Latest news with #Army-McCarthy
Scoop
3 days ago
- Politics
- Scoop
Mister Netanyahu, Have You No Sense Of Decency?
Opinion – Jeremy Rose Well be waiting a long time for the wanted war criminal Netanyahu to show any decency, but could we be approaching a tipping point where the establishment finally calls off a witch hunt after realising no one is safe from false accusations? The word antisemitism has become so debased that depending on who is using it I might well take it as a sign that the accused is worth listening to. When the World Criminal Court issued a warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu's arrest, he responded by saying the court was being antisemitic. One of the court's legal advisers was Theodor Meron a former Israeli ambassador and legal adviser who spent a chunk of his childhood in a Nazi concentration camp. Last week, Netanyahu declared the leaders of France, the UK and Canada of fuelling antisemitism. Their crime? Threatening 'concrete action' against Israel if it continues its 'egregious' blockade of aid entering Gaza. Egregious not genocidal. And the concrete action referred to wasn't sanctions or a full arms embargo but stalling free trade talks. The bitter irony is that with none of those countries having yet imposed a complete ban on arms exports to Israel; they are all in a sense fuelling a genocide. The Army-McCarthy hearings We're coming up to the 71st anniversary of the Army-McCarthy hearings where an army lawyer, Joseph Welch, rebuked senator Joseph McCarthy with the famous line: 'Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last?' We'll be waiting a long time for the wanted war criminal Netanyahu to show any decency, but could we be approaching a tipping point where the establishment finally calls off a witch hunt after realising no one is safe from false accusations? The McCarthyite red scare, which began in the late 1940s, saw more than 2000 federal workers sacked, thousands of academics, teachers, and union members pressured or forced to resign due to anti-communist policies, and up to 500 Hollywood directors and actors blacklisted for being leftwing or refusing to name names. Welch's rebuke was triggered by none of that. It was McCarthy turning his metaphorical guns onto the military implying he would expose high ranking army personnel that saw the army lawyer return fire. The conflating of criticism of Israel with antisemitism has been spectacularly successful in making any criticism of Israel a potentially career ending move. Three Ivy League presidents have been pushed out of their jobs for failing to crack down hard enough on students protesting the brutality of Israel's ongoing genocide. UK Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, whose popularity had seen the party become the biggest political movement in Europe, was toppled in 2016 after bogus accusations of antisemitism. In the purge of the Labour Party that followed Jews were five times more likely to be investigated for antisemitism than goys. It's the same story in Germany where Jews feature prominently among those cancelled for alleged antisemitism. Renowned professor of Jewish studies Peter Schäfe was forced to resign as the director of Berlin's Jewish Museum after he retweeted a post critical of Germany's anti-Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) resolutions. Greece's former finance minister Yanis Varoufakis – not a Jew – has been banned from Germany or even appearing via Zoom for this response, on the 8th of October 2023, to being asked if he condemned Hamas: 'I condemn every single atrocity, whomever is the perpetrator or the victim. What I do not condemn is armed resistance to an apartheid system designed as part of a slow-burning, but inexorable, ethnic cleansing programme. As a European, it is important to refrain from condemning either the Israelis or the Palestinians when it is us, Europeans, who have caused this never-ending tragedy: after practising rabid anti-Semitism for centuries, leading up to the uniquely vile Holocaust, we have been complicit for decades with the slow genocide of Palestinians, as if two wrongs make one right.' That nuanced response, with its acknowledgement of the dreadful legacy of real antisemitism, has not only seen him banned from speaking – in person or virtually – but dropped by his German publisher. Antisemitism is often referred to as the oldest hatred – with good reason – but the word itself is relatively recent. A 'scientific' word for an old hatred 19th Century German journalist Wilhelm Marr popularised the term in a pamphlet the title of which translates as: The way to victory of Germanism over Judaism. What distinguished antisemitism from the commonly used Judenhass – or Jewish hate – was the idea that it was a Jew's race not their religion that was deserving of hate. Antisemitism was a prejudice proud to speak its name. It was respectable in a way that religious intolerance wasn't. Prominent professors and politicians happily declared themselves antisemites and adherents of 'scientific racism.' It was an old idea dressed up in new clothing. 