Will You Survive? How Trump’s Upheaval is Reshaping Your Legal Career

Will You Survive? How Trump’s Upheaval is Reshaping Your Legal Career

By Chere B. Estrin

I had the honor of delivering the keynote address for the Illinois Paralegal Association conference. Initially, we envisioned a lighthearted discussion on emerging job trends in the legal field where opportunities were growing and how professionals could position themselves for success. However, in just a few short weeks, the rapid and sweeping changes implemented by the Trump administration transformed the conversation entirely. What was meant to be a career-focused talk became a critical discussion on the profound shifts reshaping the legal profession. Today, I want to share that message with you.

The following is from that presentation:

It is an honor to be before you today to discuss one of the most pressing topics in the legal world: the sweeping changes brought about by the Trump administration and their impact on our profession. Now, I know what you’re thinking: politics can be a dangerous game. But do not worry; today, we will focus on the legal, economic, and practical ramifications of these changes without getting caught in the crossfire of political debates.

I truly don’t care if you lean to the far right, are stretching far left or are in between. We are not addressing politics.

We will talk about pros and cons of the administration’s changes and how it affects your profession. Just so you know, my mother was a dyed-in-the-wool Republican and my father, a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat. Dinners at our house were, let’s say, very interesting. 

From judicial appointments to executive orders directly targeting law firms, to ramifications of tariff wars, the profession is experiencing a seismic shift. Some changes bring opportunity, others uncertainty, and all require adaptation. Today, we will discuss strategies to ensure that legal professionals not only survive but thrive in this unpredictable terrain.

“These fundamental shifts threaten the very foundations of our justice system. The Trump administration has launched an unprecedented war against the legal community, and with every passing day, the target list grows.”

The Legal Landscape Now

Whether you love him, hate him, or fall somewhere in between, there is no denying that Trump’s policies are reshaping the industry in ways that will be felt for years.

Some of the most significant areas include:

1. Regulatory Changes – The deregulatory agenda in healthcare, finance, and environmental law has introduced significant uncertainty. With the rollback of federal oversight, companies now tackle emerging compliance hurdles and increasing demand for compliance legal professionals. Legal teams are navigating shifting regulatory landscapes, interpreting new policies, and mitigating liability risks to ensure corporate adherence to new laws.
   
2. Judicial Appointments – A significant reshaping of the judiciary, particularly to the Supreme Court and federal appellate courts, has reshaped the judiciary. These appointments are already influencing rulings on key areas, including administrative law, corporate litigation, and constitutional law. The lasting effects are significant: a judiciary that leans more conservatively affecting decisions on consumer protection, employment disputes, and regulatory oversight, and reshaping the legal strategies of businesses and advocacy groups.
   
3. Executive Orders, Law Firm Targeting and Banishment of DEI – Recent executive orders have not only altered the business terrain but have placed firms under direct scrutiny, such as the cases of Perkins Coie and Covington & Burling [see below]. These actions have created chilling effects, prompting firms to reassess their risk exposure before taking on politically sensitive clients. Targeting legal entities raises concerns about government interference in legal representation and has broader implications for the independence and responsibilities of law firms in an increasingly polarized environment. Trump has furthered outlawed DEI, and consequences are having a tremendous impact on the legal community.

Trump initiated a series of aggressive actions against the legal community, with an expanding list of targeted law firms. 

Trump isn’t just going after his rivals as promised on the campaign trail, Trump is also going after lawyers of his rivals. He sends a clear message to anyone thinking about representing clients opposing him – differ with me, and I will come after you.

Picking fights with lawyers is tricky. They are smart. Some stay quiet out of fear of retribution, but many are fighters. You cannot control them by threatening to run someone against them in an election. They know their rights, and fight battles in their home court in front of judges, also lawyers. When attacked, lawyers will work for free to defend themselves and causes they believe in.

There’s a bigger issue in all this chaos. For centuries, lawyers have enjoyed considerable freedom from consequences in deciding who they represent, even if the defendant is accused of horrible crimes. Everyone is entitled to a good defense and fair trial. The sin of a client rarely rubs off on the lawyer, whose work even in helping the guilty, retains an air of respect.

