LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD - Squarespace
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD
2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTRIBUTORS & ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...............................................................................4 I: THE BUDDING MOVEMENT FOR A JUST, CLIMATE- COMPATIBLE LEGAL INDUSTRY...........................................................10 II: ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND FRONTLINE COMMUNITIES ...............................................................................................14 III: METHODOLOGY.......................................................................................16 IV: RESULTS......................................................................................................20 V: LIMITATIONS..............................................................................................25 VI: RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMITMENTS ..............................27 ENDNOTES & APPENDICES...................................................................30
2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 3 CONTRIBUTORS & ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The 2021 Law Firm Climate Change Scorecard was developed and supported by: SCORECARD RESEARCH TEAM Research Lead: Michaela Anang, UC Davis School of Law, LSCA 2021-22 Board Research Chair Research Volunteers: Briana Elizondo, Indiana University Maurer School of Law Taylor Monney, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law Annie Wiesenfeld, UC Hastings School of Law LSCA 2021-2022 BOARD Marjan Kris Abubo, UC Davis School of Law Josh Kirmsse, Stanford Law School Kyra Blas, Yale Law School Devin Oliver, Berkeley Law School Haley Czarnek, University of Alabama School Grecia Nuñez, American University of Law Washington College of Law A.J. Hudson, Yale Law School Aaron Regunberg, Harvard Law School Amelia Keyes, Harvard Law School LSCA CO-FOUNDERS Camila Bustos, Yale Law School Rachael Stryer, Yale Law School Tim Hirschel-Burns, Yale Law School Alisa White, Yale Law School FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS LSCA would like to acknowledge the lineage of movement work dedicated to environmental justice which informs and has laid the groundwork for young organizers, budding legal workers, and beyond to engage critically in a just transition. We hope to work alongside communities on the frontline of the climate crisis whose lives and livelihoods have been built around or affected by toxic and destructive industries in order to support sustainability and a livable future. We also extend immense gratitude to Nadira Foster- Williams for her insights, solidarity and work and to Divest Ed for support.
2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
America’s most prestigious law As driving declined and the
firms have expanded their fossil economy stalled, many
fuel work. recognized this moment of crisis
as a chance to move away from
Last year, Law Students for fossil fuels and move towards a
Climate Accountability released just transition to a livable future.
a first-of-its-kind Climate
Scorecard, which catalogued The 2021 Climate Scorecard
the climate-related work of the reveals that instead, top firms
Vault 100 firms — the 100 top- fought even harder to accelerate
ranked firms in the US — and climate change. On the whole,
gave them grades for their data over a five-year window
performance. Released in reveal a startling trend among
October 2020, the report Vault 100 firms:
focused on transactional, The top firms facilitated a
litigation, and lobbying work stunning $1.36 trillion in fossil
over a five-year span that fuel transactions, increasing
revealed staggering data: the the top 100’s total by $50
large majority of firms were billion from last year’s report;
exacerbating climate change, These firms also litigated
facilitating $1.31 trillion in even more cases on behalf of
transactions and fighting in fossil fuel clients, bringing
hundreds of cases to continue the total from 275
warming the planet and representations to 358; and
endangering low-income Even more firms earned F
communities and communities grades, which requires a firm
of color. While 2020 saw the to do 8+ cases exacerbating
COVID-19 pandemic rage and climate change, support over
the American West on fire, [1] $20 billion in fossil fuel
dying the skies orange and transactions or receive over
destroying entire communities, $2 million for fossil fuel
the report served to highlight lobbying. 10 more firms
Big Law’s role in climate joined the F class. In all, 36
injustice. firms managed to perform
the extraordinary amount of
But despite the dismal state of fossil fuel work necessary to
affairs in Big Law and in the fail.
world, some reason for
optimism remained.
2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Some actors stand out as particularly This report is intended not only to
egregious. For example, Akin Gump did document the legal industry’s complicity in
more fossil fuel lobbying than 91 Vault 100 the climate crisis, but to support those
firms combined. Allen & Overy did more inside and outside the industry trying to
fossil fuel transactions than 75 Vault 100 realize a better future.
firms combined, and Paul Weiss litigated
more fossil fuel cases than 60 Vault 100 First, this report provides law students
firms combined. Firms like these are global and young lawyers with a resource when
leaders in the fight for climate change, deciding on their current and future
dedicating top minds to the mission of a employment. Today’s law students are
warmer planet. preparing for careers that will be profoundly
shaped by the climate crisis, no matter
But they are not alone. Only 3 firms received where they work. This scorecard provides a
an A and 9 received a B, while 18 received a resource to begin understanding and
C, 34 received a D and 36 received an F. On questioning the role that the legal industry
the whole, 88 of the top 100 firms undertook plays in that crisis. It’s up to this generation
work that worsened climate change. of lawyers to transform the legal industry
into one that protects, rather than harms,
The report also documents two promising the planet and communities.
trends. Fossil fuel lobbying decreased, with
firms receiving $34.9 million in Second, we hope this report will spur
compensation for fossil fuel lobbying in this change in the Vault 100 firms themselves.
report compared to $36.5 million in last Vault 100 firms undoubtedly provide
year’s report. Firms also increased renewable excellent representation. These firms could
energy transactions from $268 billion to use their extraordinary skills to accelerate
$347 billion and renewable energy lobbying the transition to a sustainable future, but
from $6.6 million to $8.3 million. But too many are instead lending their services
ultimately, while these figures are moving in to the companies driving the climate crisis.
the right direction, they remain woefully Law firms are increasingly recognizing their
inadequate and are cold comfort to obligations to fight climate change, and
communities who bear the burden of both they frequently emphasize their pro bono
dangerous fossil fuel extraction and the work, internal sustainability measures, and
worst consequences of climate change. ESG practices. Although these initiatives are
welcome, law firms’ work for fossil fuel
In early August, the United Nations clients exists on a far greater scale. Law firms
International Panel on Climate Change cannot maintain reputations as socially
(IPCC) released a major new scientific report responsible actors as long as they continue
summed up by a New York Times headline: to support the destructive fossil fuel
“A Hotter Future Is Certain, Climate Panel industry. Firms can take the Law Firm
Warns. But How Hot Is Up to Us.” Law firms Climate Responsibility Pledge included in
must reckon with the fundamental role they this report to agree to stop taking on new
play in this crisis. From litigation to fossil fuel industry work, continue to take on
transactional work to lobbying, the fossil fuel renewable energy industry work and
interests that have created this emergency litigation to fight climate change, and to
are aided by armies of the best trained completely phase out fossil fuel work by
lawyers in the world. These firms understand 2025.
their work has ethical implications, taking
every opportunity to laud their pro bono
hours. It is past time that each firm adopts
an ethical standard for its climate work and
makes clear which side of history it wishes
to be on.
