abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb
Story

26 Oct 2020

USA: Report alleges biggest law firms are contributing to climate change through defense of fossil fuel interests

A new report by Law Students for Climate Accountability is calling out big law firms for their role in the climate crisis. The Law Firm Climate Change Scorecard analyzes litigation, transactional, and lobbying work conducted by the 2020 Vault Law 100 law firms - a US-based ranking of the most prestigious law firms - for the benefit of fossil fuel clients. The report argues that law firms are not neutral actors, and that Vault 100 firms have no shortage of clients to chose from, yet too many have chosen the side of actors' responsible for the climate change crisis.

The Business & Human Rights Resource Centre invited all law firms who received a failing score according to the report's methodology to respond. Their responses or non-responses are included below.

Company Responses

Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP

No Response

Shearman & Sterling

No Response

Sidley Austin

No Response

Simpson Thacher & Bartlett

No Response

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

No Response

Squire Patton Boggs

No Response

Sullivan & Cromwell

No Response

Vinson & Elkins LLP

No Response

White & Case

No Response

King & Spalding

No Response

Hogan Lovells

No Response

Kirkland & Ellis

No Response

Latham & Watkins

No Response

McGuire Woods

No Response

Milbank

No Response

Munger, Tolles & Olson

No Response

Linklaters View Response
Clifford Chance View Response
Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

No Response

Allen & Overy View Response
Baker & Hostetler LLP

No Response

Baker Botts LLP

No Response

Baker McKenzie View Response
Cravath Swaine & Moore

No Response

Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher

No Response

Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer View Response

Timeline

Privacy information

This site uses cookies and other web storage technologies. You can set your privacy choices below. Changes will take effect immediately.

For more information on our use of web storage, please refer to our Data Usage and Cookies Policy

Strictly necessary storage

ON
OFF

Necessary storage enables core site functionality. This site cannot function without it, so it can only be disabled by changing settings in your browser.

Analytics cookie

ON
OFF

When you access our website we use Google Analytics to collect information on your visit. Accepting this cookie will allow us to understand more details about your journey, and improve how we surface information. All analytics information is anonymous and we do not use it to identify you. Google provides a Google Analytics opt-out add on for all popular browsers.

Promotional cookies

ON
OFF

We share news and updates on business and human rights through third party platforms, including social media and search engines. These cookies help us to understand the performance of these promotions.

Your privacy choices for this site

This site uses cookies and other web storage technologies to enhance your experience beyond necessary core functionality.