Trump’s actions change that, and lawyers now must think about their brand, and the prospect that one day they might have to switch from the representor to the represented, if they choose the wrong side. Do you take cases attacking Trump actions or defending them? Do you collaborate with companies lined up on the left or the right? 

The decision where to stand has long range consequences and potentially “bet the firm” risks. There will be “MAGA” firms, and “opposition” firms. How do you pick a side? It’s a challenging decision in today’s mega-firm environment, with thousands of lawyers with diverse political perspectives working in countries worldwide. 

Some worry about what association with firms taking these and their future careers, and potential for retribution if the firm takes the wrong case. New cases may pass conflict of interest checks but not moral conflict. 

Trump has issued executive orders targeting two law firms representing his perceived enemies, and attacked firms and law schools he says are violating presidential initiatives against diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts.

He took direct aim using executive power to punish those representing his perceived enemies. He issued executive orders restricting access to classified information and federal buildings, crippling ability to serve certain clients. This is not just an attack on individual firms; it is an attack on the principle of legal representation.

Perkins Coie, Covington & Burling and Paul Weiss

One firm, Perkins Coie, an AmLaw firm (top revenue producing), has been harshly impacted. Trump’s executive order limited access to government resources sending shockwaves throughout the legal profession. It is without precedent. Never has a sitting president issued an order specifically designed to undermine a law firm.

On March 6, Trump directed federal agencies to terminate contracts with Perkins Coie “to the extent permitted by law,” to limit the firm’s 1,200 attorneys access to federal buildings and employees, and to halt all security clearances. No Perkins employee can enter a federal building. I guess if I wanted a passport, I could not get into the building. The order claimed the firm compiled a dossier critical of Trump while representing Clinton, and − referencing DEI policies − discriminated hiring based on race.

Security clearances give access to classified information and allow firms to represent companies with sensitive government information. Perkin’s federal contracting clients include Microsoft, Northrop Grumman and other huge companies. Government records show that other firms involved in the lawsuits also have been federal contractors such as Arnold & Porter, Cleary Gottlieb and WilmerHale – all AmLaw firms. 

The Perkins executive order suspends national security clearances because it was part of commissioning the Russian dossier about Trump during the 2016 election. The firm warns of far-reaching consequences if the order remains. This means the firm cannot represent clients with government contracts. 

“By punishing a law firm for its advocacy on behalf of clients whom the President disfavors, the Executive Order is designed to have a chilling effect extending far beyond Perkins Coie,” the firm wrote in its TRO request.

The Judge’s response? “Regardless of whether the president dislikes the firm’s clients, dislikes the litigation positions the law firm takes in vigorous representation of those clients or dislikes the results Perkins achieved, issuing an executive order targeting the firm based on the president’s dislike of the political positions of the firm’s clients is retaliatory and runs head-on into First Amendment protection.”

Trump also moved to restrict security clearances for Covington & Burling, the largest firm in the U.S., over representation of former Special Counsel Jack Smith, who brought two criminal cases against Trump. As of this writing, Covington has not yet sought to challenge the order. 

Trump called Smith “deranged” accusing him of a politically motivated “witch hunt.” Trump faced criminal charges in two other cases. In one of only four cases to go to trial, Trump was convicted in New York state court of 34 felony charges involving hush money paid to a porn star. Trump has vowed to hold “accountable” officials responsible for the criminal cases.

The reliance of lawyers on security clearances to access serve clients is a part of their practice. “By removing these security clearances, they removed a piece of their livelihood, and they’ve done that without due process of law,” American Bar Association President William Bay said in a statement that clients have a right to access lawyers without government interference. “The government has decided to punish two prominent law firms because they represent parties that the administration does not like.”

Every morning now, as I get up, I turn on the morning news to see what occurred while I was asleep. This morning, I learned Trump issued an executive order suspending security clearances of Mark Pomerantz and those at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison (AmLaw firm). The order also restricts government access to lawyers and employees at the New York-based law firm. Pomerantz oversaw the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office’s investigation into Trump and his business practices. Pomerantz retired years ago from Paul Weiss.