2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Third, this report calls upon clients of Law students are occupying offices,
Vault 100 law firms, some of whom have disrupting recruiting events, speaking to
their own commitments to mitigate their classmates, and standing in solidarity
climate change, to ensure their legal with the communities that have led the
representation is as committed to fighting fight for climate action and a just
the global climate crisis as they are. We transition. Many within law firms are doing
encourage law firm clients to review this their best to move their firms away from
report and insist the law firms they hire extraction. Law firms have an ethical
phase out support for the fossil fuel obligation to heed these calls to change.
industry.
If they refuse, we will only grow louder.
The movement to change the legal
industry is only growing.
STUDENT TESTIMONIAL
“WHEN I WAS CHOOSING A LAW FIRM TO SPEND MY
SUMMER AT, IT TRULY MEANT A LOT TO ME TO
KNOW THAT THE LAW FIRM THAT I WORKED FOR
WAS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
HARM AND DEGRADATION. AS SOMEONE WITH AN
ENVIRONMENTAL BACKGROUND, I PROMISED
MYSELF BEFORE I ACCEPTED AN OFFER THAT I
WOULD SERIOUSLY THINK ABOUT THE EFFECTS
THAT A LAW FIRM HAS ON THE PLANET. WHEN I
SAW THAT MANY OF THE LAW FIRMS I WAS
INTERVIEWING FOR HAD RATINGS LOWER THAN A
B, IT REALLY FORCED ME TO ASK THOSE LAW FIRMS
QUESTIONS ABOUT WHERE THEIR RESOURCES GO
AND HOW THEY CHOOSE THEIR CLIENTS ON THE
ENVIRONMENTAL SIDE. I ULTIMATELY RELIED ON
THE LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD TO
MAKE THE BEST AND MOST ENVIRONMENTALLY
SOUND DECISION THAT I COULD FOR MYSELF.
WITHOUT THE CLIMATE SCORECARD, I'M NOT SURE
HOW I WOULD HAVE TRIED TO MAKE MY
DECISION.”
-VIVIENNE PISMAROV, 3L AT UC DAVIS SCHOOL OF LAW
2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 7
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TABLE 1
Vault 100 Fossil Fuel Work
Over Time
2015 to 2019 2016 to 2020
Litigation* 275 358
Transactions** $1.31 trillion $1.36 trillion
Lobbying*** $36.5 million $34.1 million
*Number of representations in cases exacerbating climate change
**Total value of fossil fuel projects supported
***Compensation received for lobbying
Paul, Weiss worked on as many cases exacerbating
climate change as 60 other Vault 100 firms
combined.
Allen & Overy was the legal advisor on more
transactional work for the fossil fuel industry than 75
other Vault 100 firms combined.
Akin Gump lobbied more for fossil fuel companies
than 91 other Vault 100 firms combined.
8
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TABLE 2
Vault 100 Work Mitigating Climate
Change Over Time
2015 to 2019 2016 to 2020
Litigation* 26 25
Transactions** $268 billion $347 billion
Lobbying*** $6.6 million $8.3 million
*Number of representations in cases mitigating climate change
**Total value of renewable energy projects supported
***Compensation received for renewable energy lobbying
TOP 10 WORST FIRMS: TRANSACTIONAL WORK FOR THE
FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY, 2016-2020 (USD BILLION*)
Paul, Weiss
Allen & Overy
Akin Gump
* USD billion in total project value
9 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TOP 10 WORST FIRMS: LOBBYING WORK FOR THE FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY, 2016-2020 (USD MILLION*) * USD million in compensation for law firm TOP 10 WORST FIRMS: LITIGATION EXACERBATING CLIMATE CHANGE, 2016-2020 (ACTIVE CASES)
2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 10
THE BUDDING MOVEMENT FOR A JUST, CLIMATE-COMPATIBLE LEGAL INDUSTRY
SECTION I:
THE BUDDING
MOVEMENT FOR A
JUST, CLIMATE-
COMPATIBLE
LEGAL INDUSTRY
On January 15th, 2020, something They had little information on law
unusual happened at Harvard Law firms’ roles in the climate crisis,
School: dozens of students disrupted limiting their ability to weigh climate
a Paul Weiss recruiting reception and justice in their career search. After the
called for the law firm to drop protests in early 2020, a group of
ExxonMobil as a client. [2] Direct seven students at Yale Law School
action is rare in the legal profession, came together to compile data on
even more so against the law firms law firms’ litigation, transactional, and
that attract law students with fancy lobbying work that impacts climate
dinners, promises of generous change. With this database and the
salaries, and opportunities to engage Law Firm Climate Change Scorecard,
in prestigious legal work. But the students could compare any of the
Harvard law students saw that the top 100-ranked law firms based on
urgent threat of climate change the extent of their work exacerbating
demanded a break from the status or mitigating climate change.
quo. Students at Yale, NYU, and
Michigan agreed, holding their own LSCA has worked with students from
protests of Paul Weiss recruiting over 50 law schools from across the
events in the subsequent weeks. [3] country. LSCA’s network has shared
Over 600 students ultimately the findings of the 2020 Law Firm
pledged to boycott Paul Weiss until Climate Change Scorecard and raised
the firm dropped Exxon as a client. awareness about the role of law firms
in the climate crisis; attended law
The momentum created by the Paul firm recruiting events to demand
Weiss protests led to the October stronger climate action; and engaged
2020 launch of Law Students for more intentionally with the
Climate Accountability (LSCA) and organizations and communities that
the publication of the 2020 Law Firm have been leading the fight for
Climate Change Scorecard. Students climate and environmental justice.
