General Counsels Navigate Politically Charged Climate in Selecting Outside Counsel
New York, NY — August 22, 2025 — As political polarization intensifies, general counsels (GCs) across the United States are grappling with complex decisions about selecting outside counsel, balancing legal expertise with reputational risks in a politically charged climate. A recent report from Law.com highlights how in-house legal teams are increasingly scrutinizing law firms’ political affiliations and public stances, particularly in relation to their associations with the Trump administration, as they weigh options for external legal support.
The evolving landscape has led some GCs to actively seek firms with anti-Trump credentials, while others prefer to retain less vocal lawyers to avoid potential backlash. Eric Whitaker, co-founder of GCs United, emphasized that in-house counsel must consider “reputational risks, impact on their companies, and how to protect their clients” when choosing external partners. This strategic shift comes amid concerns that outside pressures, such as public perception or political activism, could compromise a firm’s ability to represent clients effectively, as noted in posts on X by @CorpCounsel and @TheNLJ.
While many GCs have not yet pulled work from firms that secured deals with the Trump administration, several told Law.com they are redirecting new matters to firms that publicly opposed it. This trend reflects a broader caution among corporate legal departments, with some diversifying their outside counsel portfolios to mitigate risks tied to political controversies. “Ongoing concern that outside pressure might impact a firm’s ability to represent a client is prompting some GCs to diversify their options,” stated a post by @TheNLJ on August 20, 2025.
The decision-making process is further complicated by the broader regulatory and compliance challenges facing GCs in 2025. According to a report by Athennian, GCs are under increased scrutiny due to new regulations in areas like data privacy, ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance), and corporate transparency, which require robust legal strategies. In this context, selecting outside counsel with expertise in navigating multi-jurisdictional compliance and political sensitivities is critical. Legal compliance software that integrates regulatory updates and automates reporting is being recommended to streamline these efforts, allowing GCs to focus on strategic counsel selection.
The politically charged climate has also amplified the role of GCs as strategic advisors beyond traditional legal duties. Mohaimina Haque, an attorney and interim CEO at Tony Roma’s, noted in a Forbes article that GCs are increasingly seen as “natural problem solvers and leaders” capable of managing risks in complex environments. This perspective underscores the need for GCs to align with outside counsel who can navigate not only legal complexities but also the public and political implications of their work.
As the legal landscape continues to evolve, GCs are adopting a cautious yet proactive approach, leveraging technology and diversifying counsel to manage risks effectively. The ongoing debate over law firm affiliations highlights the delicate balance between legal strategy and public perception, ensuring that corporate legal departments remain agile in an era of heightened political scrutiny.