Law Firms Turn Their Backs

Perkins Coie could not get a firm to defend them. According to reports, the firm went to every major law firm and was turned down because those firms did not want to face the same retribution. Finally, Williams & Connolly, a major DC firm, accepted the case. 

Mark Elias, a lawyer to Democrats who until 202, was Perkins Coie’s primary political law attorney, critiqued the lack of large law firms rallying behind those who lost security clearances. 

Elias says, “The way Trump targeted the firms could go against the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment. Trump’s executive orders terminating security clearances and taking other actions against two prominent law firms may violate constitutional protections and represent exceptional acts of retribution against lawyers who have crossed him in the past, according to legal experts”. 

Trump has expanded attacks to include law schools and firms that support diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. These efforts – representing a more just and representative legal system, are now considered violations of presidential policy.

Just a couple of days ago, a letter has been issued by some AmLaw lawyers called The Associate Open Letter, which is anonymous, asks supporters to list their firms and class year and had 278 signatories at 2pm EDT. It is representing an array of top firms, including Davis Polk & Wardwell, Debevoise & Plimpton, Kirkland & Ellis and Latham & Watkins. However, the 278 signatures could not even qualify as a tiny drop in a bucket. 

The letter writing protest was tried in 2020 where an open letter from Lawyers Defending Democracy was signed by more than 1,500 attorneys and you can see where that led – nowhere. 

The Real Danger: Fear.

The resounding impact of these actions is fear.

• Law firms are reconsidering which clients they take. The political risk of defending the “wrong” client is now greater than ever.
• Legal professionals are questioning their careers and worry that association with a politically charged case could lead to long-term retribution and failure to get jobs elsewhere.
• Firms are rewriting policies and web content to minimize DEI initiatives and hiring practices. They wiped off DEI policies from websites, used to generate new hiring and clients. 

This is the real goal of these executive orders: not just to punish individual firms, but to send a message to the entire legal community: representing the wrong client could cost you everything.

The Broader Implications: A Shift in Legal Strategy

In response, law firms face difficult choices:

1. Stay neutral? Some firms may attempt to balance their client roster, avoiding overt political affiliations. But neutrality is no longer an option.
2. Choose a side? Others may embrace a political identity, becoming known as either “MAGA law firms” or “opposition law firms.” This carries both financial and reputational risks.
3. Reassess long-term business strategy? Large firms, with diverse political perspectives among their thousands of attorneys, now face internal conflict over the risks and rewards of certain cases.

These decisions are not just legal or financial. They are existential. In today’s legal climate, taking the wrong case could be a “bet-the-firm” risk.

The Call to Action: Defending the Rule of Law.

The attacks so far are not isolated incidents, they are test cases. If these actions go unchallenged, what stops the administration from expanding its targets?

• Will future executive orders strip legal protections from other firms, bar associations, or law schools?
• Will attorneys be forced to pass political loyalty tests to retain access to government clients or contracts?
• Will the legal profession be restructured by political intimidation?

Elizabeth G. Oyer, the pardon attorney for the DOJ, was fired March 7, 2025, and asserts her termination resulted from refusal to recommend restoration of firearm rights to Mel Gibson, who lost these rights in a 2011 misdemeanor domestic violence conviction. Oyer was instructed by supervisors to include Gibson in the group recommendation, citing his personal relationship with President Trump. Oyer declined.

The American Bar Association, trial lawyer associations, and advocacy groups have sounded alarms. But individual lawyers and legal professionals must also take a stand.

History will judge how the legal community responded at this moment. Will we allow fear to reshape our profession, or will we defend the very principles that define it? So far, radio silence. 

The rule of law depends on our answer.

Legal Demand

Shifts in regulation will likely drive law firm demand. Given the highly political nature of these aims and the precedent of the first Trump administration, legal challenges to changing regulations are likely. Furthermore, recent Supreme Court decisions curbing the power of regulatory agencies set the stage for an additional litigation surge.

Corporate demand is likely to push an even larger boost of needed legal services. Corporate profits correlate with demand for legal services, because of increased investment, spending, and dealmaking that companies overflowing with cash tend to make. If the promise to significantly lower corporate taxes comes to fruition, companies would be expected to see a substantial boost in profits – resulting in more legal work.

