Firms accommodating Trump's demands, and some workers openly opposing

The Great Resignation: When Professionals Say "No More" to Trump's Orders

In a bold move, John Morris, a seasoned professional, recently left his decade-long career at tech strategy giant Accenture. Why? To protest against the company's accommodation of President Donald Trump's orders on diversity, gender identity, and other contentious issues.

Morris, like many other American professionals, was appalled by the forced compliance of corporations. To him, it felt like a symbolic act of submission, undermining fundamental values of acceptance and equality.

"They're using this as a tactic to make large corporations bend their knee and demonstrate that we're not going to be a problem," Morris explains. "That, to me, is unacceptable."

Morris is part of a growing group of professionals who, despite the potential career repercussions, are stepping up to voice their disapproval. Yet, speaking out isn't easy. The fear of backlash is prominent, both online and in professional circles, as the line between protesting and professional suicide becomes increasingly blurred.

According to Morris, the fear of discussion is a significant hurdle. "There's a sense of unease about talking about what's happening," he explains. "How do you continue to advance professionally when something is fundamentally wrong?"

The actions of professionals like Morris are putting pressure on law firms, private companies, universities, and other entities that have come under Trump's scrutiny. The edicts force a difficult choice: either challenge Trump, risking security clearances, research funding, and public backlash, or comply, compromising one's values and integrity.

Firms Caving In: A Case Study

In March, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, a prominent law firm, agreed to provide $100 million in free legal services for Trump-backed causes. In return, the firm signaled its intent to wind down most of its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs1.

Brenna Frey, a former Skadden lawyer, resigned following the announcement. "Skadden's move opened the floodgates for further Big Law deals," she asserts. "It shocked our entire profession."

In an internal email announcing the firm's decision, Skadden's executive partner, Jeremy London, defended the move, stating it was "the best path to protect our clients, our people, and our Firm." However, alumni were not convinced, with 80 of them penning a letter to London expressing profound disappointment and outrage1.

Skadden's move set a dangerous precedent, raising concerns among law students who had accepted offers from the firm. Several contacted Frey, reconsidering their choices in light of the firm's deal with Trump1.

The Price of Conformity

Trump's critics argue that his tactic of pressuring private entities is a means of extending his power. By targeting universities, he has raised the stakes, threatening to cut research funds if institutions do not adjust their approach to anti-Israel protests1.

University presidents like Wesleyan University's Michael Roth maintain that Trump's strategy is rooted in the desire for submission and control. "They want people to bend the knee and to say, 'Yes, leader, you do know how to run things,'" Roth says.

Recent events have seen several universities, including Columbia, Harvard, and Brown, come under pressure from the Trump administration. Each has faced the daunting decision between defying Trump and losing valuable research funds or caving in, leading to a reevaluation of their principles and practices1.

The Fight for Principle

While many feel powerless to challenge Trump, there are those who, like Morris, are willing to take a stand. In today's polarized climate, these individuals risk career setbacks, personal backlash, and even ostracization. Yet, for many, the cost of remaining silent is too high.

As Obama recently urged, "If you're a law firm being threatened, you might have to say, 'OK, we will lose some business because we're going to stand for a principle.' If not, and you're just being intimidated, well, you should be able to say, 'That's why we've got this big endowment.'"

In a world where principles often collide with personal gain, a handful of professionals are choosing to make a stand, proving that sometimes, the most powerful act is the one that defies conformity.

References:

[1] (#enrich1): Enrichment Data - Impact of Trump's executive orders on diversity, gender identity, and DEI initiatives

[2] (#enrich2): Enrichment Data - Broader professional and institutional implications of Trump's orders and pushback from universities

Seattle author Tessa Hulls wins 2025 Pulitzer Prize
Hood Canal Bridge reopens after emergency closure
Trump budget would slash money for housing programs in WA
UW protest ends with 31 arrests at occupied building on campus
2 Seattle-area breweries win gold medals at global beer competition

John Morris, a Seattle-based professional, left his long-standing career at Accenture to protest against the company's accommodation of President Donald Trump's contentious orders on diversity and inclusion.
Many American professionals, like Morris, feel appalled by corporate forced compliance with Trump's orders, viewing it as a symbolic act of submission that undermines fundamental values of acceptance and equality.
Despite potential career repercussions, professionals continue to voice their disapproval, a move that puts pressure on various entities, including law firms, private companies, universities, and other entities under Trump's scrutiny.
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, a prominent law firm, agreed to provide $100 million in free legal services for Trump-backed causes, leading to the winding down of most of its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs.
Brenna Frey, a former Skadden lawyer, resigned following the announcement, expressing her disapproval and shock over the firm's decision.
Skadden's move set a dangerous precedent, raising concerns among law students who had accepted offers from the firm, leading some to reconsider their choices.
Trump's tactics of pressuring private entities are seen as a means of extending his power, as he targets universities and threatens to cut research funds if institutions do not adjust their approach to anti-Israel protests.
In the world of business and politics, principles often collide with personal gain, but a handful of professionals are choosing to make a stand, defying conformity and taking risks for what they believe in.
In 2025, Seattle author Tessa Hulls won the Pulitzer Prize, marking a significant achievement in the city's literary landscape.
The debate over political directives and their impact on business, housing, finance, science, workplace-wellness, health-and-wellness, diversity-and-inclusion, policy-and-legislation, and general news remains a hot topic, with professionals and institutions alike navigating the complexities of principle versus personal gain.