← All stories
Politics

Litman says Raskin signalling future House probe into Trump-aligned law firms

MeidasTouch · 🚨FURIOUS Raskin SENDS URGENT WARNING to Trump LAW FIRMS!! · July 24, 2026
Litman says Raskin signalling future House probe into Trump-aligned law firms
MeidasTouch
MeidasTouch
🚨FURIOUS Raskin SENDS URGENT WARNING to Trump LAW FIRMS!!
"This is Rascin saying again, the cavalry is coming and you guys best be ready. And we've adverted different times to internal debates uh within the Democratic party or members Democratic members in Congress about how aggressive to be in terms of accountability, backwardlooking, forwardlooking."
Legal analyst Harry Litman, speaking on MeidasTouch, says Rep Jamie Raskin is putting large law firms on notice that they could face congressional scrutiny if Democrats win the House and Raskin ends up leading or heavily involved with the Judiciary Committee. The discussion centres on a reported Raskin letter seeking details from the firm the speakers call “Scatteren” (likely Skadden) about a purported agreement to provide $100 million in pro bono work, and raises questions about possible conflicts tied to an Intel-related transaction mentioned in Delaware Chancery Court filings.

About this episode

MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas discusses Rep Jamie Raskin’s reported warning to major law firms that entered into agreements with the Trump administration, framing it as an early signal of potential congressional scrutiny if Democrats regain control of the House. Meiselas says Raskin sent a letter to a firm he refers to as “Scatteren” (likely Skadden), questioning a purported arrangement to provide $100 million in pro bono work and requesting details on how the figure was calculated and what work was performed. The segment also references allegations raised in Delaware Chancery Court filings in shareholder litigation involving Intel, suggesting the firm’s work for Intel and a contemporaneous arrangement with the Trump administration could present conflicts of interest; the episode does not provide direct excerpts from the court record.

Guest Harry Litman characterises Raskin’s posture as an accountability-driven approach within ongoing Democratic debates over how aggressively to investigate past conduct. Litman argues Congress has a legitimate oversight interest in uncovering how government power was used to pressure private institutions, including law firms and universities, and suggests firms that “bent the knee” have already faced reputational and internal professional consequences. Meiselas speculates that future hearings could be highly public and embarrassing for firm leadership, comparing the prospect to past high-profile congressional testimony in sports doping investigations.

The episode ends with channel promotion and subscription requests (not editorially relevant).

Key takeaways

More stories More from MeidasTouch