protesting Paul Weiss realized how
difficult it was to get information
about how each Big Law firm’s work
impacts climate change.2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 11
THE BUDDING MOVEMENT FOR A JUST, CLIMATE-COMPATIBLE LEGAL INDUSTRY
In April 2021, LSCA launched its As a result, many students see employers
#DoneWithDunn campaign to call on the who contribute to the climate crisis as
law firm Gibson Dunn to commit to an clashing with their values. According to a
ethical standard for its fossil fuel work. The recent poll, 40% of law students wouldn’t
firm, which represents the Dakota Access represent a fossil fuel company. [7]
Pipeline and Chevron, has yet to articulate
any standard guiding its work for fossil Second, there is growing recognition that
fuel clients other than profit. 88 law corporate lawyers are responsible for the
student organizations have signed on to clients they choose to represent. The law
the campaign, the largest law student firms representing Donald Trump’s attempts
mobilization targeting a law firm in recent to overturn the 2020 election faced massive
history. LSCA’s work has not gone without backlash, [8] while Neal Katyal, an Acting
notice: outlets including The New Yorker, Solicitor General under the Obama
Axios, and Reuters have covered LSCA’s administration, received extensive criticism
work, and LSCA held an event with for representing Nestle over its connection
Senators Sheldon Whitehouse and Jeff to child slavery in the Ivory Coast. [9] Law
Merkley. [4] firms have long tried to evade criticism by
arguing that everyone deserves
representation. But young lawyers recognize
LSCA Finding its Place in a Movement that this argument makes little sense in the
context of law firms who receive massive
The movement for a just transition is legal fees in exchange for providing
rooted in struggles for livability and additional legal firepower to already well-
environmental justice, forged by groups of represented and well-resourced
predominantly low income communities corporations.
of color, and this movement has begun to
taken hold in the legal industry. [5] In Third, LSCA offers law students actionable
2020, LSCA launched a national ways to integrate their values into their
movement of law students and young career search. Climate change is not the
lawyers seeking just and equitable action only factor students consider in their career
around climate change. Now, LSCA seeks search: students care about other justice
to hold the legal industry accountable to issues, including but certainly not limited to
environmental justice by addressing its firms’ track record of racial and gender
role in exacerbating climate change and diversity in hiring and promotion. [10] Low-
building a legal industry committed to a income and first-generation law students
just, livable future. Several factors have may also face significant financial
contributed to LSCA’s success and growth. constraints when choosing where to work.
The Law Firm Climate Change Scorecard
First, today’s law students see climate does not demand that students ignore all
change as an issue of central concern. these considerations but rather allows
Especially for low-income students and students to consider law firms’ role in the
students of color, climate change climate crisis as a factor. Whether a student
threatens (and is already wreaking) is considering a public interest career as
immense harm to their lived environment, opposed to a law firm or choosing between
community health, and wellness and Big Law firms, the scorecard allows students
justice. Chronic exposure to air pollution, to incorporate climate justice into their
which is endemic of environmental decision-making. Because LSCA organizes
racism, was named as one of the law students across the country, students
exacerbating factors for higher rates of considering prospective employers’ climate-
severe illness and death from COVID-19 related work in their career search know
within Black, Latinx, and Indigenous their collective efforts can influence firm
communities. [6] behavior.2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 12
THE BUDDING MOVEMENT FOR A JUST, CLIMATE-COMPTAIBLE LEGAL INDUSTRY
Limited Accountability in and their efforts to tackle recognition of the need to
the Legal Industry climate change have tended take climate action. 39 Vault
to focus on four primary 100 firms have joined the
Law firms have belatedly areas. Law Firm Sustainability
recognized the need to Network, which seeks to
respond to climate change First, law firms have increase the sustainability of
but have largely avoided the attempted to address the firms’ operations. {14] 12
most important action they sustainability of their Vault 100 firms have
can take to address climate internal operations through participated in the Lawyers
change: phasing out the measures like increasing for a Sustainable Economy
provision of legal support to recycling and reducing initiative that connects law
clients driving the climate travel. Second, law firms firms with pro bono
crisis. Some law firms are have pointed to climate- sustainability work. [15] The
meeting the urgency of the related pro bono work they Net Zero Lawyers Alliance
moment, and as of August have undertaken. Third, law launched in June 2021, and
2021, nine firms have signed firms are increasingly six Vault 100 firms and a
our Law Firm Climate establishing Environmental, number of other prominent
Responsibility Pledge. Social, and Governance international law firms have
Pledge signatories agree not Criteria (ESG) practices. [12] joined. [16] The Net Zero
to work for the fossil fuel Fourth, law firms are seeking Lawyers Alliance sets strong
industry and to engage in out work in the renewable targets for firms to reduce
beneficial climate and energy sector. When five law their operational emissions.
environmental work. Even firms offered official The commitments for
among major corporate responses to the 2020 Law members of the alliance
firms that have not made Firm Climate Change includes language on firms’
public commitments, some Scorecard, they primarily work for clients, and while
have turned away clients on cited their work in these including this section
climate change grounds. [11] four areas. [13] constitutes significant
progress, it only calls on law
Most law firms have not Law firms’ increasing firms to offer climate-
responded as seriously to participation in compatible legal services
the climate crisis, however, environmental initiatives “where possible.”
points to their growing
STUDENT TESTIMONIAL
“I ELIMINATED FROM MY LIST ANY FIRMS THAT SCORED
AN ‘F.’ I STILL WORKED AT A PRESTIGIOUS FIRM WITH
GENEROUS COMPENSATION, AND THE CULTURE AND
CLIENTS WERE GREAT. REMOVING THE ‘F’S’ FELT LIKE A
SMALL SACRIFICE TO ME FOR A BIG IMPACT: I KNOW
FIRMS WILL BE CAREFUL ABOUT WHICH CLIENTS THEY
TAKE ON BECAUSE THEY DON’T WANT TO LOSE TALENT
TO PEERS.”
