King & Spalding Asks to Withdraw from Marriage Litigation

After a week of criticism from gay-rights groups, King & Spalding reversed itself today and asked to withdraw as counsel in charge of defending the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

In a statement, firm chairman Robert Hays Jr. said the process for vetting its involvement in the litigation was “inadequate.” Hays took responsibility for “any mistakes” and apologized.

(Related: former U.S. solicitor general Paul Clement, who has been leading the litigation, is resigning in protest and will carry on with the lawsuits.)

Organizations that advocate for gays and lesbians, most prominently the Human Rights Campaign based in Washington, have harshly criticized the firm’s involvement with the litigation and promised to target the firm’s clients and recruits. A news conference had been scheduled for Tuesday morning in Atlanta, where the law firm is based.

King & Spalding’s involvement in the litigation became public one week ago, and Hays’ statement says the firm’s attempt to withdraw began soon after. “Last week we worked diligently through the process required for withdrawal,” the statement says.

“In reviewing this assignment further, I determined that the process used for vetting this engagement was inadequate,” the statement continues. “Ultimately I am responsible for any mistakes that occurred and apologize for the challenges this may have created.”

The office of House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), who hired King & Spalding, condemned the announcement. “The speaker is disappointed in the firm’s decision and its careless disregard for its responsibilities to the House in this constitutional matter,” spokesman Brendan Buck said in an e-mailed statement.

But in filings in federal court in Manhattan, King & Spalding asks the court to give the House additional time to make arrangements. Withdrawal requires the approval of the court, according to the filings.

Rep. Nancy Pelsoi (D-Calif.), who has opposed the House’s involvement in the marriage lawsuits, took heart in Hays’ letter, said Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill. “Leader Pelosi shares Mr. Hays’ apparent concerns with the lack of transparency and accountability in the way this contract was signed,” Hammill said in an e-mailed statement. “She also vigorously opposes using half a million taxpayer dollars or any taxpayer resources to defend discrimination, at a time when Republicans in Congress are cutting critical initiatives like education and infrastructure.”

The new court filings are signed by Richard Cirillo, a partner in King & Spalding’s New York office and, according to his firm profile, the chairman of the firm’s ethics committee. A hearing is scheduled for May 25 in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, according to the filings.

Hays did not elaborate on any vetting mistakes. A spokesman said the firm would have no comment beyond Hays’ statement.

Updated at 12:26 p.m. Photo by Zachary D. Porter/Daily Report.

Comments

[Terry Beckett]

King & Spaulding are a disgrace withdrawing their services in the face of criticism.They have a professional and fiduciary to their clients, whoever they are.

And they are not being paid to judge but to represent the interests of their clients.

[anonymous]

Journalists are overlooking an important angle in this story. The court is NOT required to approve a party's Substitution of Counsel -- there is a constitutional right to select one's own counsel. The only reason why a Motion To Withdraw is filed is if the party is REFUSING to change law firms -- i.e., if the law firm wants out of the case but the party is refusing to find substitute counsel. So it is very interesting that such a Motion was filed here.

[Michael Bennett]

DOMA is an absurd law. No one, neither private citizen nor lawyer, has any obligation to follow laws that are discriminatory or which given even the appearance of being discriminatory. Want to defend Plessey v. Ferguson in light of Brown v. Board? Want to roll back Gideon v. Wainwright? Haven't we don enough damage to the Fourth Amendment without doing more damage to other areas of privacy? How about reversing Roe v. Wade and Griswold v. Connecticut? Good grief---this isn't a matter of zealous representation! This is a matter of doing the right thing because it is the right thing to do. Bravo, K&S!!!! After years of being on the wrong side in most of the cases you took in Atlanta and elsewhere, you finally did the right thing!!!!

[Atlanta Roofing]

Paul Clements' problem is that there are nine DOMA cases pending in several jurisdictions. King & Spalding has sufficient staff to assist; a six attorney firm is going to be stretched beyond its capacity to undertake this assignment. I'm not so sure that Boner will want to go that route. He may try to find another law firm.

[Harry Belafonte]

The intimidation and harassment engaged in by HRC and its ilk is truy disguisting. Why are they afraid to allow a law duly passed by the nation's elected representatives have its day in court?

[Jeff Spangler]

Apparently HRC also doesn't understand the role of attorneys in a Nation of Laws. Such arrogance on both sides!

[Daniel Artz]

As a lawyer, and one committed to the ethical obligations of lawyers (an apparently vanishing breed, I'm afraid), I'm deeply offended by this withdrawal. Paul Clement's letter of resignation from King & Spaulding hits the nail on the head - K&S had no obligation to undertake the representation of an unpopular side in this controversy in the first place, but, once having done so, it was cowardly and unprofessional of the firm to withdraw in the face of public criticism. Clarence Darrow is well remembered as much for his willingness to take on cases highly unpopular with the public as for his rhetoric; No one I know defends the actions of Leopold & Loeb, but Clarence Darrow should be remembered as a brave and professional advocate for accepting the representation and seeing it through. If public criticism can chase competent attorneys away from the representation of any unpopular cause, the adversarial system, and our system of justice, is at risk.

[jesus Christ]

Thank god for common sense. Kudos to the law firm!