Well, readers, the Paul, Weiss litigation exodus just claimed a major name.
Kannon Shanmugam — one of the most prominent Supreme Court litigators in private practice, a man who has argued 39 cases before the High Court — is leaving Paul, Weiss for Davis Polk & Wardwell. As Bloomberg Law reported, he and partner Masha Hansford will launch the firm’s new Supreme Court and appellate practice.
If you’ve been following the slow-motion litigation talent drain at Paul, Weiss since the firm’s ignominious capitulation to the Trump administration in March 2025, Shanmugam’s departure shouldn’t be entirely surprising. But it stings. This is the crown jewel of the firm’s appellate litigation practice walking out the door.
Keeping Law School Accessible When Federal Loans Fall Short
As federal borrowing caps tighten financing options for law students, one organization is stepping in to negotiate the terms they can't secure alone.
To briefly recap, Paul, Weiss became the first major Biglaw firm to bend the knee to Donald Trump, signing a deal that included $40 million in pro bono services and the elimination of all DEI programs in exchange for the rescission of an executive order targeting the firm. The fallout has been considerable. Litigation co-chair Karen Dunn, along with partners Bill Isaacson and Jeannie Rhee, bolted to start their own boutique to practice free from the constraints of the Trump deal. Former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Damian Williams departed for Jenner & Block — one of the firms actually fighting the executive orders in court, adding a certain poetic quality to the move. And that was just the beginning; even more litigation partners followed them out the door in the weeks that followed. Former Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson retired after four decades at the firm. Through all of it, the firm’s official posture was essentially that everything was fine, actually.
And now Shanmugam.
To his credit, Shanmugam was one of the only Biglaw partners to say anything publicly about the firm’s deal with Trump, though his comments were more in the way of explanation than full-throated endorsement. At the Aspen Ideas Festival last June, when asked directly to explain why Paul, Weiss decided to “cave,” he acknowledged the weight of the decision. The executive orders targeting firms, he said, “raise real issues concerning the rule of law and our legal system.” But, he added, “for the law firms that are on the receiving end of this, there are very practical considerations concerning the implications for the firms’ clients, and those implications were very real.” He described the firm as being “in the vortex” of competing imperatives. And at Pepperdine’s Caruso School of Law, Shanmugam described the broader attacks on legal institutions as “regrettable,” while also allowing that the legal profession doesn’t exactly have a viewpoint diversity problem working in its favor.
The Shanmugam departure has to be understood in the context of Paul, Weiss’s ongoing identity crisis. Following Brad Karp’s resignation — itself coming after revelations about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, compounding the reputational damage from the Trump deal — the firm’s new chair is M&A heavyweight Scott Barshay. Barshay was, by insider accounts, a vocal internal champion of the Trump capitulation, reportedly framing the cave as pragmatism. But the message his elevation sends is unmistakable: the future of Paul, Weiss is transactional work.
LexisNexis Practical Guidance Rolls Out Dedicated Practice Area for AI & Technology
The new generation of AI-related legal issues are inherently cross-disciplinary, implicating corporate law, intellectual property, data privacy, employment, corporate governance and regulatory compliance.
Turns out, the lateral move may have been telegraphed in a move we missed. Legal watchers were puzzled earlier this week when, in the Supreme Court case T.M. v. University of Maryland Medical System Corporation, Shanmugam, who had been counsel of record from the cert petition through the merits briefs, did not argue the case. Former Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar of Cooley LLP appeared on the docket and argued in Shanmugam’s place, despite not appearing anywhere on the briefs.
(Now, about that Prelogar angle, because it’s too good to skip over. Longtime Above the Law readers may recall that Shanmugam and Prelogar have a… bit of a history. Back in 2023, we covered the controversy when Shanmugam’s supplemental brief in a SCOTUS case described Prelogar’s government brief as — and this is a direct quote from the filing — “a hot mess.” Twitter had thoughts! The legal world had thoughts! Prelogar had thoughts! Now Prelogar stepped in to argue a case he’d briefed from scratch. The universe, apparently, has a sense of humor.)
But, over on Bluesky appellate litigator Bob Loeb of Orrick sussed out the clear signal Shanmugam was out at Paul, Weiss : “I knew something was up when I saw Kannon enter his name into the appellate transfer portal.”
Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, host of The Jabot podcast, and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. 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 or Bluesky @Kathryn1