15th Century Spain passed Limpieza de Sangre (cleanliness of blood) statutes to allow discrimination against Jewish and Muslim converts to Christianity. The Judeo-Christian civilisational conflict with Islam, often referred to by right-wing supporters of Israel, is a relatively new construct. When the Jews were expelled from Spain the Ottomans sent ships to take them to new homes in Istanbul, Thessaloniki and Izmer. Times change and while it was once possible – even common – to be a respectable antisemite and scientific racist but frowned upon to discriminate based on religious belief, now the reverse is true. So-called new atheists like Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins declare all religions bad but Islam worse. 'Listening to the lovely bells of Winchester, one of our great mediaeval cathedrals. So much nicer than the aggressive sounding 'Allahu Akhbar.' Or is that just my cultural upbringing?' Dawkins once tweeted. The cultures of Europe have indeed cultivated racist ideas for centuries. And just as half a millennia ago conversion offered you no protection from the racism of the Spanish court, embracing Buddhism didn't protect Columbia university student Moshen Mahdawi from being snatched from a naturalisation interview by balaclava-clad ICE agents. His crime? Being Palestinian and telling his story. It's a topsy-turvy world where life-long anti-fascists like Jeremy Corbyn and Yanis Varoufakis are sanctioned on bogus claims of antisemitism while the likes of Elon Musk and Hungarian PM Victor Orban – both peddlers of old-style antisemitic conspiracies – are welcomed to Israel as friends and allies in a contrived battle of civilisations. One thing that differentiates antisemitism from the Judeophobia, which has been a European disease since the early days of Christianity, is that it places Jews among the victims of the continent's white supremacist legacy. It's perhaps no coincidence the Christopher Columbus set sail for the Americas in the same year, 1492, that Spain expelled its Jews and Muslims. The settler colonisation of the Americas has been estimated by historian David Stannard to have resulted in the death of 100 million indigenous people – many from introduced diseases but tens of millions also died in genocides only recently making their way into history books. Last week when Netanyahu declared Israel's attacks on Gaza 'a war against human beasts' he was echoing the words of settler colonialists from Alaska to Aotearoa and the dehumanising language of the Nazis against the Jews. So, back to that question about whether we've reached a tipping point where unfair accusations of antisemitism will be seen in a similar light to McCarthy's red scare. With Netanyahu accusing the leader of the Democrats party, Yair Golan, an IDF reserve major general, of promoting a blood libel for speaking out against the starving of babies in Gaza, it's hard not to draw parallels with the Army-McCarthy hearings. It's worth quoting the words that saw Israel's PM accuse Golan of a blood libel – a reference to the lie that Jews used the blood of non-Jewish children in the baking of matzos, and a trigger for centuries of pogroms. 'A sane country does not wage war against civilians, does not kill babies as a hobby, and does not set goals for itself like the expulsion of a population.' The idea that an IDF general speaking out against the killing of babies is propagating racist hatred of Jews is surely a leap too far even for many fervent Zionists. Another sign that the tide might be turning is Kenneth Stern, the lead drafter of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism, saying the US administration's weaponisation of the IHRA definition is making academics and students (including Jews) less safe. The self-described Zionist said the definition was being distorted and used to silence anti-Israel critics. The IHRA working definition has been widely adopted internationally – including by institutions in New Zealand and Australia. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have both criticised the definition claiming it has seen those documenting Israel's human rights abuses being falsely accused of antisemitism. It's a tragedy that weaponised accusations of antisemitism aimed at protecting Israel from criticism are obscuring a rise in Judeophobic conspiracy theories and attacks on Jewish community centres and synagogues around the world. And even more tragically that those accusations are blunting criticisms of Israel that could help bring the ongoing genocide in Gaza to an end.