Legal and Insurance Sectors 

• Legal Gold Rush: Lawyers are bracing for a surge in immigration and compliance cases, potentially filling their coffers with new revenue streams. With stricter immigration enforcement, there is a surge in the need for immigration attorneys who specialize in deportation defense, asylum cases, and visa applications. However, our staffing organization has not yet seen an increase in job searches.
• In a strategic maneuver, Trump’s recent executive orders are set to revolutionize the legal and insurance industries, unlocking substantial revenue and unprecedented growth. These directives, aimed at deregulation, enhanced immigration enforcement, and healthcare reforms, are creating a fertile environment for law firms and insurance companies.
• The insurance industry is positioned to reap benefits. Insurance companies are revising policies complying with new healthcare regulations and developing innovative insurance products to cover emerging risks. Enhanced immigration and trade policies necessitate advanced risk management, allowing insurance firms to offer comprehensive solutions tailored to the new regulatory environment equally, of course, more legal demand.
• The alterations in healthcare regulations necessitate legal professionals to assist in adapting to new insurance coverage mandates. Constitutional law and civil rights attorneys may see a rise in cases challenging the executive orders. Areas expected to benefit include insurance industry – defense and plaintiff- healthcare, regulatory, environment, compliance and more.
• Trump’s executive orders significantly altered the regulatory framework, presenting both challenges and opportunities. Law firms of all sizes are positioned to benefit from the heightened demand for specialized legal services.
• Lawyers in international trade and corporate restructuring will be in high demand as businesses adjust to new trade policies and tariffs.
• Paralegals and legal analysts may have expanded workload. The evolving landscape requires extensive research, documentation, and case preparation, elevating the role of paralegals in supporting complex cases. Legal analysts interpret implications of new orders, offering strategic insights into businesses and law firms.
• Labor & Employment law and discrimination cases: A huge uptick coming. This week, Trump shared an article with a pink triangle symbol alarming critics as this is blatantly reminiscent of Nazism. An upside-down pink triangle was featured in a Washington Times opinion article by Jeremy Hunt, Chairman of the advocacy group, Veterans on Duty. The pink star was a symbol of a gay person by the Nazis in World War II. “Such actions are frighteningly reminiscent for both LGBTQ+ people and Jews of our long histories of persecution, which have included tactics we’re seeing today, such as scapegoating, book bans, destruction of information access, and control/confiscation of identity documents like passports. “ 

Firing federal employees for performance when reviews were excellent; harassment; bullying; LGBTQ exclusion; and more will cause a rise in employment and labor litigation. 

Targeting Lawyers, Not Just Laws.

Throughout history, lawyers have represented controversial clients across a wide spectrum of legal battles. From civil rights struggles to corporate disputes, from criminal defense to national security litigation, legal professionals have stood as defenders of individuals and institutions, often in the face of formidable government power.

But today, lawyers are the targets.

Trump is not attacking his political opponents as he continually promised during his campaign. Instead, he goes after their legal representation, a tactic sending a chilling message: defend my adversaries, and I will come after you.

• The administration’s executive orders targeting firms are an attempt to silence legal opposition.
• The revocation of security clearances is a strategic move to cripple firms representing clients the administration dislikes.
• The scrutiny of law firms’ business dealings is an effort to intimidate and deter legal advocacy.

This is a dangerous precedent threatening the fundamental principle that everyone, no matter how powerful or powerless, has the right to legal representation.

You would think lawyers would not allow themselves to be bullied.

Despite radio silence from the legal community on Trump’s executive orders to dismantle law firms, starting fights with lawyers is risky. Lawyers are trained to challenge authority, uphold legal protections, and fight for justice. They are not swayed by political intimidation, nor subject to electoral pressure.

History has shown that when lawyers are attacked, they do not retreat, they are fully trained to fight back. And in this fight, they may become the strongest opposition the administration faces.