-ANONYMOUS, 3L AT YALE LAW SCHOOL2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 13
THE BUDDING MOVEMENT FOR A JUST, CLIMATE-COMPATIBLE LEGAL INDUSTRY
These existing efforts to address climate The $500,000 of free legal services Hogan
change are all welcome—and firms should Lovells contributed to the Lawyers for a
continue to scale up these efforts—but they Sustainable Economy initiative in 2020
are insufficient. Law firms’ work for paying [21] makes up just 0.02% of the firm’s
clients exists on a much larger scale than revenue. [22]
their operational sustainability or pro bono
work. For example, Latham & Watkins ESG counsel and renewable energy work
announced that its operations became are also welcome but do not dilute the
carbon neutral in 2020. [17] But the Dakota importance of phasing out the provision
Access Pipeline, just one of the many of legal services to fossil fuel companies
projects for which Latham & Watkins and other contributors to climate and
arranged primary financing, generates environmental injustice. Lawyers can play
lifecycle emissions 7,856 times greater than an important role in shaping clients’
the annual emissions the firm prevented by behavior through ESG counsel, but clients
going carbon neutral. [18] Water protectors are not obligated to follow that advice
who resisted the construction of the Dakota and ESG initiatives can serve as window
Access Pipeline also suffered impacts from dressing for destructive activities. [23]
the criminalization of their dissent, while Further, while the expansion of renewable
companies supported by law firms continue energy is urgently needed, many firms
to move forward seeking pipeline projects on that support renewable energy work also
indigenous territories. [19] continue to support fossil fuel companies.
This fossil fuel work will help lock in fossil
Furthermore, while pro bono initiatives that fuel infrastructure use for years to come
support environmental justice protections and jeopardize our chance at keeping
are welcome, no Vault 100 firm devotes more global average temperature increase to
than 10% of its billable hours to pro bono “well below 2°C above pre-industrial
work, [20] and only a fraction of that pro levels.” [24] Law firms have also paid
bono work is devoted to climate change- insufficient attention to ensuring
related causes. renewable energy work does not replicate
patterns of environmental injustice, which
we address in the next section.2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 14
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TAKING THE LEAD
SECTION II:
ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE TAKING
THE LEAD
As law students, legal practitioners, With the support of consultation
and advocates alike interrogate from community partners,
firms’ fossil fuel activities, we must colleagues, and activists, we agree
also ask: Is it enough to advocate that activities to support the
against a law firm’s representation advancement of renewable energy
of the fossil fuel industry? And, shouldn’t automatically be
more importantly: Even if a firm perceived as a form of climate or
shifts their representation from environmental justice. Although
fossil fuel work to renewable energy renewable energy will be an
work, is this renewable energy work essential piece of a just transition,
compatible with a just transition or renewable energy projects must
observe standards of equity and
is it replicating the harmful and
justice, resisting displacement of
extractive practices of the fossil fuel
already over-polluted communities
industry?
and respecting human rights.
The very nature of this student-led
LSCA’s stance on environmental
and student-run movement is to
equity wholeheartedly follows the
provide intentionality and bring a
Principles of Environmental Justice,
critical lens as we collectively hold
introduced at the People of Color
the legal profession accountable. Environmental Leadership Summit
Moving towards accountability of 1991. [25] Among its 17 tenets, we
means that our movement must honor the notion that environmental
self-reflect and strive to deepen our justice “demands the right to
understanding of what participate as equal partners at
environmental justice looks like. every level of decision-making,
LSCA’s first-ever scorecard rewarded including needs assessment,
firms for their engagement in planning, implementation,
renewable energy work, across the enforcement and evaluation.” [26] In
categories of transactional, honoring this principle, we must
lobbying, or litigation work. But in then honor the uncomfortable truth
doing so, the scorecard’s analysis that environmental injustice is not
established a binary that was not exclusive to the fossil fuel industry,
always justice-oriented or equity- and it is important to acknowledge
driven: the binary system created a that in holding the fossil fuel
presumption that a firm’s work on industry accountable, firms who
renewable energy representation represent the renewable energy
was de facto a form of climate industry are not shielded from
accountability. However, this criticism, nor those who defend
assumption is not based in the other destructive industries.
tenets of environmental justice.15
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TAKING THE LEAD
CASE HIGHLIGHT
BACKCOUNTRY AGAINST DUMPS V. U.S.
BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS
A lawsuit filed in the federal district court asserted that the U.S. Bureau of Indian
Affairs failed to fully address harms to the Campo Band of Diegueño Mission Indians
and the surrounding community when it authorized construction and operation of
renewable energy generation facilities, including 60 wind turbines. The complaint
alleged violations of a number of environmental protections including the National
Environmental Policy Act. The allegation included that the analysis of the facility
ahead of construction “paints a rosy picture” of global warming impacts but that it
failed to calculate the project’s entire life cycle greenhouse gas emissions.
Cumulative effects of construction projects such as these are often not taken into
account for high-health risk communities, furthering environmental injustices. In
this case these harms were perpetuated by renewable energy companies as well.2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 16
METHODOLOGY
SECTION III:
METHODOLOGY
The methodology for this scorecard Analysis: Last year’s analysis
applies the metrics used in the distinguished between
2020 scorecard and supplements representation of clients that
them with frameworks of racial exacerbated climate change or
equity and environmental justice. mitigated climate change. This
Our quantitative analysis and binary scale depended on whether
scoring system aims to accurately the firm’s position in the litigation
portray the role of Vault 100 law was judged to advance or oppose
firms in the climate crisis. climate action. For example,
defending a fossil fuel company in a
The quantitative dataset was lawsuit brought by a state for
compiled, stored and processed damages caused by climate change
using Google Sheets. The 2021 Vault was considered to be exacerbating
100 firms were identified on climate change. Mitigating climate
Vault.com and changes in ranking change included representation of
since 2020 were assessed. This year renewable energy companies or pro
we have incorporated a racial and bono representation of renewable
environmental justice lens into our energy companies or pro bono
litigation analysis and added representation of environmental
human rights analysis into our groups. This year, we expanded upon
evaluation of firms’ engagement this metric to include a racial equity
with clients. All data was verified by and environmental justice lens to
multiple reviewers. begin to reflect the principles of a
just transition. While the scale for
I. Data and Scoring by Category data review remained a binary,
critical engagement around the
Litigation Data [31] Principles of Environmental Justice,
UN guidelines, and EPA guidance
Database & Collection: We used [32] allowed for a renewed analysis
Climatecasechart.com, a publicly- of the cases situated within a just
available climate change litigation transition framework.
