When oil giant Chevron lost a multibillion-dollar environmental lawsuit to a group of Indigenous Ecuadorians, the company refused to pay up — and instead went to war against Steven Donziger, the attorney who won the historic judgment.
Since 2009, hundreds of lawyers from 60 firms have made Donziger’s life a living hell. For the last two years, he’s been under house arrest in New York, forced to wear an electronic ankle monitor — and now he’s facing a six-month prison sentence after refusing to turn over his electronic devices to Chevron’s lawyers.
Donziger has appealed to his own New York congressional delegation for help, but powerful Democrats including Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand and House Judiciary Chair Jerry Nadler have remained conspicuously silent on the case.
Now, new reporting from The Intercept has revealed that Gillibrand has received almost $200,000 in campaign donations from the law firm leading Chevron’s attacks — where Nadler’s own son is an associate.
The cozy relationship between members of Congress and the lucrative world of corporate law barely raises an eyebrow at many news outlets. But at The Intercept, we’re following the money and digging deeper into these potential conflicts of interest.
If you’ve saved your payment information with ActBlue Express, your donation will go through immediately:
Donziger’s battle with Chevron began in Ecuador, where he won a $9.5 billion judgment against the company on behalf of Indigenous peoples and farmers. Rather than pay up, Chevron removed its operations from the country and dedicated a battalion of lawyers to retaliate against Donziger in corporate-friendly U.S. courts.
The United Nations High Commissioner on Human Rights recently ruled that Donziger’s house arrest violates international law, urging U.S. courts to drop the charges against him. Instead, Donziger has been sentenced to six months in jail, pending an appeal.
Meanwhile, Gillibrand has played a crucial role in nominating a partner from Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Chevron’s lead firm on the Donziger case, to the federal bench. Jennifer H. Rearden worked on the case, hosted multiple fundraisers for Gillibrand during her time at Gibson Dunn, and personally donated over $30,000 to the senator and her PAC.
Rearden revealed during the judicial nomination process that her path toward the bench began in talks with Gillibrand. And while she was ultimately never confirmed, her ties to Gillibrand create “the appearance of a quid pro quo” that could damage public trust, according to a researcher at the campaign finance watchdog OpenSecrets.
These kinds of apparent conflicts of interest are all too common among politicians and the donor class — and too often they’re ignored or treated like business as usual. The Intercept is different. Our reporting connects the dots between the wealthy and powerful and the lawmakers who receive their largesse, regardless of party lines.