Trump’s second term is expected to turn heavily towards deregulation, impacting various sectors from energy to finance. His administration plans to roll back green regulations that currently limit oil and gas drilling and coal mining, potentially boosting traditional energy sectors while curtailing government investment in renewable energy.
Additionally, Trump has expressed intent to rescind unspent funds from the Inflation Reduction Act, a significant climate law, which could hinder growth in industries involved in electric vehicles, solar power, and wind energy.

Corporate demand is likely to push a larger boost in legal work. Corporate profit correlates with demand for legal services, resulting from increased investment, spending, and dealmaking that companies flush with cash tend to make. If the Trump promises to significantly lower corporate tax rates come to fruition, companies would be expected to see a substantial boost in profits meaning they will utilize law firms even more. Expect to see more jobs in the corporate transactional arena.

Corporate paralegals are always hard to find, and recent changes call for more experienced paralegals. I currently have a position for a Corporate Paralegal Manager paying up to $200,000 plus bonus. Reaching way beyond the market is an indication of how desperate employers are, and the new changes will only increase the demand.

Overseas operations are likely to face significant challenges. The European Union, and especially countries like Germany, could experience economic downturns because of potential trade initiatives the administration favors. This could pose substantial threats to transactional demand for law firms’ international offices.

While trade wars have adverse effects on business, regardless of the outcome for governments involved, firms may see a temporary increase in demand in 2025. This could be due to companies’ reactions to new trade policies such as relocating operations, selling assets, or engaging in litigation. In the long term, however, such conflicts have traditionally dampened growth rather than promoted it.

Tariffs & Expenses

The tariffs Trump initiated represent a significant shift in US economic policy, with potentially far-reaching implications. While the intention behind tariffs is to bolster domestic manufacturing, the reality is that American manufacturing currently lacks the capacity to substitute its needed imports at a comparable cost anytime soon. If US corporations could, there would be no need for tariffs.

I personally see these tariff wars as childlike: “I am going to raise tariffs by 25%.” “Oh, yeah, well, I’m raising them to 50%” “Really? Well, then I am cutting off your electricity to Minnesota.” “Oh, yeah?, Well, then I am taking away champagne from America.” It’s like two five-year olds. Any minute, I expect them to say, “I’m gonna tell Mommy on  you.”

An indication of just how upset corporations are by tariffs: This week, the administration received an unsigned letter from Tesla (we all know who runs Tesla) strongly urging Trump to stop tariff wars as Tesla was very vulnerable and would lose. An unsigned letter? What does that say? Fear.

Price Gouging
As the legal and insurance sectors expand, there is an inherent risk of price gouging driven by the increased demand for services. Clients and policyholders need to adopt proactive measures to safeguard their interests. Transparency in communication is critical. Understanding fee structures, law firm policies, billing guidelines, setting clear expectations, and asking questions helps prevent unexpected charges and ensure fair pricing. 

Billing Rates and Inflation
Inflation offers certain advantages for law firms. In response to the post-pandemic inflation surge, many firms have integrated inflation into their rate-setting strategies, ensuring that their prices automatically adjust. Current trends indicate clients have shown minimal resistance to inflation-driven rate increases. If this pattern persists, it could provide a financial buffer for firms in a renewed inflationary climate, particularly as their own operational costs continue to rise.

The Impact of Global Events on Law Firms
While short-term factors are crucial for understanding law firms’ near-term landscape, it is equally important to consider prospects a few years into the future and beyond. While the current fluctuating terrain paints a picture of a market that is reactive and adaptable in the short term, the broader horizon reveals deeper challenges and uncertainties that could shape the legal industry for years.

Litigation Against Trump
The disruption of both domestic and international stability is likely to drive a short-term increase in legal demand as clients adapt. However, long-term implications remain uncertain.

Here are specifics: California filed 123 separate lawsuits in Trump’s first term – about one new lawsuit every two weeks. California was far from the only one. The Trump Administration’s litigation record was terrible – winning only one case in four by some estimates. The Trump folks should do better this time. But they could still lose more often than they win.  Money invested in litigating against the Administration could be well spent.

Why did Trump lose so often? The main reason is that, rather than investing time and expertise to create rules that would hold up in court, the Administration rushed the process and put out rules taking extreme positions with a notable lack of good data and careful analysis. They were fast and loose. They got a little better but not much. They suffered setbacks even in front of judges appointed by Trump. We are seeing this same situation replay now in his second term. 