Scoop
3 days ago
- Politics
- Scoop
Mister Netanyahu, Have You No Sense Of Decency?
The word antisemitism has become so debased that depending on who is using it I might well take it as a sign that the accused is worth listening to. When the World Criminal Court issued a warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu's arrest, he responded by saying the court was being antisemitic. One of the court's legal advisers was Theodor Meron a former Israeli ambassador and legal adviser who spent a chunk of his childhood in a Nazi concentration camp. Last week, Netanyahu declared the leaders of France, the UK and Canada of fuelling antisemitism. Their crime? Threatening 'concrete action' against Israel if it continues its 'egregious' blockade of aid entering Gaza. Egregious not genocidal. And the concrete action referred to wasn't sanctions or a full arms embargo but stalling free trade talks. The bitter irony is that with none of those countries having yet imposed a complete ban on arms exports to Israel; they are all in a sense fuelling a genocide. The Army-McCarthy hearings We're coming up to the 71st anniversary of the Army-McCarthy hearings where an army lawyer, Joseph Welch, rebuked senator Joseph McCarthy with the famous line: 'Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last?' We'll be waiting a long time for the wanted war criminal Netanyahu to show any decency, but could we be approaching a tipping point where the establishment finally calls off a witch hunt after realising no one is safe from false accusations? The McCarthyite red scare, which began in the late 1940s, saw more than 2000 federal workers sacked, thousands of academics, teachers, and union members pressured or forced to resign due to anti-communist policies, and up to 500 Hollywood directors and actors blacklisted for being leftwing or refusing to name names. Welch's rebuke was triggered by none of that. It was McCarthy turning his metaphorical guns onto the military implying he would expose high ranking army personnel that saw the army lawyer return fire. The conflating of criticism of Israel with antisemitism has been spectacularly successful in making any criticism of Israel a potentially career ending move. Three Ivy League presidents have been pushed out of their jobs for failing to crack down hard enough on students protesting the brutality of Israel's ongoing genocide. UK Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, whose popularity had seen the party become the biggest political movement in Europe, was toppled in 2016 after bogus accusations of antisemitism. In the purge of the Labour Party that followed Jews were five times more likely to be investigated for antisemitism than goys. It's the same story in Germany where Jews feature prominently among those cancelled for alleged antisemitism. Renowned professor of Jewish studies Peter Schäfe was forced to resign as the director of Berlin's Jewish Museum after he retweeted a post critical of Germany's anti-Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) resolutions. Greece's former finance minister Yanis Varoufakis – not a Jew – has been banned from Germany or even appearing via Zoom for this response, on the 8th of October 2023, to being asked if he condemned Hamas: 'I condemn every single atrocity, whomever is the perpetrator or the victim. What I do not condemn is armed resistance to an apartheid system designed as part of a slow-burning, but inexorable, ethnic cleansing programme. As a European, it is important to refrain from condemning either the Israelis or the Palestinians when it is us, Europeans, who have caused this never-ending tragedy: after practising rabid anti-Semitism for centuries, leading up to the uniquely vile Holocaust, we have been complicit for decades with the slow genocide of Palestinians, as if two wrongs make one right.' That nuanced response, with its acknowledgement of the dreadful legacy of real antisemitism, has not only seen him banned from speaking - in person or virtually – but dropped by his German publisher. Antisemitism is often referred to as the oldest hatred – with good reason – but the word itself is relatively recent. A 'scientific' word for an old hatred 19th Century German journalist Wilhelm Marr popularised the term in a pamphlet the title of which translates as: The way to victory of Germanism over Judaism. What distinguished antisemitism from the commonly used Judenhass – or Jewish hate – was the idea that it was a Jew's race not their religion that was deserving of hate. Antisemitism was a prejudice proud to speak its name. It was respectable in a way that religious intolerance wasn't. Prominent professors and politicians happily declared themselves antisemites and adherents of 'scientific racism.' It was an old idea dressed up in new clothing. 