SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Seek and share information about clerkship applications, clerkship hiring timelines, and post-clerkship employment opportunities.
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are sharing sensitive information about clerkship applications and clerkship hiring. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned."
Jchance
Posts: 713
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2012 2:17 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby Jchance » Sun May 14, 2017 11:46 pm

A lot of law profs at each of your schools have clerked for SCOTUS. Bring your questions to them instead, you have access to reliable sources, why trust random anon on the internet?

Let me even spell it out for you: identify law profs who are former SCOTUS clerks, ask them out for coffee, ask about their experiences, especially the selection and hiring process.
Last edited by Jchance on Sun May 14, 2017 11:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

LurkerTurnedMember
Posts: 222
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:31 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby LurkerTurnedMember » Sun May 14, 2017 11:49 pm

Jchance wrote:A lot of law profs at each of your schools have clerked for SCOTUS. Bring your questions to them instead, you have access to reliable sources, why trust random anon on the internet?


Yea I know. I'm years after law school. I just came in here thinking I'd ask a quick question. OP would answer. But I got trolled bad. Lol I'll stop responding. Good luck y'all.

Anonymous User
Posts: 302912
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby Anonymous User » Mon May 15, 2017 12:01 am

LurkerTurnedMember wrote:
Jchance wrote:A lot of law profs at each of your schools have clerked for SCOTUS. Bring your questions to them instead, you have access to reliable sources, why trust random anon on the internet?


Yea I know. I'm years after law school. I just came in here thinking I'd ask a quick question. OP would answer. But I got trolled bad. Lol I'll stop responding. Good luck y'all.


Other posters here are overreacting. It's rare, but law students graduating outside top 10% have clerked for SCOTUS. See, e.g., http://www.bancroftpllc.com/who-we-are/ ... -mcginley/ (graduated "only" cum laude from HLS, clerked for Alito in OT 2014).

Then again, this means basically nothing for most T13 students graduating top 20%.

lawlorbust
Posts: 421
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 11:50 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby lawlorbust » Mon May 15, 2017 12:24 am

Anonymous User wrote:
LurkerTurnedMember wrote:
Jchance wrote:A lot of law profs at each of your schools have clerked for SCOTUS. Bring your questions to them instead, you have access to reliable sources, why trust random anon on the internet?


Yea I know. I'm years after law school. I just came in here thinking I'd ask a quick question. OP would answer. But I got trolled bad. Lol I'll stop responding. Good luck y'all.


Other posters here are overreacting. It's rare, but law students graduating outside top 10% have clerked for SCOTUS. See, e.g., http://www.bancroftpllc.com/who-we-are/ ... -mcginley/ (graduated "only" cum laude from HLS, clerked for Alito in OT 2014).

Then again, this means basically nothing for most T13 students graduating top 20%.


I mean, FFS--Gorsuch "only" graduated cum laude. No one suggested there was a top 5%/10% HYS absolute cutoff, but these are guys who are basically the exceptions that prove the rule.

LurkerTurnedMember wrote:Lol Someone said there are stats of all the clerks out there yet I'm sure if I managed to find em.all there would be a noticeable amount not top 5% or top 10%. But nevermind. OP hasn't been on for a while.


Lurker: Look, wikipedia has a very nice compilation of SCOTUS clerks. Most of them are googleable and you'll probably be able to get a good sense of their class rank. I hope you find your white whale.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_l ... ted_States

User avatar
mjb447
Posts: 1242
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 4:36 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby mjb447 » Mon May 15, 2017 12:36 am

Here are some of OP's answers about qualifications (emphasis mine throughout). Shockingly, socioeconomic diversity was not mentioned as a primary qualification: if the judges thought it was as important as Lurker hopes it is, I assume OP would have mentioned it. (Also, top 20% at any ol' T14 doesn't necessarily have a decent chance.)

But surely we're all just trolling, right?

Anonymous User wrote:This is OP. [...]

I think anyone in the top 5% of a T14 or who is #1 of a top 25 or so school has enough of a chance that it is worth considering. But even in those bands the chances diverge a lot. And no one has an objectively good chance just based on school/grades. Connections matter so much it is hard to describe without risking breaking my anonymity.


Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:First, thanks for this, OP. Truly, truly appreciated.

I'm clerking for a semi-feeder but graduated from a school that has never sent anyone to SCOTUS. Worth applying? The school doesn't really have much experience in providing institutional support for SCOTUS clerkship applicants, so what should the administration be doing?