Employment uncertainty.
It is critical to monitor whether external economic factors such as ongoing tariff wars and declining consumer confidence impact legal hiring trends. Further, the hundreds of thousands of federal employees recently laid off or more accurately fired, present a problem finding law firm employment in the private sector.   

Law firms historically do not like to hire government employees because of beliefs that Government employees: a) do not understand the law firm environment b) don’t know how to bill time c) have no sense of urgency and can’t cope with the pace d) have had a walk in the park instead of the stress and sophistication of work found in the firm and e) would not know how to deal with multiple clients. While all of this is perception and not necessarily truth, that is how the law firm market functions. 

DEI. 
The Trump administration ended DEI programs and certain long-standing initiatives. Federal contractors must now certify that they do not operate any program promoting DEI or consider race, color, sex, sexual preference, religion or national origin in ways that violate the nation’s civil rights laws. The administration has directed agencies to identify discriminatory practices in various sectors and propose plans to deter such programs through litigation. Let’s call the administration and tell them there’s a law firm DEI program hiding down the street in the basement of the Flores family.

Some firms, out of fear, have removed website references from DEI programs previously used to attract clients and candidates. These firms have also removed references from branding and firm culture. The American Bar Association urged Trump to roll back its executive order calling for federal investigations into diversity and inclusion efforts by bar associations, citing First Amendment rights.

The ABA, (with about 150,000 members) is the federal accreditor of U.S. law schools, and has made DEI one of its four core goals.

Gender identity. 
On Trump’s first day, the administration declared that the government would recognize only two sexes: male and female. The administration directed agencies to remove “gender” from all documents and use the term “sex” instead, and to cancel or disband any employee resource groups “that inculcate or promote gender ideology or have done so in the past.” This includes banning bathrooms with combined gender access, removing he/she identity, and more. 

In addition, the administration directed State Department staff to stop processing passport applications seeking to change the applicant’s sex. Trump signed executive orders seeking to ban transgender troops from serving openly in the military and to end gender-affirming medical treatment for children under the age of 19.

This is causing an increased demand in employment law for attorneys and paralegals. 

Immigration
We expected to see an increase in demand for immigration attorneys. Our organization has not. I am unaware what other staffing organizations have seen. However, speculation leads me to believe that lower income immigrants cannot afford attorneys. Those increasing positions may be going to legal aid or other agencies and most of the more highly visible employment opportunities are with business immigration attorneys. 

Mergers and Acquisitions
“Corporate M&A could become more active, as a more hands-off, laissez-faire philosophy comes to the fore at the Justice Department’s antitrust division,” said consultant Bruce MacEwen, president of Adam Smith, Esq. That would require more demand for corporate transactional attorneys and paralegals with solid experience. The more profitable corporations get, the more M&A business there is. 

Climate Change
The administration’s change regarding environmental and climate change policies will increase positions for lawyers, paralegals and environmental specialists. 

Private Credit
“Money practices are widely expected to benefit” according to consultant Kent Zimmermann of the Zeughauser Group. “That includes private credit and finance, particularly where those practices intersect with sectors that are on the receiving end of increasing demand and investment under Trump 2.0.”

As traditional banks became subject to more onerous lending rules in the wake of the Great Recession, private credit in particular boomed. It is now a  $1.7 trillion industry and top law firms have built up their private-credit practices to meet the needs.

Antitrust
Merger enforcement is not all there is to antitrust enforcement. While the Trump administration will likely allow more mergers, it will probably continue the Biden administration’s practice of investigating and litigating antitrust claims against large companies.