15th Century Spain passed Limpieza de Sangre (cleanliness of blood) statutes to allow discrimination against Jewish and Muslim converts to Christianity. The Judeo-Christian civilisational conflict with Islam, often referred to by right-wing supporters of Israel, is a relatively new construct. When the Jews were expelled from Spain the Ottomans sent ships to take them to new homes in Istanbul, Thessaloniki and Izmer. Times change and while it was once possible – even common – to be a respectable antisemite and scientific racist but frowned upon to discriminate based on religious belief, now the reverse is true. So-called new atheists like Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins declare all religions bad but Islam worse. 'Listening to the lovely bells of Winchester, one of our great mediaeval cathedrals. So much nicer than the aggressive sounding 'Allahu Akhbar.' Or is that just my cultural upbringing?' Dawkins once tweeted. The cultures of Europe have indeed cultivated racist ideas for centuries. And just as half a millennia ago conversion offered you no protection from the racism of the Spanish court, embracing Buddhism didn't protect Columbia university student Moshen Mahdawi from being snatched from a naturalisation interview by balaclava-clad ICE agents. His crime? Being Palestinian and telling his story. It's a topsy-turvy world where life-long anti-fascists like Jeremy Corbyn and Yanis Varoufakis are sanctioned on bogus claims of antisemitism while the likes of Elon Musk and Hungarian PM Victor Orban – both peddlers of old-style antisemitic conspiracies – are welcomed to Israel as friends and allies in a contrived battle of civilisations. One thing that differentiates antisemitism from the Judeophobia, which has been a European disease since the early days of Christianity, is that it places Jews among the victims of the continent's white supremacist legacy. It's perhaps no coincidence the Christopher Columbus set sail for the Americas in the same year, 1492, that Spain expelled its Jews and Muslims. The settler colonisation of the Americas has been estimated by historian David Stannard to have resulted in the death of 100 million indigenous people – many from introduced diseases but tens of millions also died in genocides only recently making their way into history books. Last week when Netanyahu declared Israel's attacks on Gaza 'a war against human beasts' he was echoing the words of settler colonialists from Alaska to Aotearoa and the dehumanising language of the Nazis against the Jews. So, back to that question about whether we've reached a tipping point where unfair accusations of antisemitism will be seen in a similar light to McCarthy's red scare. With Netanyahu accusing the leader of the Democrats party, Yair Golan, an IDF reserve major general, of promoting a blood libel for speaking out against the starving of babies in Gaza, it's hard not to draw parallels with the Army-McCarthy hearings. It's worth quoting the words that saw Israel's PM accuse Golan of a blood libel – a reference to the lie that Jews used the blood of non-Jewish children in the baking of matzos, and a trigger for centuries of pogroms. "A sane country does not wage war against civilians, does not kill babies as a hobby, and does not set goals for itself like the expulsion of a population." The idea that an IDF general speaking out against the killing of babies is propagating racist hatred of Jews is surely a leap too far even for many fervent Zionists. Another sign that the tide might be turning is Kenneth Stern, the lead drafter of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism, saying the US administration's weaponisation of the IHRA definition is making academics and students (including Jews) less safe. The self-described Zionist said the definition was being distorted and used to silence anti-Israel critics. The IHRA working definition has been widely adopted internationally – including by institutions in New Zealand and Australia. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have both criticised the definition claiming it has seen those documenting Israel's human rights abuses being falsely accused of antisemitism. It's a tragedy that weaponised accusations of antisemitism aimed at protecting Israel from criticism are obscuring a rise in Judeophobic conspiracy theories and attacks on Jewish community centres and synagogues around the world. And even more tragically that those accusations are blunting criticisms of Israel that could help bring the ongoing genocide in Gaza to an end.
