Talk:White-shoe firm

Untitled
The remark about elites being “white Anglo Saxon Protestants” is inflammatory and impertinent. The generic socioeconomic identity of “the elite” in America is a matter of common knowledge, and emphasizing it in this article accomplished little. What is the purpose of the remark? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.29.35.178 (talk) 09:15, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Irish American =/= Roman Catholic.
In the usage section it says, "Most white-shoe firms also excluded Roman Catholics, such as Irish Americans..," which implies either that all "Irish Americans" are Catholics or that "Irish Americans" were specifically excluded from these firms. Both interpretations are factually incorrect.

Regarding religious identity, it's been known for decades that most Americans who identify themselves as "Irish American" are Protestant rather than Catholic..

Secondly and more importantly, this phraseology is particularly awkward in light of the fact that several of these white-shoe firms were founded by Irish Americans, and also hired Irish Americans. For example, Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. was started by an Irish linen merchant and his sons. Sullivan & Cromwell was co-founded by Algernon Sydney Sullivan, the great-grandson of an Irish barrister from Cork. Hogan & Hartson was founded by Frank J. Hogan, while Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP was co-founded by James Byrne - both so-called Irish Americans (Harold J. Gallagher, another Irish-American who also got his name on the firm, was a partner). Willkie Farr & Gallagher was also one of the first major law firms to hire a female associate in 1939, namely Mary MacDonough, who also had an Irish background (see firm history).

I recommend changing this phrase to something like "excluded Irish Catholics" or "Irish American Catholics" rather than just "Irish Americans". Since this line was sourced mostly to dilettante journalists writing in publications like the "Washington Examiner" rather than professional scholarship, this shouldn't be that big of a deal. Or you could simply not single out specific ancestry groups at all, which really serves no encyclopedic purpose. I would just write that these firms had a habit of excluding Roman Catholics and leave it at that - a simple and self-explanatory statement.Jonathan f1 (talk) 04:07, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @ This is a sensible suggestion. I've implemented the change.  Why didn't you WP:BOLDly do it yourself?  XavierItzm (talk) 00:04, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately the last time I decided to get bold on here it resulted in an article space edit block, so I can't edit articles at the moment. I'm supposed to be learning a lesson by practicing the collaboration process with other editors on talk pages.Jonathan f1 (talk) 19:44, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @ Looks like soon it will be one year since your last unblock request was denied. Maybe you'd like to try again following the anniversary.  In the meantime, if you have other constructive recommendations such as the one you placed on this page, let me know on my talk page. XavierItzm (talk) 15:02, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Inaccurate page name
Wikipedia references “white shoe law firms” in relation for what is known popularly as biglaw or big law. The term biglaw is used almost exclusively within the industry and by the media outlets that cover it. “White shoe” is not a part of the conversation, because it’s an outdated historical term that used to encapsulate the leading American law firms in New York City. Many non-white shoe firms that were founded by their competitors in the 20th century are now equal in terms of profitability and reputation. In addition, white shoe firms no longer discriminate against Jews and other minority groups in hiring, so in contemporary times it’s largely an archaic descriptor.

I understand to those not familiar with biglaw this might seem like a nitpick, but virtually zero large firms or industry-adjacent media outlets use this term. If you ask attorneys working at the places mentioned on this page what it’s like to practice at a white shoe firm, it’s entirely possible they won’t know what you mean. This article’s title is misplaced and should be changed to biglaw. 166.205.222.54 (talk) 01:58, 4 January 2023 (UTC)