Skip to main content

BigLaw Firm's Firing of Junior Associate for Outside Writing Raises Job Boundary Questions

Kit Yona, M.A.

Article by: Kit Yona, M.A.

Legal Writer

Reviewed by Joseph Fawbush, Esq. | Last updated on

Where does a job end and an employee's private life begin? For a junior associate formerly at Davis Polk & Wardwell (Davis Polk), writing articles for local newspapers criticizing the federal government and Palantir was evidently a step too far.

Ryan W. Powers, a second-year tax associate at Davis Polk, was fired on June 12, 2025, after submitting an article to the firm for approval to be published in a local paper. The firm claimed he was guilty of violating an internal policy that gave Davis Polk considerable sway over the speech and dissemination permitted among its employees.

Rather than beg forgiveness, Powers continues to strike a defiant pose as his termination reverberates through the legal field. Should he have known better and respected his employer's parameters, or is Powers taking a necessary stand against BigLaw's capitulation to the second Trump administration?

Dying on His Feet Instead of Living on His Knees?

To say Powers' journey to employment with Davis Polk was unlikely is a bit of an understatement. He went from a high-school dropout at age 18 to a top-of-his-class college graduate three years later. Harvard Law followed, with a career at Davis Polk beginning after graduation in 2023. Specializing in tax law, Powers also logged substantial pro bono hours advising low-income clients on child support and custody cases.

When the second Trump Administration launched its attacks via executive orders against certain BigLaw firms in 2025, Davis Polk wasn't targeted. While it had sent lawyers to Kennedy Airport in 2017 to help those affected by President Donald Trump's Muslim Ban, the Davis Polk declined to offer similar immigration help this time around.

The firm instead announced in April that it would be representing Trump Media & Technology Group Corp. and Crypto.com in an ETF venture. The firm also hired former Trump White House counsel Stefan Passantino and removed the fact that two of its partners had been part of the Mueller investigation from their bios.

Distressed by major law firms knuckling under the pressure from the Trump administration, Powers began writing articles on his own time for publication in local newspapers. Stating his goal was to help non-lawyers understand the law, he wrote on current topics under his real name but without identifying which law firm he worked for.

On June 11, the firm told Powers that his writing had violated an internal policy. This policy allowed Davis Polk to restrict the speech of any employee it felt encroached on its interests. Powers had recently written about Palantir, a company that had its financial advisors represented by Davis Polk.

Powers was informed that the firm expected him to stop his independent writing that affected its clients. Instead of following that dictate, Powers penned a piece about the federal government's increased ability to track protestors. He submitted it to Davis Polk for approval, requesting a written explanation if the firm objected to it being published.

Within four hours, Powers found himself fired, escorted from Davis Polk's offices by security, and his name scrubbed from the company website.

Toeing the Company Line

It's standard practice for law firms to have policies in place that forbid employees from making unauthorized public comments on any client or representation they have. Some are vague enough to give firms substantial latitude in restricting the free speech of employees. This often walks the fine line between a firm protecting itself and stepping on the constitutional rights of its lawyers.

It's easy to see the argument that Powers knew the score but chose to poke the bear again anyway, and that Davis Polk's response was justified since it could be connected to a firm client. On the other hand, it calls into question how much control a law firm should have over an employee's private writings of largely public policy discussions.

Was this helpful?

Copied to clipboard