Earlier this month, revelations surfaced that Bob Giuffra of Sullivan & Cromwell had unexpectedly become entangled in the controversial E. Jean Carroll litigation against Donald Trump. Despite previous assurances to his partners that he would not be involved in such cases, Giuffra's name appeared prominently on a Supreme Court petition filed by Trump's legal team.

On Tuesday, Trump’s attorneys sought to overturn the substantial $83.3 million defamation verdict awarded to Carroll in 2024. This request comes after the Supreme Court had previously refused to engage with a $5 million sexual abuse verdict against Trump. The petition, bearing the signatures of Giuffra, Maxwell F. Gottschall, and Michael Martinich-Sauter, starkly contradicts the boundaries Giuffra had publicly committed to regarding Trump’s legal affairs.

The involvement of Sullivan & Cromwell in this highly charged case has sparked significant internal discord within the firm, evidenced by a reported partner revolt concerning Trump’s representation. This latest development might just exacerbate the existing tensions, as partners grapple with the firm's public alignment with such a contentious figure and case.

The reaction on social media has been swift and severe. Prominent critic George Conway tweeted his dismay, expressing shock at seeing a reputed law firm representing Trump in a case involving such serious allegations. This sentiment echoes the broader public and professional unease surrounding Sullivan & Cromwell’s decision to extend their legal services to Trump in these sensitive matters.

As the legal community and the public await the Supreme Court's decision on whether to take up the case, all eyes will be on how Sullivan & Cromwell manages this internal crisis and the repercussions this may have on its reputation. The unfolding events will likely serve as a significant case study on the complexities and potential fallout of representing high-profile clients in highly divisive legal battles.