In a new examination of the erosion of institutional resistance during Donald Trump’s second term as president, Jacob Weisberg’s book, *Profiles in Cowardice: A Study of Collaboration in the Trump Era*, explores why many American elites, once critical of Trump, ultimately acquiesced to his administration despite the escalating authoritarian tone.
Weisberg’s book scrutinizes eight individuals who, despite apparent awareness of the risks posed by Trump’s governance, compromised their values and roles. The study emerges amid unprecedented challenges to democratic norms, including attacks on free speech, immigration enforcement practices, and pressures on academic independence. What stands out, according to the author and commentators, is not merely the overt abuses of power but the readiness of prominent figures to yield with limited resistance.
Among the subjects Weisberg profiles is Brad Karp, the former chairman of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, a New York law firm historically committed to civil rights causes such as the Brown v. Board of Education case and same-sex marriage legalization. During Trump’s first term, the firm actively opposed policies like family separation, deploying significant legal resources. However, after Trump issued an executive order targeting Paul Weiss, Karp reportedly negotiated an agreement that included the provision of substantial pro bono work for government departments, effectively curtailing the firm’s activism. This shift sparked concerns that it set a precedent for institutional submission within elite legal circles.
Weisberg attributes such concessions to competitive pressures within the private equity legal market. Firms like Paul Weiss face intense rivalry for top lawyers demanding multimillion-dollar salaries, with client loyalty often tied to individuals rather than firms. Fear of losing key clients, including Apollo Global Management—a major Republican donor’s firm—compelled Karp to frame the challenge to Paul Weiss as “existential.” Yet Weisberg notes that the financial consequences threatened were significant but not catastrophic, with projected partner income reductions unlikely to reach a level that would equate to genuine sacrifice.
Further complicating Karp’s legacy, his resignation earlier this year followed revelations about his association with Jeffrey Epstein, including providing the financier with legal counsel. Epstein’s connection to Leon Black, Apollo’s co-founder, underscores the intertwining of wealth, corporate power, and political influence that shaped decisions within high-tier institutions during the Trump era.
Alongside Weisberg’s analysis, philosopher Susan Neiman’s recent book, *Call It Evil: Understanding the Trump Era*, offers a theoretical framework for understanding elite cooperation with Trumpism. Neiman argues that a pervasive ethos favoring self-interest over virtue has normalized pragmatic self-preservation at the expense of moral courage. She references studies indicating that extended exposure to economic theory can increase individualistic behavior, suggesting that capitalist logic increasingly permeates social conduct, reducing the space for altruism and principled resistance.
Together, these works contend that the convergence of financial incentives, intra-elite competition, and an ideological climate skeptical of virtue contributed to a broad pattern of accommodation to authoritarian tendencies during Trump’s presidency. This phenomenon reflects not just a failure of individual resolve but a systemic shift that pressures institutions and leaders to subordinate democratic ideals to personal and organizational survival.