database compiled by the Sabin
Center for Climate Change Law at Scoring: Scoring was based upon the
Columbia Law School and Arnold & exacerbation of climate change. A
Porter. The site includes cases in law firm received one point towards
which climate change is a material its score every time that all three
issue of law or fact. The docket conditions were met: first, the firm
numbers, status year, litigation was involved in a case listed on
location, firms who participated in climatecasechart.com; second, the
the case, and subject of the suit firm was involved in the case
were noted in Google Sheets. between 2016 and 2020; and third,
the firm’s involvement in the case
was judged to exacerbate climate
change.2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 17
METHODOLOGY
While we recognize that litigation Scoring: Scoring was based upon the
mitigating climate change is amount of money that firms received as
commendable, it does not cancel out the compensation from fossil fuel companies
impacts of litigation that exacerbates and associations representing fossil fuel
climate change. Mitigating cases counted companies. While we recognize that
towards a firm’s A score, but the firm was lobbying on behalf of renewable energy
only eligible for an A if it did not litigate industries can advance climate action, it
cases that exacerbated climate change. does not cancel out the harmful effects of
lobbying on behalf of fossil fuel and other
Lobbying Data extractive companies. Renewable energy
industry lobbying counted towards a firm’s
Database & Collection: The Center for A score, but the firm was only eligible for
Responsive Politics’ online database, an A if it did not lobby for fossil fuel clients.
OpenSecrets.org, compiles data from
mandatory lobbying disclosure reports
filed with the Senate’s Office of Public Transactional Data
Records. These records only include federal
lobbying. It lists all clients that each firm Database & Collection: The IJGlobal Project
maintained each year and the amount of Finance and Infrastructure Transaction
money the client paid the firm that year. database contains over 32,000
The dollar figures displayed in the transactions. The database contains a
database reflect the amount of money the variety of different types of transactions
law firm received in compensation for across a range of categories: additional
lobbying on a client’s behalf. facility construction, asset acquisition,
company acquisition, design-build,
Analysis: We analyzed every Vault 100 firm portfolio financing, primary financing,
appearing on OpenSecrets.org with privatization, refinancing, and
lobbying activity in 2020. Lobbying for securitization. IJGlobal provides the total
fossil fuel companies and associations dollar value of these transactions but it
representing fossil fuel companies was does not provide the amount of money
judged to exacerbate climate change. that each law firm received in
Fossil fuel companies are those who compensation for their work on
promote the reliance on oil, gas, and coal. transactional projects. Due to the
We also recorded lobbying for renewable proprietary nature of IJGlobal data and to
energy companies and associations comply with the terms and conditions, we
representing renewable energy companies. were only able to publish aggregate
Additional contextual analysis of amounts of transactional work for law
companies was sought from firms in energy categories. The data can be
https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/ purchased via license from IJGlobal.
which in some instances indicated
environmental injustices at the Analysis: We divided transactions in the
intersection of human rights. Although our database into two categories: fossil fuel
dataset provides information on which and renewable energy transactions. Fossil
companies employed Vault 100 firms as fuel transactions include any transactions
lobbyists, it does not include information in the IJGlobal database where “oil and
about the precise laws and regulations a gas” is listed as the transaction sector or
law firm lobbied for or against. The “gas-fired,” “oil-fired,” or “coal-fired” is listed
database included an amount category of as one of the primary transaction sub-2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 18
METHODOLOGY
We also included coal energy transactions, those contributions to greenhouse
mining transactions in the transactions involving gas emissions and climate
fossil fuel category. Some of biofuels or biomass in change.
the transactions in the fossil conjunction with one or
fuel category have minor more other sources of Scoring: Law firms’
renewable energy renewable energy (i.e. wind, transactional scores are
components, for example, solar, or small hydroelectric based on the total dollar
acquisition of a company power). We do not count value of the fossil fuel
with largely fossil fuel transactions listed as power transactions they supported
holdings but some co-generation as either from 2016 to 2020. If
renewable energy holdings. renewable or fossil fuel multiple firms were listed on
Renewable energy because we do not have a particular transaction, the
transactions included the information on whether the amount counted towards
following sources: large co-generation derives from each firm’s transactional
hydroelectric, small combustion of fossil fuels or score was the total dollar
hydroelectric, geothermal renewable energy co- value of the transaction
energy, photovoltaic solar, generation. Transactions divided by the number of
off-shore wind, on-shore from global locations were firms listed on the
wind, thermal solar, and included as US-based transaction. Renewable
waste-to-energy plants. We lawyers often arrange energy work was factored
recognize that biofuels and financing for these projects into an A score, provided
biomass are not universally and advise on the legal risks that the firm conducted no
sustainable. Thus, for resulting in enormous global fossil fuel work.
renewable
YROGETAC YB SEDARG ROF AIRETIRC :3 ELBAT
LITIGATION TRANSACTIONS LOBBYING
Cases active 2016-2020 Sum of transaction value 2016- Sum of lobbying compensation
2020 for firms 2016-2020
No cases exacerbating climate No transactional work for the No lobbying for the fossil fuel
change, at least one case fossil fuel industry & some industry & some lobbying for the
A mitigating climate change. transactional work for the renewable energy industry.
renewable energy industry.
No cases mitigating or No transactional work for the No lobbying work for the fossil
B* exacerbating climate change. fossil fuel or renewable energy fuel or renewable energy
industries. industries.
Greater than $0 and below $1 Greater than $0 and below
1-2 cases exacerbating climate
C change.
billion transactional work for the $100,000 lobbying for the fossil
fossil fuel industry. fuel industry.
3-7 cases exacerbating climate $1 billion to $20 billion $100,000 to $2 million lobbying
D change. transactional work for the fossil for the fossil fuel industry.
fuel industry.
8+ cases exacerbating climate $20 billion+ transactional work $2 million+ lobbying for the fossil
F change. for the fossil fuel industry. fuel industry.
*Firms can move up a grade if we do not have data showing they exacerbate or mitigate climate change, or their
renewable energy work or litigation mitigating climate change exceed their fossil fuel work or litigation exacerbating
climate change, AND the firm has taken our Law Firm Climate Responsibility Pledge.2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 19
METHODOLOGY
Climate Scores Our scoring system does not average firms’
litigation, transactions, and lobbying scores.