This is OP.

Assume you mean either Vanderbilt or Emory, since these are the two schools which, from my recollection, have never sent a clerk but occasionally have credible applicants.

If so, or approximately: you need for your dean and clerkship committee (assuming you have one, since you have a semi-feeder) to reach out to better known professors to see who they know as far as SCOTUS clerks go and to see who knows the Justices. Your dean should make a phone call on your behalf. The professors should reach out to former/current clerks, as best they can, on your behalf. Your question in a sense is like asking how to make friendships, and so it is hard to answer. It is definitely worth applying but your best bet will be if your dean calls up and says: "this is the one, give this guy a chance" combined with another prominent professor happening to have a friend, co-author, contact, etc. that knows someone or clerked him or herself.

It would also help a lot if you graduated #1-#3 in your class. For schools that don't regularly send, top 3 is really what you have to be to have more than a prayer, and it helps a lot more at #1.


Anonymous User wrote:This is OP. I think I should clarify what a strong application is.

A minimally qualifying application is t25 school in top #1-3 people, top 14 at top ~5-10 people, top 6 at top 5-10%.

A realistic application is #1 in t25, #1-3 in t14, top 3 in top 5%, all with LR.

A strong application is "best in the last decade" at t25, #1 at t14 usually with high-end LR spot, top 3 in top 2-4% with attractive awards & brand-name recs, LR, and probably a feeder judge (from any of these school bands).

A "strong application" to SCOTUS is so glitteringly elite that it is hard to even postulate. Someone who has an application like that has probably done everything he or she was supposed to since approximately age 10, and that's not an exaggeration. A couple renegades a year that are just legitimate geniuses or lucky as sin get in too. But for the most part you're talking about (1) dedicated lifetime conformists that are (2) very, very bright. Or (3) outlandishly lucky people that are bright as a supernova.


Anonymous User wrote:This is OP. There have been many questions to the effect of "could I do it outside top 10% at HYS" and "are there any clerks of opposite ideological direction." I'll just aggregate and answer here.

Yes, sometimes outside 10% at HYS gets it. Actually that once in a while happens from anywhere. Usually these people have just fantastic connections and almost-good-enough grades. When I say "fantastic connections" I mean a combination of, you know, a great judge, a Congressman, a couple of name-brand professors, etc. My guidelines are designed to describe grades for people with standard "good connections" but nothing special. A feeder judge, couple of strong recommenders. If you have special connections, if the leader of FedSoc or ACS is behind you 100%, the requirements relax some. I'm trying to describe the main line of cases.

The "hiring the other side" phenomenon was until very recently essentially exclusively something conservatives did in hiring liberals. Once in a while Justice Scalia would do this, and occasionally still does. Same with Chief Justice Roberts. Liberal Justices almost never do this, though Breyer might for a VERY well-credentialed one. Justice Sotomayor has hired one conservative recently. Too early to tell if that's a trend.

This is rare and basically reflects a difference between jurisprudence and politics. Justices want you to share their jurisprudence. They're a bit more flexible on politics. But how often do you see really honest liberals that are strong textualists, or really serious conservatives willing to look at broad consequences of a ruling to override statutory requirements, and so on?


Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:I find this thread interesting. But all these "Can I get a scotus clerkship with (obviously mediocre credentials)?" questions are getting a little old. I suspect OP is being generous in not shooting them down, but before you ask, consider this: if you were a Justice, would you hire somebody who 1) got beaten by only 50 people in their class (but I'm top 10% at Harvard!) or 2) bombed a year of law school or 3) had a rough admissions cycle or etc.? Probs not. You'd choose from one of 100 superstars without those flaws. So unless you're close to the rubric he laid out earlier or have some other specific question I'd sit back and enjoy the academic exercise that this is for most of us.


This is OP. Thank you for this considerate response. I am trying to answer all questions that I can because this is probably a once-in-this-board's-lifetime event and I don't want anyone to feel like they're missing out. But I laid down the guidelines above for a reason.

I'm not going to sit here and tell you non-magna HYS grads don't get it. In fact, I know of one lower t14 that was not even top 15% that got it once. That clerk had a spectacular set of other factors going in his/her favor. There are outliers by nature. If you're barely top 10% but you go clerk for a CADC judge that calls up a Justice and says: "Look, this clerk of mine is simply brilliant," you're going to get the job, or at least an interview. But in the main run of cases, if you're not top 5% of HYS, top few people at t14, or #1 outside t14, you're not going to get a close look. OTHER THINGS can get you a close look. If a Senator calls on your behalf... someone's going to pay attention. But if I start making that reservation for everyone then I have to ask a series of kind of abstruse and specific questions, right? The answer to any one of which would be highly personally identifying.