Chicago Tribune
23-04-2025
- Politics
- Chicago Tribune
Kenneth Obel: Donald Trump's attacks against law firms follow in the footsteps of Joseph McCarthy
In February 1950, Wisconsin U.S. Sen. Joseph McCarthy began a four-year crusade of baseless accusations against alleged communists in government, academia and the entertainment industry. It was an era marked by fear, suppression of dissent and ruined careers. Roy Cohn, a New York lawyer, served as chief counsel to McCarthy's Senate subcommittee. Cohn played a central role in directing its investigations, many of which relied on unsubstantiated or misleading claims. If this seems familiar today, it may be because Cohn was one of President Donald Trump's early and most influential mentors. As portrayed in the movie 'The Apprentice,' Trump absorbed many lessons from Cohn: Attack relentlessly, never admit error and always claim victory. As promised during his campaign, Trump has launched a McCarthy-esque effort to retaliate against the private law firms he blames for investigations of his personal misconduct. This is just one of many attacks: against the federal workforce, immigrants, the courts, Democratic-led cities, major universities, transgender Americans and student protesters. These attacks aim to punish dissent and consolidate power by forcing institutions that could challenge his authority into submission. In the popular imagination, McCarthy's crusade was halted at a particular moment in 1954, on live television, during the Army-McCarthy hearings. Army counsel Joseph Welch famously rebuked McCarthy, 'Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last?' — puncturing his aura of invincibility. But other institutions also stepped up to oppose McCarthy. Courageous journalists exposed McCarthy's tactics, most notably Edward R. Murrow in his ' See It Now ' broadcast. Federal court decisions affirmed constitutional protections. Even the U.S. Senate — which, then as now, had a narrow Republican majority — grew uneasy with McCarthy's unchecked power and finally voted to censure him by a margin of 67-22. Today, the president himself plays the role of McCarthy and has thus far maintained lockstep loyalty from a Republican-controlled Congress. Maybe the Senate will eventually stand up to Trump; four years elapsed between McCarthy's emergence and his censure. Until then, the work of challenging the president's abuses of power must be undertaken by law firms, the courts, journalists, academic institutions, states, and cities — the very institutions the president is assaulting. Law firms such as Jenner & Block, Perkins Coie, WilmerHale and Susman Godfrey have shown courage in the face of unconstitutional executive orders barring their lawyers from federal buildings and stripping them of security clearances, and their legal challenges have secured preliminary victories, with one judge characterizing the administration's actions as a 'shocking abuse of power.' More than 500 firms have joined a legal brief challenging the president's actions. In standing up for their constitutional rights, these firms vindicate the rule of law for everyone. Regrettably, not one of the top 20 firms ranked by revenue has yet stood up in opposition to the administration. Indeed, as a lawyer, it is distressing to me to see the country's most powerful law firms yield to presidential pressure rather than join battle alongside their peers. When the president targeted Paul, Weiss, the firm folded within days, agreeing to a variety of the president's demands. Not to be outdone in the capitulation Olympics, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom surrendered to the president in advance of any executive order being issued — a textbook example of what professor Timothy Snyder terms ' anticipatory obedience.' Skadden has now been joined by several other Big Law titans, including Kirkland & Ellis, the wealthiest law firm in the world by partner profits; Simpson Thacher & Bartlett; Latham & Watkins; and others. (The Above The Law blog helpfully maintains a 'Big Law Spine Index.') As part of their terms of surrender, these firms have promised a reported $1 billion in free legal services to the president's favored causes. The president is clearly satisfied with his results: 'They're all bending and saying: 'Sir, thank you very much.' … 'Where do I sign? Where do I sign?'' It's not clear whether the U.S. government or Trump personally (as if this is