Firms’ overall Climate Scores derive from their Many law firms specialize in certain
litigation, transactional, and lobbying scores. practice areas. Therefore, a firm may
If a firm has a C, D, or F in any category, their conduct much less fossil fuel work in
Climate Score is equal to their lowest grade certain categories solely because the firm
in any category. If a firm has a B in all three does little work of any type in that category,
categories, their Climate Score is a B. If a firm and averaging all three categories may
has an A in at least one category and has no produce misleading results. Although this
lower than a B in any category, meaning that system may seem harsh on firms, our
the firm conducted some work mitigating scoring system is also forgiving to firms in
climate change and no work judged to several respects. The threshold for F grades
exacerbate climate change, the firm receives is set at a high level so that only firms that
an A. conduct large amounts of fossil fuel work
relative to their peers--and enormous
This scoring system is meant to reflect the amounts of damage to the climate--receive
principles of climate justice and a just F grades.
transition. Although last year’s scoring system
allowed firms to offset work exacerbating Second, firms can improve their score by
climate change with work mitigating climate signing our Law Firm Climate Responsibility
change, this year’s scorecard does not use Pledge. And third, because our scoring
this “net” score because beneficial work does system using fixed thresholds rather than
not cancel out the destructive effects of fossil calculating scores based on firms' relative
fuel work. And because Vault 100 firms do far ranks, improvements in the industry as a
more fossil fuel work than renewable energy whole would lead to a better range of firm
work or litigation mitigating climate change, scores in future iterations of the report.
the scoring change affected relatively few
firms’ scores.
CLIMATE SCORE CRITERIA
EROCS ETAMILC ROF AIRETIRC :4 ELBAT
To receive an A+, a firm must sign the Law Firm Climate Responsibility
A+ Pledge to stop taking on new fossil fuel industry work, continue to take
on renewable energy industry work and litigation to fight climate
change, and to completely phase out fossil fuel work by 2025. [60]
Firm meets the criteria for an A grade in at least one of the three
categories and has no lobbying nor transactional work on behalf of the
A fossil fuel industry and no cases exacerbating climate change.
B Lowest grade in any category is a B.
Lowest grade in any category is a C.
C
D Lowest grade in any category is a D.
F Lowest grade in any category is an F.2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 20
RESULTS
SECTION IV:
RESULTS
Our data sheds light on both the
KEY TAKEAWAYS collective and individual performance of
Vault 100 firms. This year’s scorecard
covers data from 2016 to 2020 while last
year’s scorecard covered data from 2015
Vault 100 firms increased the to 2019. On the whole, Vault 100 firms
amount of litigation and are increasing the amount of fossil fuel
work they conduct. As compared to last
transactional work exacerbating
year’s scorecard, Vault 100 firms
climate change that they increased their fossil fuel transactional
performed. work and increased their litigation work
exacerbating climate change. This
increase in fossil fuel work in 2020 is
Some Vault 100 law firms conduct
especially striking given the context of
significantly more fossil fuel the COVID-19 pandemic: even though
work than others . much of the economy slowed and
courts operated more slowly, Vault 100
firms still managed to increase the
TABLE 5: NUMBER OF VAULT 100
amount of fossil fuel work they
FIRMS WITH EACH CLIMATE SCORE conducted. As compared to last year’s
scorecard, Vault 100 firms decreased the
CLIMATE SCORE NUMBER OF
amount of fossil fuel lobbying they
FIRMS conducted, increased the amount of
A
renewable energy lobbying they
3 conducted, and increased the amount
of renewable energy transactions they
supported. Vault 100 firms slightly
B 9
decreased the amount of litigation
mitigating climate change that they
conducted.
C 18 From 2016-2020, in total, Vault 100 firms
performed 358 representations of clients
D
in litigation exacerbating climate
34 change and 25 representations of clients
in litigation mitigating climate change.
They supported fossil fuel transactions
F 36
with a total value of $1.36 trillion and
renewable energy transactions with a
total value of $347 billion. Vault 100
firms received $34.9 million in
compensation for fossil fuel lobbying
and received $8.3 million in
compensation for renewable energy
lobbying.2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD # 21
RESULTS
However, Vault 100 firms’ roles in the climate crisis differ extensively. For
example, Akin Gump conducted more fossil fuel lobbying than 91 firms
combined, Allen & Overy supported more fossil fuel transactions than 75
firms combined, and Paul Weiss performed as much fossil fuel litigation as
60 firms combined. 3 of the 100 firms scored in this report received an
overall Climate Score of A, 9 firms received a B, 18 firms received a C, 34
firms received a D, and 36 firms received an F.
Each data point collected in this report represents human consequences
that people will face as a result of the climate crisis. Firms’ fossil fuel
litigation, transactions, and lobbying lead to increased emissions that affect
everyone but disproportionately cause harm to the Global South,
predominantly Black, Indigenous, people of color (BIPOC) communities,
and low-income communities. In addition to its contribution to climate
change, fossil fuel work often involves direct human rights violations and
environmental injustice.
STUDENT TESTIMONIAL
"I'VE USED THE SCORECARD TO NOT ONLY
AVOID "F" FIRMS, BUT ALSO GAIN A MORE
HOLISTIC UNDERSTANDING OF ALL FIRMS'
FOSSIL FUEL COMMITMENTS. FOR EXAMPLE,
WHEN LOOKING AT FIRMS FOR FUTURE
EMPLOYMENT, THE SCORECARD HELPED ME
CONTEXTUALIZE A GIVEN FIRM'S
RENEWABLES PRACTICE GROUPS AS PART OF
A LARGER BOOK OF BUSINESS, WHICH OFTEN
STEERED DIRECTLY TOWARD OIL AND GAS OR
MINING COMPANIES. THE SCORECARD HAS
REVEALED THAT MANY FIRMS' HIGHLY-
ADVERTISED ESG AND RENEWABLES
PRACTICES DWARF IN COMPARISON TO THEIR
BUSINESS WITH OIL-AND-GAS AND OTHER
FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRIES. NOW MORE THAN
EVER, FIRMS ARE REALIZING THAT THEIR
GREATEST ASSET—LAW STUDENTS AND
YOUNG ATTORNEYS—GENUINELY CARE ABOUT
CLIMATE CHANGE AND EXPECT THEIR
EMPLOYERS TO LEAD IN A CONSCIOUS
DIRECTION."
