Sullivan & Cromwell is facing significant internal tensions after reports emerged that the firm quietly crossed a line partners were explicitly promised would not be crossed.
The Wall Street Journal has confirmed rumours circulating across Biglaw that a serious dispute is brewing within the firm over the extent of its representation of Donald Trump.
When Sullivan & Cromwell first took Trump on as a client, partner Bob Giuffra reportedly drew a clear boundary for the partnership regarding which matters the firm would handle.
Giuffra told partners the firm would represent Trump in his criminal appeal over the falsified business records conviction, as well as his appeal of the civil fraud judgment.
However, the Carroll cases, in which a jury found Trump had sexually abused and defamed E. Jean Carroll, were explicitly declared off limits for the firm’s involvement.
That assurance now appears to have been abandoned, with the Journal reporting that Sullivan & Cromwell has quietly moved to help Trump in territory partners were told was firmly out of bounds.
According to the Journal, the firm has stepped in to help Trump prepare a Supreme Court petition seeking review of the $83 million defamation verdict against him.
That verdict is separate from the earlier $5 million verdict that the Supreme Court had already declined to review, making this a distinct and potentially more significant legal intervention.
Giuffra himself is reportedly among the Sullivan & Cromwell lawyers carrying out this work, placing the partner who drew the original line at the centre of the controversy.
The reported reversal has deepened frustration among partners who accepted the firm’s Trump representation on the understanding that the Carroll cases represented a firm and final boundary.
The episode reflects a broader tension across major law firms as political pressures, client demands, and internal ethics debates increasingly collide at the highest levels of the legal profession.
Sullivan & Cromwell has built its reputation as one of Wall Street’s most prestigious firms, and internal disagreements of this nature carry significant weight for its standing and partnership cohesion.