So just assume that it's a strong presumption against you if you aren't within the grade bands I outlined above, but if you have factors like these:

- Nationally known faculty recommenders (think McConnell, Tribe, Calabresi, Yoo, Karlan, etc.)
- Politically significant recommenders (high-ups in Congress, leaders of FedSoc/ACS, judiciary committee people especially)
- A long publication history of good publications in good placements ("have you read my piece in the Harvard Law Review?")
- A feeder clerkship or two very prestigious clerkships with VERY strong recommendations (think phone call here, minimum)
- An incredibly compelling life story (think literal war hero or former venture capitalist)

Then you can probably get in the door anyway.

But look, if you think making SCOTUS the traditional way is hard (top 5%, top couple people, #1), making it the unusual way is -- harder. There are transfer students who get it. There are nontrad students who get it. But what do you think these people had to have going for them to top, say, a Sears Prize winner who DIDN'T get it? (Sears Prize winners do not always get SCOTUS clerkships.)

Anonymous User
Posts: 302912
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby Anonymous User » Mon May 15, 2017 12:42 am

So it's clear that OP is being too conservative. For example, OP stated that "[a] minimally qualifying application is ... top 6 at top 5-10%." But this is objectively wrong. See, once again, http://www.bancroftpllc.com/who-we-are/ ... -mcginley/. It is incorrect to say that SCOTUS clerks must graduate in the top 5–10% of your class at a T6.

Obviously there will always be exceptions. But that's basically what Lurker is asking about — what are the exceptions?

And, minor quibble, but lawlorbust is painfully misusing the phrase "the exception that proves the rule" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception ... s_the_rule). It is nonsensical to say that pointing out an exception to your proposed rule actually strengthens the argument for your rule.

lawlorbust
Posts: 421
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 11:50 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby lawlorbust » Mon May 15, 2017 12:49 am

Because I'm so psyched for summer, I'll pass up the too-easy jibe of how you were painfully misreading (or not reading) information that's directly responsive to your question. Here you go. Again.

Anonymous User wrote:I'm not going to sit here and tell you non-magna HYS grads don't get it. In fact, I know of one lower t14 that was not even top 15% that got it once. That clerk had a spectacular set of other factors going in his/her favor. There are outliers by nature. If you're barely top 10% but you go clerk for a CADC judge that calls up a Justice and says: "Look, this clerk of mine is simply brilliant," you're going to get the job, or at least an interview. But in the main run of cases, if you're not top 5% of HYS, top few people at t14, or #1 outside t14, you're not going to get a close look. OTHER THINGS can get you a close look. If a Senator calls on your behalf... someone's going to pay attention. But if I start making that reservation for everyone then I have to ask a series of kind of abstruse and specific questions, right? The answer to any one of which would be highly personally identifying.

So just assume that it's a strong presumption against you if you aren't within the grade bands I outlined above, but if you have factors like these:

- Nationally known faculty recommenders (think McConnell, Tribe, Calabresi, Yoo, Karlan, etc.)
- Politically significant recommenders (high-ups in Congress, leaders of FedSoc/ACS, judiciary committee people especially)
- A long publication history of good publications in good placements ("have you read my piece in the Harvard Law Review?")
- A feeder clerkship or two very prestigious clerkships with VERY strong recommendations (think phone call here, minimum)
- An incredibly compelling life story (think literal war hero or former venture capitalist)

Then you can probably get in the door anyway.

But look, if you think making SCOTUS the traditional way is hard (top 5%, top couple people, #1), making it the unusual way is -- harder. There are transfer students who get it. There are nontrad students who get it. But what do you think these people had to have going for them to top, say, a Sears Prize winner who DIDN'T get it? (Sears Prize winners do not always get SCOTUS clerkships.)
Last edited by lawlorbust on Mon May 15, 2017 12:54 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
mjb447
Posts: 1242
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 4:36 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby mjb447 » Mon May 15, 2017 12:54 am

Anonymous User wrote:So it's clear that OP is being too conservative. For example, OP stated that "[a] minimally qualifying application is ... top 6 at top 5-10%." But this is objectively wrong. See, once again, http://www.bancroftpllc.com/who-we-are/ ... -mcginley/. It is incorrect to say that SCOTUS clerks must graduate in the top 5–10% of your class at a T6.