-DEVIN OLIVER, 3L AT BERKELEY LAW SCHOOL2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 22
RESULTS
TABLE 6: NUMBER OF VAULT 100 FIRMS WITH
EACH GRADE BY CATEGORY
GRADE BY
LITIGATION TRANSACTIONS LOBBYING
CATEGORY
A 2 11 1
B 37 24 68
C 22 17 6
D 20 30 21
F 19 18 4
Top 5 Worst Firms for Litigation
Cases exacerbating climate change, 2016-2020
1. Paul Weiss: 30 cases (8x the average)
2. Gibson Dunn: 23 cases
3. Latham & Watkins: 19 cases
4. Sidley Austin: 15 cases
5. Baker Botts: 15 cases2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 23
RESULTS
Top 5 Worst Firms for Transactions
Transactional work for fossil fuel industry, 2016-2020
1. Allen & Overy: $125,676,000,000 (9x the average)
2. Clifford Chance: $124,359,000,000
3. Latham & Watkins: $118,635,000,000
4. Vinson & Elkins: $107,053,000,000
5. White & Case: $90,781,000,000
Top 5 Worst Firms for Lobbying
Compensation from lobbying for fossil fuel industry, 2016-2020
1. Akin Gump: $6,780,000 (19x the average)
2. Hogan Lovells: $5,325,000
3. Squire Patton Boggs: $5,200,000
4. Steptoe & Johnson: $3,000,000
5. McGuire Woods: $1,950,0002021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 24
RESULTS
TABLE 6
Changes in Law Firm Climate Scores
Firm Name 2020 Score 2021 Score
Cooley B A
Boies Schiller C B
Cozen O'Connor A C
Sheppard Mullin A C
Davis Wright B C
Goodwin Procter B C
Winston & Strawn B D
Arent Fox B D
Duane Morris C D
Nixon Peabody C D
Quinn Emmanuel C D
Arnold & Porter D F
Crowell & Moring D F
K&L Gates D F
Kellogg Hansen D F
Mayer Brown D F
Morgan Lewis D F
Norton Rose D F
Orrick D F
Steptoe & Johnson D F
Susman Godfrey D F2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 25
LIMITATIONS
SECTION V:
LIMITATIONS
This scorecard provides a more However, some beneficial work that law
representative picture of top-ranked law firms perform may not be captured in this
firms’ roles in the climate crisis than would report. For example, we lack data on the
otherwise be available. Its conclusions are extent and quality of law firms’ ESG work,
based on rigorous analysis of tens of and therefore this work is not included in
thousands of data points. However, we this scorecard.
fully acknowledge that the report has
limitations. Third, we have insufficient data to perform
a full analysis of how law firms' work
First, law firms’ work intersects with a wide contributes to climate justice and racial
range of important issues in addition to equity. We use a binary system between
the fossil fuel industry and climate work exacerbating climate change and
change. A law firm may receive a good work mitigating climate change. Although
score on this scorecard but perform this binary enables a practical scoring
harmful work with respect to labor rights system for law firms, it does not offer
or immigrant justice. Whether firms nuanced distinctions within the categories
encourage gender and racial equity in of mitigating and exacerbating climate
their hiring and promotion practices is change. In particular, some renewable
also not reflected in this scorecard. We energy work depends on human rights
encourage readers of this report to abuses and neocolonial economic
investigate law firms’ records on a wide relations. The databases we utilized only
range of issues, not only those that we provide enough information to determine
were not able to cover in this report. whether law firms supported renewable
energy work. We cannot definitively
Second, our databases are not entirely determine whether this work also involved
comprehensive. As a result, Vault 100 law harmful practices or fully complied with a
firms are likely performing even more just transition framework.
harmful work than this scorecard reflects.2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 26
LIMITATIONS
Fourth, our analysis is limited to existing infrastructure. Further, we
Vault 100 firms. Many other law are only able to quantify firms’
firms, both major corporate firms involvement in transactions based
and smaller firms, contribute to on the total dollar value of the
climate and environmental injustice transactions. This total value may
but are not included in this not directly correlate to the extent or
scorecard. The absence of a law firm importance of law firms’ work on the
from this scorecard should not lead project, and their compensation for
to the assumption that the law firm’s the project is only a fraction of the
work aligns with climate justice. project’s total value. When multiple
There are also many law firms not firms are listed on a transaction, the
within the Vault 100 that support database does not provide
work to achieve a just transition and information on the relative amounts
climate accountability, such as of work each firm conducted on the
plaintiff-side law firms that bring project. Therefore, the amount
lawsuits against major polluters. Law credited to each firm’s score equals
students and potential law firm the project’s total value divided by
clients should not limit their law firm the number of firms listed on the
search to Vault 100 firms. Nine law transaction, although some firms
firms have signed our Law Firm may have contributed more work to
Climate Responsibility Pledge, and the project than others.
these firms can be found at the end
of this report. Last, our lobbying data suffers from
several data limitations. First, our
Each category of data also has database only includes federal
limitations. For reasons of lobbying, so similarly harmful
practicality and fairness, our lobbying conducted at the state
litigation analysis counts each case level is not included in our analysis.
as one point towards a firm’s score. Second, although the database
This system does not account for the shows the amount of compensation
fact that some cases are more clients paid law firms for their
significant or more destructive than lobbying work, there is relatively
others, or that firms may have played little information on what policy
smaller roles in some cases than priorities law firms advanced for
others. Further, the Sabin Center their clients. Any lobbying for fossil
database on which we rely only fuel companies advances fossil fuel
includes litigation in which climate dependence and climate injustice,
change is a material issue of law or and thus we count all lobbying for
fact. Therefore, a significant number fossil fuel companies and
of cases related to climate and associations representing fossil fuel
environmental justice, such as many companies in our analysis. However,
permitting cases, are not included in firms likely conduct climate-related
this database. lobbying for clients in a number of
other industries, but this lobbying is
In addition, our analysis of not included in our database
transactional data does not because we are unable to determine
distinguish between fossil fuel whether the lobbying law firms
transactions based on their relative conducted for these clients relates
impacts on the climate. For example, to climate and environmental
transactions constructing new fossil justice.
