We recently caught up with Nikita Crowley (NY, ’13), Director and Associate General Counsel of Privacy at Meta Platforms. Nikita started her career as a law clerk for Justice John Byrne AO RFD in Queensland, Australia before moving to New York in 2013 and joining Davis Polk’s Mergers & Acquisition practice as an associate.
In this Spotlight, we discuss Nikita’s work at Meta, her reflections on the intersection of technology and law, and the skills she believes are essential for lawyers seeking to grow into leadership roles.
Tell us about your role and what a typical day looks like for you.
I lead the Risk Organization Counseling team within Meta’s Legal department. We provide specialized privacy expertise to Legal and counsel Meta’s central Risk organization, which sits at the intersection of privacy counseling and regulatory readiness on a global scale. In practice, that means my team advises on some of the most consequential data governance and regulatory compliance challenges facing Meta’s products and infrastructure – from specialized privacy legal topics to how we operationalize new regulatory obligations as they emerge (and they emerge constantly).
A typical day involves a mix of strategic and operational work. I might start with a cross-functional alignment session on a new regulatory requirement, shift to reviewing a risk assessment for a product launch, and then spend time working through strategy discussions for our central risk tooling for product reviews and launches. The through-line is calibrating risk, driving alignment across stakeholders and making sure my team is set up for success. No two days look the same, the work is nuanced and the problems are nascent, which, to me, is what makes the role compelling.
What do you believe are the most complex or interesting legal challenges facing global tech companies today?
The regulatory landscape for global tech is not static – it requires constant calibration. The complexity that arises in (i) navigating the sheer velocity of new privacy frameworks across jurisdictions (each with its own definitions, obligations and enforcement posture) and (ii) operationalizing compliance at scale, is acute for global tech companies. At the same time, many legal constructs have not kept pace with emerging technologies, generating genuinely novel legal questions. The challenge isn’t just understanding the law as written – it’s anticipating how requirements will evolve. That combination of complexity, ambiguity and scale is what makes this work both demanding and deeply interesting.
What impact has your Davis Polk experience had on your career?
Davis Polk gave me a foundation in rigorous legal analysis and a standard for excellence that I carry into everything I do. The training I received from Phillip Mills, Frank Azzopardi, Pritesh Shah and countless others – particularly the emphasis on precision, taking ownership of the work, and understanding the business context behind every legal question – shaped my approach today. I learned quickly that the quality of your thinking matters as much as the quality of your writing.
What skills do you think the next generation of lawyers will need that weren’t as essential when you first started?
The legal profession is being reshaped by technology, regulatory velocity and the increasing complexity of cross-functional work – and the next generation of lawyers will need to meet that shift. Two things stand out.
First, fluency with technology and data. You don’t need to be an engineer, but you need to understand how products are built, how data flows and how technical architecture intersects with legal obligations. Without that, you’re advising in the abstract. A fluency with AI tools is what competency with Word and email used to be to employability.
Second, the ability to operate cross-functionally. Modern legal work, particularly in-house, requires driving alignment across engineering, policy, product and business teams. That’s a skill set that goes beyond legal drafting; it demands communication, influence and a willingness to rigorously develop strategic solutions. My own personal bias is that lawyers with technology transactions experience thrive as product counsel because they are practiced in this skill set.
What skills or qualities do you think are most important for lawyers who want to grow into leadership positions?
Three qualities come to mind.
The first is relentless ownership. In leadership, you can’t wait for someone to hand you the answer – or the problem. You need to see the gap, take responsibility and drive it to resolution. That means owning outcomes, not just tasks, and holding yourself accountable even when the path forward isn’t clear.
The second is curiosity. The best leaders I’ve worked with are genuinely curious – about the business, the technology, the regulatory environment and the people around them. Curiosity drives better questions, deeper understanding and ultimately better judgment. It also keeps you learning, which is non-negotiable in a field that evolves as quickly as ours.
The third is the ability to think and act strategically. Strong legal analysis is table stakes. What distinguishes a leader is the ability to see the broader landscape – where the business is heading, where the risks are emerging and how to position the legal function to add value beyond reactive compliance. Strategic thinking is what moves you from trusted adviser to institutional leader.
Have any mentors been particularly helpful to you in your career?
I’ve had the benefit of many wonderful mentors in my career, though three stand out.
The first is Justice John Byrne AO RFD, the judge I clerked for in the Supreme Court of Queensland, Australia. He modeled integrity, intellectual rigor, fairness and an extraordinary work ethic – and he taught me that the quality of your preparation is the quality of your judgment. That lesson has stayed with me.
The second is Phillip Mills at Davis Polk. Phillip showed me what it means to be a truly excellent lawyer and a trusted business adviser: technically precise, commercially astute and deeply invested in developing the people around him. The standard he set – both for the work and for how you treat colleagues – has been a touchstone throughout my career.
The third is Rufus Pichler at Fenwick. Rufus is a lawyer I fondly describe as a “neurosurgeon” within his profession – in addition to immense intellect, he brings a strategic, forward-looking perspective to every problem, and, when he worked together, he trusted me with responsibility early in my career. That combination of mentorship and opportunity was formative in helping me develop confidence in my own judgment and voice as a lawyer.
I’m deeply grateful to all three – I now try to pay it forward with my own team.