Obviously there will always be exceptions. But that's basically what Lurker is asking about — what are the exceptions?

And, minor quibble, but lawlorbust is painfully misusing the phrase "the exception that proves the rule" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception ... s_the_rule). It is nonsensical to say that pointing out an exception to your proposed rule actually strengthens the argument for your rule.

Yeah OP lays out how he views exceptions/outliers a bit later. Just getting tired of LTM talking about how none of us know anything when a bunch of OP's posts seem to take a pretty dim view of his hypothetical candidate's chances. Unless he's a "literal war hero," I guess.

Anonymous User
Posts: 302912
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby Anonymous User » Mon May 15, 2017 12:56 am

lawlorbust wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:So it's clear that OP is being too conservative. For example, OP stated that "[a] minimally qualifying application is ... top 6 at top 5-10%." But this is objectively wrong. See, once again, http://www.bancroftpllc.com/who-we-are/ ... -mcginley/. It is incorrect to say that SCOTUS clerks must graduate in the top 5–10% of your class at a T6.

Obviously there will always be exceptions. But that's basically what Lurker is asking about — what are the exceptions?

And, minor quibble, but lawlorbust is painfully misusing the phrase "the exception that proves the rule" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception ... s_the_rule). It is nonsensical to say that pointing out an exception to your proposed rule actually strengthens the argument for your rule.


Because I'm so psyched for summer, I'll pass up the too-easy jibe of how you are painfully misreading (or not reading) information that's directly responsive to your question. Here you go.

Anonymous User wrote:I'm not going to sit here and tell you non-magna HYS grads don't get it. In fact, I know of one lower t14 that was not even top 15% that got it once. That clerk had a spectacular set of other factors going in his/her favor. There are outliers by nature. If you're barely top 10% but you go clerk for a CADC judge that calls up a Justice and says: "Look, this clerk of mine is simply brilliant," you're going to get the job, or at least an interview. But in the main run of cases, if you're not top 5% of HYS, top few people at t14, or #1 outside t14, you're not going to get a close look. OTHER THINGS can get you a close look. If a Senator calls on your behalf... someone's going to pay attention. But if I start making that reservation for everyone then I have to ask a series of kind of abstruse and specific questions, right? The answer to any one of which would be highly personally identifying.

So just assume that it's a strong presumption against you if you aren't within the grade bands I outlined above, but if you have factors like these:

- Nationally known faculty recommenders (think McConnell, Tribe, Calabresi, Yoo, Karlan, etc.)
- Politically significant recommenders (high-ups in Congress, leaders of FedSoc/ACS, judiciary committee people especially)
- A long publication history of good publications in good placements ("have you read my piece in the Harvard Law Review?")
- A feeder clerkship or two very prestigious clerkships with VERY strong recommendations (think phone call here, minimum)
- An incredibly compelling life story (think literal war hero or former venture capitalist)

Then you can probably get in the door anyway.

But look, if you think making SCOTUS the traditional way is hard (top 5%, top couple people, #1), making it the unusual way is -- harder. There are transfer students who get it. There are nontrad students who get it. But what do you think these people had to have going for them to top, say, a Sears Prize winner who DIDN'T get it? (Sears Prize winners do not always get SCOTUS clerkships.)


First: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophasis.

And further negative points for your poor attempt at parallelism.

More on point: OP's rule — to repeat myself — doesn't explain seemingly aberrant outcomes. For instance: https://www.law.hawaii.edu/article/uh-l ... -sotomayor. This example doesn't fit any of OP's suggested categories. The best explanation for that is that Lurker is sometimes right and that Justice Sotomayor, like some other justices, seemingly cares about socioeconomic diversity.

Anonymous User
Posts: 302912
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby Anonymous User » Mon May 15, 2017 1:00 am

mjb447 wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:So it's clear that OP is being too conservative. For example, OP stated that "[a] minimally qualifying application is ... top 6 at top 5-10%." But this is objectively wrong. See, once again, http://www.bancroftpllc.com/who-we-are/ ... -mcginley/. It is incorrect to say that SCOTUS clerks must graduate in the top 5–10% of your class at a T6.

Obviously there will always be exceptions. But that's basically what Lurker is asking about — what are the exceptions?

And, minor quibble, but lawlorbust is painfully misusing the phrase "the exception that proves the rule" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception ... s_the_rule). It is nonsensical to say that pointing out an exception to your proposed rule actually strengthens the argument for your rule.