Prediction of Jobs Coming Up for Legal Professionals as a Result of Administration Changes:

• Compliance Director
• Regulatory Experts
• Paralegal Manager
• Practice Support Manager
• eDiscovery Manager
• Complex Business Litigation Paralegals
• AI Experts
• Climate Control Experts
• Corporate Transactional Attorneys and Paralegals
• Healthcare and Insurance Specialists
• Education Experts (related to destruction of Dept. of Education)
• Litigation Attorneys and Paralegals
• Labor & Employment Law Legal Professionals
• Workplace Legal Reforms Experts
• Class Actions Attorneys and Legal Professionals
• Food/Agriculture Experts
• Religious Liberty vs. LGBTQ+ Rights
• Tax Attorneys and Paralegals
• Private Equity Roles
• Gender Discrimination Experts
• First Amendment Experts
• Appellate Court Experts
• Legal Operations
• International Law Experts
• Finance Experts

CLOSING

As we stand at the crossroads of unprecedented change, one truth remains unshaken: you, the paralegals, the unsung warriors of justice are more essential than ever. The legal landscape has been reshaped in ways we never anticipated, and yet, through every challenge, every uncertainty, every moment of upheaval, you have stood strong.

You are more than just the backbone of the legal profession, you are its driving force. You research, you strategize, you build cases, you find the facts that change lives. You are the difference between chaos and order, between injustice and fairness. And in times like these, when policies shift overnight, when laws are tested, and when justice feels like it’s hanging by a thread, you are the ones holding the line.

But let me be clear: this is not the time to stand still. This is the time to fight back, not with anger, but with knowledge. Not with fear, but with expertise. Stay ahead of the trends. Know the laws before they change. Be so indispensable that no firm, no attorney, no court can function without you.

You must not only adapt to change, but you must also command it. Learn modern technologies. Sharpen and share your expertise. Anticipate the next challenge before it arrives. Be proactive, be relentless, be the authority in your field. The legal world is shifting but let me tell you this – those who stay ahead, who push forward, who refuse to be sidelined, will be the ones who shape the future.

So, I leave you with this: Never underestimate your power. Never doubt your value. Never think for one second that what you do is anything less than extraordinary. Because in a time of profound change, great professionals rise. And I know, beyond any doubt, that you are those professionals.

Now go out there. Stay vigilant. Stay invaluable. And above all – stay unstoppable.

Thank you.

About the Author

Chere Estrin has over 20 years of experience in the staffing arena, including executive positions in law firms, litigation support companies, and the legal staffing divisions of a $5billion publicly held corporation. She is CEO of Estrin Legal Staffing, a nationwide staffing organization. Ms. Estrin was founder of the Paralegal Knowledge Institute, an online CLE organization. She publishes the prestigious digital magazine, KNOW, the Magazine for Paralegals, and is the former Editor-in-Chief of Sue, the Magazine for Women Litigators. She is also the author of 10 books about legal careers for attorneys and legal professionals.

Ms. Estrin’s contributions to the legal industry have been significant, and she continues to play an active role in shaping the future of legal staffing and training. She writes the popular,

award-winning blog, The Estrin Report, and has been interviewed by CBS News along with many top publications, such as The Wall Street Journal, Fortune Magazine, Forbes.com, Los Angeles Times, Entrepreneur Magazine, Newsweek, The Chicago Tribune, The Daily Journal, ABA Journal, Above the Law, ALM, Law360 and many others. She has also been a speaker for many prestigious organizations and written hundreds of articles.

As the Co-Founding Member and President of the Organization of Legal Professionals (OLP), Ms. Estrin has guided the association’s development and implementation of the eDiscovery and Litigation Support certification exams (first in the country) along with Pearson Publications, a $7 billion corporation specializing in certification exams and educational publishing. She was also the Education Director designing, creating and executing online, live training programs with an on-call roster of over 500 instructors throughout the world. Currently, she provides webinars on legal career matters for LawPractice and Lawline, two of the largest attorney CLE online training organizations.
Ms. Estrin is a co-founding member of the International Practice Management Association (IPMA) and the Organization of Legal Professionals, composed of a prestigious Board of Governors inclusive of judges, an ABA President, and well-known attorneys. She is the recipient of the Los Angeles/Century City “Women of Achievement” award and recognized as One of the Top 50 Women in Los Angeles. Ms. Estrin has been writing The Estrin Report since 2005 and most recently launched her podcast, “Lawfully Employed”.

Reach out at: chere@estrinlegal.com or visit her website at EstrinLegalStaffing.com.