even a meaningful distinction in the current administration) is the party to these 'settlements.' Recent reporting from Crain's Chicago Business has called into question whether any enforceable agreements even exist. Regardless, given the power the president wields, it's evident that these firms have subordinated themselves to the president in ways they are likely to regret. I worked briefly at Paul, Weiss some years ago. I remember the firm's pride in its role in advancing civil rights, most notably as advisers to Thurgood Marshall in the case of Brown v. Board of Education, which ended legal segregation in public schools. During the first Trump administration, Kirkland (where I have also worked) represented a nationwide class of immigrant teens held in Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention centers. One can only imagine the legal causes that lawyers from these firms will now be called upon to support. Suing the federal government on behalf of the recently pardoned Jan. 6 insurrectionists, perhaps? This concerning trend extends beyond law firms. Public companies such as Meta and Disney have already modeled submission as an acceptable strategy, settling baseless Trump lawsuits in return for multimillion-dollar payments. Under threat of an illegal and pretextual cutoff of federal funding, Columbia University shocked its faculty by allowing the administration to dictate university procedures and staffing decisions. However rational these individual concessions may be, collectively, they normalize the president's domination tactics and embolden him to keep going. Those who have not yet been targeted bury their heads in the sand, pretending that not looking is the same as not being seen. But that doesn't make you safe — it just makes you easier to pick off. As in nature, survival depends on sticking together. Will institutions finally find their spines? Just recently, the Trump administration summarily imposed nearly $2 billion in Columbia-style funding freezes on Northwestern and Cornell. It's gotten to be like an authoritarian edition of 'The Oprah Winfrey Show': 'You lose funding, and you lose funding! Everybody loses funding!' If there's one clear lesson from the McCarthy era, it is that bullies keep bullying until people fight back. Silence isn't neutral — it's an invitation for more of the same. Institutions should remember how McCarthy's crusade was finally stopped: not through cautious compliance, but through courage, solidarity, and a collective insistence on freedom and fairness. The question facing America's institutions today isn't whether they can afford to resist, but whether they can afford not to.
Boston Globe
22-04-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Today in History: April 22, the Oklahoma Land Rush of 1889
In 1915, German forces unleashed its first full-scale use of chlorine gas against Allied troops at the start of the Second Battle of Ypres in Belgium during World War I. Thousands of Allied soldiers are believed to have died from the poison gas attacks. Advertisement In 1954, the publicly televised sessions of the Senate Army-McCarthy hearings began. In 1960, Massachusetts poet Anne Sexton had her first collection of poems published, 'To Bedlam and Part Way Back.' In 1970, an estimated 20 million Americans participated in gatherings for the first Earth Day, a series of events proposed by Senator Gaylord Nelson, a Wisconsin Democrat, to promote environmental protections. Advertisement In 1994, Richard M. Nixon, the 37th president of the United States and the first to resign from office, died at a New York hospital four days after having a stroke. He was 81. In 2000, in a dramatic predawn raid, armed immigration agents seized 6-year-old Elian Gonzalez, the Cuban boy at the center of a custody dispute, from his relatives' home in Miami. Elian was reunited with his father at Andrews Air Force Base near Washington. In 2005, Zacarias Moussaoui pleaded guilty in a federal courtroom outside Washington, D.C., to conspiring with the Sept. 11 hijackers to kill Americans. (Moussaoui was sentenced to life in prison in May 2006.) In 2010, the Deepwater Horizon oil platform, operated by BP, sank into the Gulf of Mexico two days after a massive explosion that killed 11 workers.
Boston Globe
08-04-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
This Boston law firm helped bring down Senator McCarthy in 1954. Now it's taking on Trump.