fuel infrastructure are arguably more
harmful than transactions related to2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 27
RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMITMENTS
SECTION VI:
RECOMMENDATIONS &
COMMITMENTS
RECOGNIZING THE
LAW STUDENTS UNPRECEDENTED
IMMENSITY OF THE CLIMATE
CATASTROPHE, I PLEDGE TO
We recognize that many students enter law
school seeking to address the wrongs they DO ALL THAT I CAN TO
have seen in their communities. As such, STIGMATIZE AND
many of our peers in the legal academy may ULTIMATELY ELIMINATE THE
indeed be from frontline and/or
environmental justice communities, LEGAL INDUSTRY’S
navigating both education within the field of COMPLICITY IN
law and destructive impacts of the field PERPETUATING CLIMATE
itself. In addition many law school applicants
have been newly motivated by racial justice CHANGE. IF MY FINANCIAL
and equity and seek to make their AND OTHER PERSONAL
employment decisions accordingly. [33] CIRCUMSTANCES PERMIT, I
We recognize and acknowledge that choice PLEDGE TO REFUSE TO
is a privilege that we must wield responsibly. WORK FOR A LAW FIRM THAT
In addressing the commitments and REPRESENTS FOSSIL FUEL
recommendations students can make, we
invite those whose privilege of choice can INDUSTRY CLIENTS. IF MY
open the opportunities for a broader FINANCIAL AND OTHER
conversation around climate accountability PERSONAL CIRCUMSTANCES
and environmental justice to use it.
DO NOT YET PERMIT ME TO
Each law student has unique personal and MAKE SUCH A REFUSAL, I
financial circumstances that affect what PLEDGE TO DO ALL THAT I
actions they can take. Nevertheless, every
student can take action to hold the legal CAN TO HOLD MY FIRM
industry accountable for exacerbating ACCOUNTABLE FOR ITS ROLE
climate change. Since the release of the IN PERPETUATING CLIMATE
2020 scorecard, over 500 law students across
the country have joined the call for climate CHANGE, TO PUSH IT TO
accountability, and many students have DISCONTINUE ITS FOSSIL
taken specific actions to show law firms that FUEL REPRESENTATION, AND
they are concerned about their fossil fuel
work. TO FIGHT FOR JUSTICE
THROUGH A SUBSTANTIAL
PRO BONO PRACTICE.2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 28
RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMITMENTS
The following actions (all of which have If the student takes an internship or job
been taken this past year by fellow law at a law firm, inquire about the firm’s
students) are encouraged: climate change commitments and
advocate for the firm to take stronger
Take the Law Student Climate Pledge. action to reduce its role in the climate
Share this report within the student’s crisis.
law school community and start If possible given personal circumstances,
conversations with peers about the role reconsider working for a law firm who
of the legal industry in the climate scores a D or an F (or a B or a C).
crisis. If possible given personal circumstances,
Ask questions during law firm join a nationwide campaign and pledge
recruitment events and interviews. For not to work at a particular firm given its
example, “I understand that your firm extensive work supporting fossil fuel
has taken steps, such as energy companies and harming frontline
efficiency and recycling programs, to communities. Examples include
improve the sustainability of your office. #DropExxon (Paul Weiss) and
How has your firm extended this #DonewithDunn (Gibson Dunn).
commitment to sustainability to your If possible given personal circumstances,
decisions about representing clients pledge to not work at any firm that
from the fossil fuel industry?” represents the fossil fuel industry.
Ask about climate change at law firm events
“I UNDERSTAND THAT YOUR FIRM HAS TAKEN STEPS,
SUCH AS ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RECYCLING
PROGRAMS, TO IMPROVE THE SUSTAINABILITY OF YOUR
OFFICE. HOW HAS YOUR FIRM EXTENDED THIS
COMMITMENT TO SUSTAINABILITY TO YOUR DECISIONS
ABOUT REPRESENTING CLIENTS FROM THE FOSSIL FUEL
INDUSTRY?”
Recommendations for clients of law firms
Clients of law firms wield enormous power: their choice of representation directly impacts law
firms’ bottom lines. Many clients have their own commitments to climate justice and racial
equity and they may question whether they should have the same lawyers as companies
driving the climate crisis. This scorecard provides a resource for clients looking for law firms
whose values align with their own.
Invitation to frontline community, organizations and activists
Law Students for Climate Accountability commits to continue to engage with frontline
community, organizations and activists who seek environmental justice. We also invite frontline
community, organizations and activists to engage in our analysis and continued campaigns.2021 LAW FIRM CLIMATE CHANGE SCORECARD 29
RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMITMENTS
LAW FIRMS
Law firms can play an extremely important role in addressing the climate crisis and achieving a
just transition. However, law firms too frequently consider themselves neutral actors. This view is
inaccurate. Law firms consciously choose how to deploy their limited resources, and they should
not provide their legal services in support of fossil fuel work and other climate injustice. Although
pro bono work, in-office sustainability, ESG counsel, and renewable energy work are all welcome,
these actions are insufficient as long as law firms continue to advance fossil fuel dependence
and climate inaction.
Law Firm Climate Responsibility Pledge
"WE, AT THE UNDERSIGNED LAW FIRM, PLEDGE TO NOT TAKE ON WORK TO
SUPPORT THE FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY, NOW AND INTO THE FUTURE.* WE
FURTHER PLEDGE TO TAKE ON SOME WORK OR CONTINUE TO WORK IN AT
LEAST ONE OF THE FOLLOWING AREAS: TO SUPPORT RENEWABLE ENERGY
DEVELOPMENT, TO ADDRESS CLIMATE CHANGE, AND TO ADVANCE
CLIMATE JUSTICE."
*EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, ALL FIRMS SIGNING THE PLEDGE WILL NOT TAKE
ON ANY NEW WORK TO SUPPORT THE FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY. ANY FIRMS
SIGNING THE PLEDGE THAT CURRENTLY WORK TO SUPPORT THE FOSSIL
FUEL INDUSTRY WILL PHASE OUT THIS WORK BY 2025, AT THE LATEST.
Signatories to the Law Firm Climate
Responsibility Pledge
These firms have demonstrated impressive climate leadership. All law firms are
encouraged to sign the pledge and can do so at www.ls4ca.org. The nine firms
that have signed the pledge as of August 2021 are as follows:
Bricklin & Newman LLP Kanji & Katzen PLLC
Earthjustice Sher Edling LLP
Green Economy Law Shute, Mihaly &
Professional Corporation Weinberger LLP
Goldblatt & Singer Strumwasser & Woocher
Gupta Wessler PLLC LLPYou can also read
