Top Law Schools

We're getting close to the point when hiring plan applications go out and people start doing interviews. Seems like a good time to start a conversation about where people are applying, interviewing, or if they're already hired.

Applying to a few hundred judges soon. I'm at a T14 with good grades, on a secondary journal. Not magna grades, and not EIC, so I'm thinking any competitive circuit is out. I'm not happy with my current job prospects, so I'm hoping the to get a clerkship to improve my resume and become a more desirable candidate in the future. I'm basically applying to any decent sized city where I could tolerate living. Basically everywhere except the Deep South (AL, LA, MS) and parts of the uninteresting middle of the country (N/SD, ID, WY).

I'm done and will be clerking on an east coast COA in a major city. Applied to about a dozen early judges throughout the country back in May and June. Had interviews lined up with judges on 6, 9, 10, and 11, but happily ended up wrapping up the process before I went off to do those.

.

(Not UVA student, and I did apply to some judges off my school's cycle)

I could see how someone would be if they thought about it like this: "My school has said not to apply until X date. I'm stressed about sitting on my hands for so long, but I'm following the rules. Now my school is congratulating a bunch of people who didn't follow the rules I agreed to live by, and they now have some of the jobs that I was going to apply for. Further, when I call to ask the school whether I can start applying now, the sch0ool tells me they won't help until date X. Seems hypocritical to me for the to congratulate students for not working within the system that they say I still have to work within."

The solution, of course is just to handle applying to judges who will accept early application themselves, rather than relying on the school for help, if you cannot pull that off (because, for example, all your letters of rec are sealed and in the school's possession, and the time it takes to get them from the professors directly would take you beyond date X anyway), I could lashing out at people instead.

Just out of curiosity: how do you figure out which judges are "off-plan" and will accept early applications?

Anonymous User wrote:Just out of curiosity: how do you figure out which judges are "off-plan" and will accept early applications?

(1) The judge's profile on OSCAR may indicate the judge is off-plan.
(2) Your school may have a list of judges who regularly hire off-plan.
(3) You can call chambers and ask.
(4) Check http://www.lawclerkaddict.com and/or http://www.lawschoolclerkship.blogspot.com

.

TTT-LS wrote:

DelDad wrote:(Not UVA student, and I did apply to some judges off my school's cycle)

I could see how someone would be if they thought about it like this: "My school has said not to apply until X date. I'm stressed about sitting on my hands for so long, but I'm following the rules. Now my school is congratulating a bunch of people who didn't follow the rules I agreed to live by, and they now have some of the jobs that I was going to apply for. Further, when I call to ask the school whether I can start applying now, the sch0ool tells me they won't help until date X. Seems hypocritical to me for the to congratulate students for not working within the system that they say I still have to work within."

I guess that makes some sense to me. I say some, because there's a logical leap in there that I still just do not find compelling. When the person knows, or should know, that certain judges hire exclusively off plan, and s/he hears from the school that the school won't help until the plan kicks in, the student should (if s/he really wants those clerkships) begin making efforts on his/her own. The student should not just do nothing and then whine about it later.

The bolded part is key - I think the only way I can see someone getting upset is if they didn't know that there are some judges who hire off cycle. I agree that a failure to learn something like this is inexcusable for someone who really wants a clerkship. But I think that has to be a the root of the discontent.

.

But regardless of whether a clerkship applicant could have researched the off-plan hiring tendencies of certain judges, why not just make everything as transparent and accessible as possible? It wouldn't be that hard for schools to publicize at the beginning of the summer which judges hire off-plan and the materials each of those judges requires. I suspect that some of the criticism of the pissed-off UVA students comes from people who have gotten their own clerkships off-plan. It's in the interest of the people who have achieved success from the current system to criticize those who argue that the current system is not as fair as it could be.

.

TTT-LS wrote:

asealclubber wrote:But regardless of whether a clerkship applicant could have researched the off-plan hiring tendencies of certain judges, why not just make everything as transparent and accessible as possible? It wouldn't be that hard for schools to publicize at the beginning of the summer which judges hire off-plan and the materials each of those judges requires.

Because that would involve the school getting involved in/supporting off-plan hiring, which the plan says they can't do (at least as I understand things).

Emory calls judges' chambers to verify which judges are hiring early and provides this list to students.

TTT-LS wrote:

asealclubber wrote:But regardless of whether a clerkship applicant could have researched the off-plan hiring tendencies of certain judges, why not just make everything as transparent and accessible as possible? It wouldn't be that hard for schools to publicize at the beginning of the summer which judges hire off-plan and the materials each of those judges requires.

Because that would involve the school getting involved in/supporting off-plan hiring, which the plan says they can't do (at least as I understand things). Since the schools can't do it, professors, websites, former clerks, and other secondary actors work to fill the gap on an ad hoc basis. Plus, some of the early judges have no interest whatsoever in transparency. They want the most elite applicants possible, they won't even look at people outside of the top 5 to 10 students at most schools, and thus they need professors to act as gatekeepers. To the extent that people object to that, their beef is with the judges and no one else.