History may have something to say, too. Related : WilmerHale, headquartered in Boston and D.C., notes in its complaint that a lawyer from predecessor firm Hale and Dorr is credited with bringing down then-Senator Joseph McCarthy's fear-mongering efforts to expose supposed communists in the 1950s. During the nationally televised Army-McCarthy hearings, bow-tied Boston lawyer in books, law schools, and even Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up In his attacks on Big Law, Trump has pointed to other supposed sins, such as encouraging diversity in hiring or championing voters' rights. But there's a recurring theme: Trump's perceived enemies are named as reasons for his attacks. In other words, it's payback time. Advertisement Trump touched on all these talking points in his Advertisement Similar to other attacks, the salvo against WilmerHale attempts to limit access to courthouses and other government buildings, suspend federal security clearances, and terminate federal government contracts. Several firms capitulated faster than it takes to snap a briefcase shut. Paul, Weiss chair Brad Karp Not everyone is shying away from the fight. Perkins Coie and Jenner & Block sued the Trump administration after getting hit with executive orders, just like WilmerHale did. Advertisement These vitriolic attacks, along with similar ones against universities, have been compared to McCarthyism, when the late Wisconsin senator engendered a climate of fear with his efforts to root out communists. And, as WilmerHale mentions in its lawsuit, the firm knows a thing or two about McCarthyism. American politician Joseph McCarthy testifies against the US Army during the Army-McCarthy hearings in Washington, D.C., on June 9, 1954. Getty Images/Getty Welch's star turn in the Army-McCarthy hearings of 1954 often gets credited with shifting popular sentiment against McCarthy. The US Army, in response to a McCarthy attack, had hired Welch on a pro bono basis. At one point in the hearings, Welch was needling Cohn over his assertion that the Army was hiding communists. That prompted McCarthy to make the mistake of singling out an associate at Hale and Dorr, noting that he once belonged to a progressive attorneys' group — essentially accusing the firm of harboring a communist within its ranks. A clearly agitated Welch fought back, saying it was unfair to publicly tarnish his younger colleague's reputation. McCarthy, like a dog with a bone, continued undeterred. Welch interrupted again, prompting the oft-quoted riposte about McCarthy's sense of decency after asking him not to 'assassinate this lad' any further and saying, 'I like to think I'm a gentle man, but your forgiveness will have to come from someone other than me.' McCarthy's popularity seemingly vanished after the hearing; Welch would go on to have a second career as a TV personality. WilmerHale's lawsuit against Trump only touches on this history, focusing instead on how the executive order is unconstitutional. Among other things, WilmerHale says the US Constitution protects its employees' and clients' rights to speak freely, petition the courts and other government institutions, and choose attorneys without fear of retaliation. The right to counsel, the law firm argues, has served as a foundation for the US legal system dating back to when John Adams famously defended British soldiers after the Boston Massacre. Advertisement Hours after WilmerHale sued Trump, federal judge Richard Leon limiting access to federal buildings, and another one that effectively would have banned it from working with federal contractors or doing business with the federal government. The revocation of security clearances would remain in place, for now anyway. Much is at risk for the 2,000-person firm: More than four-fifths of its 25 largest clients have contracts with federal agencies — a group of clients that together account for more than $300 million in annual revenue — and the firm has more than 500 cases pending in various federal courts. That's according to a statement filed in court by general counsel Bruce Berman, who emphasized the firm's public-service tradition and how its attorneys represent the full political spectrum. (WilmerHale declined to comment beyond And much could be at risk for the country's entire legal system. That's one reason the two most prominent bar associations in Massachusetts hailed their hometown heroes for fighting back. Rich Page, head of the Boston Bar Association, pointed to Welch's role in ending the McCarthy-era witch hunts. He said his group is proud that a Boston law firm 'helped end that dark moment in our history, and we are just as proud — and not a bit surprised — that WilmerHale is standing up again now.' Advertisement Meanwhile, Mass. Bar Association president Victoria Santoro praised WilmerHale for standing up for the right to counsel, citing the work of another legendary Hale and Dorr lawyer, 'Not every client can be a politically expedient client,' Santoro said. 'But every client has a right to counsel, and law firms should not find themselves in political crosshairs because of the work they're empowered to do.' It's a safe bet that the attorneys at WilmerHale are well aware of Welch's legacy, if not inspired by it. Welch and McCarthy both died within a decade after they tanged with each other on national TV. One went down in history as a hero. The other, something else entirely. Jon Chesto can be reached at
