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."
LurkerTurnedMember
Posts: 225
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:31 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby LurkerTurnedMember » Fri May 12, 2017 4:43 pm

It's crazy how rampant bias is against underprivileged people. I asked OP whether diversity and a compelling life story could help make up for a slight dip in the traditional measurements of merit (i.e. grades, school, etc) and before OP even responded I had like 4 people essentially butt in with no direct evidence of their own to tell me no, diversity and compelling life story won't help, and there's no chance in hell such person would land the clerkship.

User avatar
Lavitz
Posts: 3391
Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 1:39 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby Lavitz » Fri May 12, 2017 4:48 pm

LurkerTurnedMember wrote:It's crazy how rampant bias is against underprivileged people. I asked OP whether diversity and a compelling life story could help make up for a slight dip in the traditional measurements of merit (i.e. grades, school, etc) and before OP even responded I had like 4 people essentially butt in with no direct evidence of their own to tell me no, diversity and compelling life story won't help, and there's no chance in hell such person would land the clerkship.

Well, OP hasn't posted in almost 3 years, so I'm not sure what else you expected.

cheaptilts
Posts: 405
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2013 11:29 pm

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby cheaptilts » Fri May 12, 2017 4:49 pm

LurkerTurnedMember wrote:It's crazy how rampant bias is against underprivileged people. I asked OP whether diversity and a compelling life story could help make up for a slight dip in the traditional measurements of merit (i.e. grades, school, etc) and before OP even responded I had like 4 people essentially butt in with no direct evidence of their own to tell me no, diversity and compelling life story won't help, and there's no chance in hell such person would land the clerkship.

What? Diversity absolutely helps with some judges. If you're top 5% at a T10 instead of #1 or 2, I'm sure some judges would take a look at your application and give it more weight. If you're a first-generation college student, sure. But you suggested that top 20% grades at a T10 "qualified" someone as SCOTUS-clerk material. That's just crazy.

LurkerTurnedMember
Posts: 225
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:31 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby LurkerTurnedMember » Fri May 12, 2017 4:52 pm

cheaptilts wrote:
LurkerTurnedMember wrote:It's crazy how rampant bias is against underprivileged people. I asked OP whether diversity and a compelling life story could help make up for a slight dip in the traditional measurements of merit (i.e. grades, school, etc) and before OP even responded I had like 4 people essentially butt in with no direct evidence of their own to tell me no, diversity and compelling life story won't help, and there's no chance in hell such person would land the clerkship.

What? Diversity absolutely helps with some judges. If you're top 5% at a T10 instead of #1 or 2, I'm sure some judges would take a look at your application and give it more weight. If you're a first-generation college student, sure. But you suggested that top 20% grades at a T10 "qualified" someone as SCOTUS-clerk material. That's just crazy.


I asked IF it helped, and implied in that is "how much" does it help. I thought maybe given the immaterial difference between grades of top 20% at T10 and top 10% at T3, maybe it could make up for that difference. But all these people came out of the woodwork with no knowledge of the process talkin bout no it won't you're crazy. How do u know? Did u clerk at SCOTUS? If you didn't then STFU cause you don't know. What makes someone go out of their way to offer an opinion based on pure guessing just to say diversity and overcoming barriers isn't that important I'll never kno. Maybe it's your implicit bias against change and diversity? Maybe you're just trolling? Magbe you're just overly entitled and think u have a right opinion about everything?

User avatar
QuentonCassidy
Posts: 589
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 3:58 pm

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby QuentonCassidy » Fri May 12, 2017 5:00 pm

LurkerTurnedMember wrote:
cheaptilts wrote:
LurkerTurnedMember wrote:It's crazy how rampant bias is against underprivileged people. I asked OP whether diversity and a compelling life story could help make up for a slight dip in the traditional measurements of merit (i.e. grades, school, etc) and before OP even responded I had like 4 people essentially butt in with no direct evidence of their own to tell me no, diversity and compelling life story won't help, and there's no chance in hell such person would land the clerkship.

What? Diversity absolutely helps with some judges. If you're top 5% at a T10 instead of #1 or 2, I'm sure some judges would take a look at your application and give it more weight. If you're a first-generation college student, sure. But you suggested that top 20% grades at a T10 "qualified" someone as SCOTUS-clerk material. That's just crazy.


I asked IF it helped, and implied in that is "how much" does it help. I thought maybe given the immaterial difference between grades of top 20% at T10 and top 10% at T3, maybe it could make up for that difference. But all these people came out of the woodwork with no knowledge of the process talkin bout no it won't you're crazy. How do u know? Did u clerk at SCOTUS?