Do you believe that if the schools are allowed by the "rules" to provide info regarding which judges hire off-plan, that it would be fairer to the students, in whatever sense you take that to mean, to provide that information publicly at the beginning of the summer?

Anyway, it seems like these "rules" don't mean a damn, so even if schools aren't technically allowed to provide that information, they should. In addition, it's odd that you cling to the "rules" as a defense for secrecy when the rules do not allow judges to hire off-plan in the first place.

I suspect that some of the criticism of the pissed-off UVA students comes from people who have gotten their own clerkships off-plan.

Why?[/quote]

Because I think the current system is so blatantly unfair to students in general that the only people who would argue that it should stay are those who have benefited from the system's lack of transparency or believe they can benefit from it in the future. What is wrong with transparency in this situation? I understand that these judges, in the end, will hire only those students with the best grades, but I think the cost to the clerks of tossing out applications is outweighed by the overall feeling of equal opportunity among students.

.

TTT-LS wrote:

asealclubber wrote:Do you believe that if the schools are allowed by the "rules" to provide info regarding which judges hire off-plan, that it would be fairer to the students, in whatever sense you take that to mean, to provide that information publicly at the beginning of the summer?

If schools are permitted to provide that information, then yes, it would seem more fair to me for the schools to provide this up front.

Anyway, it seems like these "rules" don't mean a damn, so even if schools aren't technically allowed to provide that information, they should. In addition, it's odd that you cling to the "rules" as a defense for secrecy when the rules do not allow judges to hire off-plan in the first place.

I'm not defending secrecy. It isn't like there's some big conspiracy out there. The information is available if only people will get off their lazy, entitled asses to get it. Further, the hiring plan rules DO NOT, I repeat DO NOT prohibit judges from hiring off plan. The federal judiciary is not subject to the same kind of top-down management that the executive branch is. While the D.C. Circuit has worked to put together sensible rules and to get many judges to adhere to those rules, the rules are nonetheless completely voluntary. Some judges perceive that the rules work against their best interest, so they ignore them. There's nothing nefarious about that, and equally so, there's nothing wrong in students figuring out who those judges are and applying accordingly.

I think the current system is so blatantly unfair to students in general that the only people who would argue that it should stay are those who have benefited from the system's lack of transparency or believe they can benefit from it in the future. What is wrong with transparency in this situation? I understand that these judges, in the end, will hire only those students with the best grades, but I think the cost to the clerks of tossing out applications is outweighed by the overall feeling of equal opportunity among students.

I see. I misread your initial statement, but now I get what you’re saying. I guess I'll just agree to disagree about the unfairness part. Everyone had the same opportunity to research and apply. I think it is worth repeating that there is no way, aside from consensus building, to impose a uniform, top-down system here. Judges are always going to do whatever they want. Smart applicants get up off their humps and respond to those preferences.

I understand that you don't think the whole secrecy thing is a big deal, and I would probably agree with you there. My point is just that, why does it need to be there in the first place? Sure, everyone has an equal opportunity to do research to get all the secrets, but why should they have to do that in the first place? It seems like your only answer to that question is that the schools aren't allowed to publicize the info. Well, my response to that is (1) why shouldn't they break that rule if they alreayd allow students to go to professors and former clerks to get the secret info, and (2) providing info about which judges cheat isn't the same as "supporting" or "getting involved in" off-plan hiring. In addition, if what poster above has said, Emory already provides this information, and I"ve seen no evidence that they've suffered consequences for breaking the "rules," if providing the info qualifies as breaking the "rules."

It seems like you're arguing for the status quo even though there is some unfairness in status quo, however slight that unfairness may be. Unless the costs of changing the status quo are prohibitive, I don't see why we shouldn't make the system as fair as possible.

You seem to characterize the students who are complaining as lazy. You ask them to "get off their humps" or to not want everything on a "platter." In doing so, it's as if you are patting yourself on the back (I'm assuming you got one of the off-plan clerkships) for not being lazy. Regardless of whether the other students could have tried harder to find out the info that is purposely made slightly difficult to obtain, there's no good reason the info about off-plan hiring should be kept as secret as it is.

EDIT:

Not to beat a dead horse, but it seems as if the ONLY reason you don't want the schools to provide the info is that you believe it is against the rules. But you said yourself that the rules are "voluntary" for the judges. Similarly, the rules are voluntary for the schools. Why shouldn't the schools provide the information in light of that?

..

..

Corsair wrote:Update: Finalized all of mine this morning. Now the waiting game begins.

How long do you expect to wait? I'll probably be doing this next year, and I'm having trouble getting consistent answers--maybe because applications are expected to go up so much this year that judges may take much longer deciding.

..

I'm a 3L at a T14 with good grades and on a secondary journal. If I don't get a call by 5pm on Friday, am I basically SOL?

.

Corsair wrote:I have heard some people getting offers before they leave the chambers, others within a day or two.

My offer was extended in chambers, but thankfully the judge gave me a few hours to mull it over. Some other judges are not so generous.

..

Flubbed an interview yesterday. Hopefully damage control was effective, but not holding my breath.

It's 10:00 - everyone waiting by their cell phones?