinion for the work you and your partners do. That’s a lesson Jones Day is well acquainted with. As is Porter Wright. And King & Spalding. And Hogan Lovells. You get the point. So if a partner at your firm plays a prominent role in one of the most shocking phone calls in American history, well, you’ve got some ‘splaining to do.

Of course I’m talking about Foley & Lardner partner Cleta Mitchell’s participation in Donald Trump’s harassing of Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to just “find 11,780 votes.” It seems that the never-Trump PAC The Lincoln Project has turned their attention to Biglaw over the incident.

There are already murmurs of Foley losing business over Mitchell’s  involvement in the debacle, and tweets like these from The Lincoln Project only ups the pressure.

And they aren’t the only PAC paying attention to Biglaw. MeidasTouch — remember they are the ones that actually drew first blood in the campaign against Jones Day — has turned their attention to Foley & Lardner. One the the PAC’s founders, Ben Meiselas, partner at Geragos & Geragos, has been very vocal about the firm’s involvement, specifically when Foley attorney Jason Villalba tweeted (though he’s since deleted it) about the now infamous phone call without condemning Mitchell’s involvement.

For their part, the firm has made a statement about Mitchell’s involvement, saying they’re “concerned” by it:

Foley & Lardner LLP is not representing any parties seeking to contest the results of the presidential election. In November, the firm made a policy decision not to take on any representation of any party in connection with matters related to the presidential election results. Our policy did allow our attorneys to participate in observing election recounts and similar actions on a voluntary basis in their individual capacity as private citizens so long as they did not act as legal advisers. We are aware of, and are concerned by, Ms. Mitchell’s participation in the January 2 conference call and are working to understand her involvement more thoroughly.

But critics are not impressed by it:

Listen — the firm has been on notice about Mitchell’s extremist political leanings for a long time. (She was famously part of an anti-gay rights crusade, attended the Amy Covid Barrett nomination celebration — without wearing a mask, natch — and worked to keep the Steve Bannon PAC donor rolls secret.) And just this past November, she went on Fox News to tell tall tales of voter fraud. It’s past time they decided what they’re going to do about it.

headshotKathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, and host of The Jabot podcast. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter (@Kathryn1).