FWIW this is what the people are having a problem with. You throw that in there saying it's a "given" and people here are saying that, right or wrong, that difference is not immaterial. When you compound that with the fact that even being top 10% at HYS doesn't give you good chances at SCOTUS, it is perfectly reasonable to say that absent some outstanding circumstances socioeconomic diversity isn't really going to matter to someone in that position (top 20% at T10).

User avatar
Lavitz
Posts: 3391
Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 1:39 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby Lavitz » Fri May 12, 2017 5:01 pm

^ agreed.
LurkerTurnedMember wrote:I thought maybe given the immaterial difference between grades of top 20% at T10 and top 10% at T3

You're the only person here who thinks this is an immaterial difference. Just because you think it should be immaterial, doesn't mean that the Justices do. If you really want to know what they think, I would recommend reading this thread from the beginning. I may not have clerked for SCOTUS, but I've actually read this thread, and if I remember correctly, OP made some enlightening comments on this topic.

LurkerTurnedMember
Posts: 225
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:31 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby LurkerTurnedMember » Fri May 12, 2017 5:09 pm

QuentonCassidy wrote:
LurkerTurnedMember wrote:
cheaptilts wrote:
LurkerTurnedMember wrote:It's crazy how rampant bias is against underprivileged people. I asked OP whether diversity and a compelling life story could help make up for a slight dip in the traditional measurements of merit (i.e. grades, school, etc) and before OP even responded I had like 4 people essentially butt in with no direct evidence of their own to tell me no, diversity and compelling life story won't help, and there's no chance in hell such person would land the clerkship.

What? Diversity absolutely helps with some judges. If you're top 5% at a T10 instead of #1 or 2, I'm sure some judges would take a look at your application and give it more weight. If you're a first-generation college student, sure. But you suggested that top 20% grades at a T10 "qualified" someone as SCOTUS-clerk material. That's just crazy.


I asked IF it helped, and implied in that is "how much" does it help. I thought maybe given the immaterial difference between grades of top 20% at T10 and top 10% at T3, maybe it could make up for that difference. But all these people came out of the woodwork with no knowledge of the process talkin bout no it won't you're crazy. How do u know? Did u clerk at SCOTUS?

FWIW this is what the people are having a problem with. You throw that in there saying it's a "given" and people here are saying that, right or wrong, that difference is not immaterial. When you compound that with the fact that even being top 10% at HYS doesn't give you good chances at SCOTUS, it is perfectly reasonable to say that absent some outstanding circumstances socioeconomic diversity isn't really going to matter to someone in that position (top 20% at T10).


And that's why I wanted someone with direct evidence to tell me how much of a difference is material and how much can other factors cover. And I said I thought it was immaterial bc rankings that close can be attributed to professor preferences and other immaterial reasons. I didn't mean that it was objectively so or that judges or justices thought it immaterial. I wanted someone who actually knew the process to enlighten me. Instead I got a bunch of trolls saying it was obviously not immaterial and diversity isn't that important to the justices even tho they don't have any evidence for it. What was their point in even doing that? I'll just leave this thread. I'm noticing this forum is mostly filled with people who just give baseless opinions.

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 28414
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Fri May 12, 2017 5:12 pm

LurkerTurnedMember wrote:It's crazy how rampant bias is against underprivileged people. I asked OP whether diversity and a compelling life story could help make up for a slight dip in the traditional measurements of merit (i.e. grades, school, etc) and before OP even responded I had like 4 people essentially butt in with no direct evidence of their own to tell me no, diversity and compelling life story won't help, and there's no chance in hell such person would land the clerkship.

It could well help with individual judges; clerkship hiring is very individualized and different judges look for different things. It is not likely to help with SCOTUS, where the public record makes clear that clerks overwhelmingly have significant records of traditional academic achievement (which can easily be verified; there are public lists of SCOTUS clerks and you can look them up to see their qualifications). This isn't to say that no SCOTUS clerks have offered diversity or compelling life stories, just that they have done so *along with* traditional markers of merit. (Thomas actually took a Duke student not that long ago who appears to have done well but may not have been complete top of the class; I can't find anything IDing her class rank or honors, but she clerked for a SSC justice who clerked for Thomas, then went to Gorsuch, then to Thomas. So - without at all saying she was unqualified in any way - I think that one was very much about making the right connections.)

Pointing this out isn't bias against the underprivileged, it's bias against wishful thinking not based in reality. Reporting that others aren't likely to weigh diversity etc. over grades/school doesn't mean that we think that's the way the world should be. Don't shoot the messengers when you don't like the message.

But of course none of us know for sure. If you're that certain of the power of diversity/your life story, why not apply? What people on the internet think shouldn't make any difference.

(for the record, the OP hasn't been logged in since 2014, so while I'd love them to come back and answer more questions, you're probably stuck with the rest of us).