Yeah OP lays out how he views exceptions/outliers a bit later. Just getting tired of LTM talking about how none of us know anything when a bunch of OP's posts seem to take a pretty dim view of his hypothetical candidate's chances. Unless he's a "literal war hero," I guess.


You're right that LTM is probably being too optimistic about her proposed candidate's chances.

lawlorbust
Posts: 421
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 11:50 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby lawlorbust » Mon May 15, 2017 1:03 am

I mean, I dish out quite a bit, so I'm more than happy to get sniped at.

But your best example is someone who graduated 2nd from Kamehameha, was valedictorian and EIC at UH before clerking for Clifton? (Other than your argument being silly, she falls within OP's valedictorian-outside-#14 rule. Again, very poor RC.)

State your IQ before I engage you further. (I believe you'd refer to that as an https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem.)

Anonymous User
Posts: 302912
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby Anonymous User » Mon May 15, 2017 1:08 am

lawlorbust wrote:I mean, I dish out quite a bit, so I'm more than happy to get sniped at.

But your best example is someone who graduated 2nd from Kamehameha, was valedictorian and EIC at UH before clerking for Clifton?

State your IQ before I engage you further. (I believe you'd refer to that as an https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem.)


I think it's a pretty good example, given that it's hard to explain that outcome without recognizing that some justices care about socioeconomic diversity?

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 28731
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Mon May 15, 2017 6:05 am

Anonymous User wrote:
lawlorbust wrote:I mean, I dish out quite a bit, so I'm more than happy to get sniped at.

But your best example is someone who graduated 2nd from Kamehameha, was valedictorian and EIC at UH before clerking for Clifton?

State your IQ before I engage you further. (I believe you'd refer to that as an https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem.)


I think it's a pretty good example, given that it's hard to explain that outcome without recognizing that some justices care about socioeconomic diversity?

Yeah, I referenced her earlier. I'm pretty sure she fits the kind of outlier the OP identified - great qualifications (other than school name), doubtless feeder pushing for her, interesting experience. Also, I'm not sure what about her says socioeconomic diversity rather than racial/ethnic diversity. (Which is a minor nitpick.)

But maybe it's true that Sotomayor does care about diversity. That would be great. I don't think that makes the responses to LTM out of line.

invisiblebridge2
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2017 9:42 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby invisiblebridge2 » Sat Jun 03, 2017 9:46 am

What should I use as a writing sample? I've published a note and a shorter online piece, but both of those have been edited by editors on my school's journal. Do the Justices want something that no one has touched/edited but me? If so, should I submit the original version of those pieces that I submitted to the journals, before anyone else touched it? Should I use something more practical, like a memo?

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 28731
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Sat Jun 03, 2017 10:10 am

If you're seriously considering applying for SCOTUS, you probably have people going to bat for you (like profs) who would be better able to advise you on your specific writing than anyone here. (If you're hoping that OP will respond, I'm afraid they haven't been back on this site for quite a while, so you're stuck with the rest of us who, AFAIK, don't actually have personal experience.)

User avatar
mjb447
Posts: 1242
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 4:36 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby mjb447 » Sat Jun 03, 2017 12:29 pm

Yeah, if you're at all in the running it's very much in your school's interest to help you answer this question, and they can probably do it better than we can.

Anonymous User
Posts: 302912
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 18, 2017 4:03 pm

I got a ding after interviewing nearly 7 months later. I'm an alumni applicant.

Why does it take some judges so long?

User avatar
rpupkin
Posts: 5635
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby rpupkin » Fri Aug 18, 2017 4:10 pm

Anonymous User wrote:I got a ding after interviewing nearly 7 months later. I'm an alumni applicant.

Why does it take some judges so long?

The judge was waiting for you to send a thank-you note. When it became clear that none was forthcoming, the judge decided to go in another direction.

Anonymous User
Posts: 302912
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 18, 2017 4:25 pm

rpupkin wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:I got a ding after interviewing nearly 7 months later. I'm an alumni applicant.

Why does it take some judges so long?

The judge was waiting for you to send a thank-you note. When it became clear that none was forthcoming, the judge decided to go in another direction.

I actually sent one though. /s.

But really, I did.

Anonymous User
Posts: 302912
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 19, 2017 10:40 am

Started my circuit clerkship for an occasional, but not regular, feeder. How do I start to think about the application process and when would I discuss it with my judge?




Return to “Judicial Clerkships”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.