Boies Schiller Flexner: Prestige Entangled with a Series of Scandals
Boies Schiller Flexner: Prestige Entangled with a Series of Scandals
For nearly three decades, Boies Schiller Flexner has cultivated the image of an elite litigation powerhouse. Founded in 1997 by David Boies, the firm quickly climbed into the top tier of American law, reaching as high as number twelve on the Vault 100 and boasting millions in profits per equity partner. Its lawyers represented presidents, corporate giants, and victims of powerful men, while the firm itself prided itself on bold strategies and relentless advocacy. But behind that prestige lies a record of scandal that has repeatedly exposed ethical lapses, conflicts of interest, and even outright incompetence. The early glamour has worn thin; what remains is a firm increasingly defined by controversies of its own making.
Boies Schiller Flexner in Washington, DC (Photo:David Lat)
A serious stain came from Boies Schiller’s deep involvement with Theranos, the Silicon Valley blood-testing company that turned out to be a massive fraud. Boies not only served as legal counsel to Theranos and its founder Elizabeth Holmes, but also joined the company’s board while his firm actively worked to silence critics and shield the company from scrutiny. Whistleblowers described how non-disclosure agreements, legal threats, and surveillance were deployed against them, creating a culture of intimidation that BSF helped enforce. Holmes later claimed she believed BSF represented her personally as well as the company, a confusion rooted in the firm’s failure to clearly define its engagement. When Theranos collapsed in 2015 and Holmes was indicted for fraud a few years later, the firm’s entanglement became a textbook example of the dangers of conflicted representation—an elite law firm defending, and profiting from, a company built on deception.
If the Theranos saga exposed poor judgment, the Weinstein affair revealed something darker. In 2017, theNew Yorkerreported that Boies had signed a contract with Black Cube, a private intelligence agency run by former Israeli operatives, to suppress reporting on Harvey Weinstein’s history of sexual assault. Black Cube agents posed as journalists, activists, and even potential victims to gather information on women preparing to come forward, including actress Rose McGowan. Disturbingly, Boies Schiller was at the time also representingThe New York Timesin unrelated matters—one of the very outlets investigating Weinstein. When theTimesdiscovered the double-dealing, it severed ties immediately, denouncing BSF’s behavior as a “grave betrayal of trust.” Boies defended himself by claiming he thought investigators were only verifying allegations, but the conflict of interest was glaring. A firm supposedly committed to justice had lent its resources to discrediting women and obstructing the press, a scandal that irreparably damaged its standing.
No Lessons Learned
Yet some of the firm did not learn restraint. In September 2025, BSF found itself humiliated once again—this time not for ethical compromises but for sheer incompetence. In a California appellate case involving alleged victims of actor Danny Masterson and the Church of Scientology,BSF partner John Kucera admittedthat a response brief filed under his supervision contained numerous AI-generated errors. Opposing counsel identified citations that mischaracterized holdings, referenced irrelevant law, and even included a case that did not exist. Kucera conceded that artificial intelligence tools had been used, that the firm’s safeguards had failed, and that he had not properly verified the brief before filing. Commentators quickly labeled it Biglaw’s most significant AI blunder to date. For a firm that had built its reputation on precision, strategy, and excellence, the sight of fabricated citations in a high-stakes case was nothing short of humiliating.
Across these scandals, the pattern is unmistakable. In Theranos, BSF became entangled with a client engaged in systemic fraud, compromising its independence. In Weinstein, it crossed ethical boundaries so flagrantly that a major client publicly denounced and dropped the firm. In the AI debacle, it demonstrated an astonishing lack of competence in the most basic of legal tasks: checking citations. Time and again, the firm has pursued aggressive tactics—aligning with powerful but toxic clients, relying on covert operatives, or rushing to embrace untested technology—without sufficient regard for oversight, ethics, or even accuracy. Each time, its leaders claimed their intentions were defensible. But in law, as in reputation, intentions matter little. Outcomes matter more. And for Boies Schiller Flexner, the outcomes have been scandal, embarrassment, and a legacy increasingly defined not by victories in court but by the firm’s own misjudgments.