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 28414
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Fri May 12, 2017 5:13 pm

Since I wrote that while others and Lurker were posting: these aren't baseless opinions, they're based on the actual academic qualifications of past SCOTUS clerks. You can go look those things up.

LurkerTurnedMember
Posts: 225
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:31 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby LurkerTurnedMember » Fri May 12, 2017 5:18 pm

A. Nony Mouse wrote:Since I wrote that while others and Lurker were posting: these aren't baseless opinions, they're based on the actual academic qualifications of past SCOTUS clerks. You can go look those things up.


Great. I actually didn't know their stats were publicly available. Can you tell me where I can find the transcripts of all scotus clerks in the last two decades? And who made calls for them? And which professors or people send their recs? Thanks! I appreciate it.

Btw I'm not asking this for myself as I don't plan to clerk anymore right now. I was just generally wondering if the justices that talk about the importance of diversity in their opinions practice it in their hiring.

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 28414
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Fri May 12, 2017 5:29 pm

LurkerTurnedMember wrote:
A. Nony Mouse wrote:Since I wrote that while others and Lurker were posting: these aren't baseless opinions, they're based on the actual academic qualifications of past SCOTUS clerks. You can go look those things up.


Great. I actually didn't know their stats were publicly available. Can you tell me where I can find the transcripts of all scotus clerks in the last two decades? And who made calls for them? And which professors or people send their recs? Thanks! I appreciate it.

Btw I'm not asking this for myself as I don't plan to clerk anymore right now. I was just generally wondering if the justices that talk about the importance of diversity in their opinions practice it in their hiring.

No, you can't get transcripts. But you can certainly see who graduated magma cum laude and so on because people advertise that to the high heavens. As for the calls and recommendations, those are to be assumed. These people will all have clerked for feeders, so you know they have that person behind them. You're not going to get to SCOTUS without someone pulling for you, but that's not really an academic achievement in itself so much as a result of academic achievement. Not sure what that has do with your putative 20%-er at Duke.

Also your last comment is a perfectly interesting question but not really what you originally asked.

lawlorbust
Posts: 420
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 11:50 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby lawlorbust » Fri May 12, 2017 5:32 pm

Grades clearly aren't sufficient for a SCOTUS clerkship. Being #1 at HLS doesn't guarantee you a slot. Conversely, softs like a Rhodes/PhD, ideological affinity, combat service, etc., obviously can help to separate someone from the rest of a hugely overachieving applicant pool.

Who knows whether "overcoming obstacles" substantively helps or not. I'm sure it could be great interview conversation fodder. The point that everyone else in this thread is trying to drill into your thick skull is that, with respect to your particular top 20% hypo, whether softs matter in the abstract is simply irrelevant because your hypothetical candidate is so far removed from consideration.

And that's not necessarily because they've initially used a screen you think is arbitrary (grades). Even if they swapped it for another benchmark that you might consider to be more "reasonable"--publications or diversity or whatever--there'd still be hundreds of applicants that would make that cut. Oh, and when they move to the first tiebreaker--yes, each one of them would still have better grades than you.

tl;dr: Pick whatever arbitrary criteria you think Justices should select clerks with. They'll still be able to fill their chambers twice over with people that fit that criteria better than you, and also have the benefit of being smarter than you.

lawlorbust
Posts: 420
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 11:50 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby lawlorbust » Fri May 12, 2017 5:41 pm

A. Nony Mouse wrote:(Thomas actually took a Duke student not that long ago who appears to have done well but may not have been complete top of the class; I can't find anything IDing her class rank or honors, but she clerked for a SSC justice who clerked for Thomas, then went to Gorsuch, then to Thomas. So - without at all saying she was unqualified in any way - I think that one was very much about making the right connections.)


I mean, in fairness, this is all Thomas hires.

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 28414
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Fri May 12, 2017 5:44 pm

I guess my other comment is this, Lurker: can you point to a former SCOTUS clerk who matches your hypothetical candidate? If not, why are you yelling at people telling you such a person isn't going to have a good shot?

(And lawlorbust - true!)

LurkerTurnedMember
Posts: 225
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:31 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby LurkerTurnedMember » Fri May 12, 2017 5:47 pm

lawlorbust wrote:Grades clearly aren't sufficient for a SCOTUS clerkship. Being #1 at HLS doesn't guarantee you a slot. Conversely, softs like a Rhodes/PhD, ideological affinity, combat service, etc., obviously can help to separate someone from the rest of a hugely overachieving applicant pool.

Who knows whether "overcoming obstacles" substantively helps or not. I'm sure it could be great interview conversation fodder. The point that everyone else in this thread is trying to drill into your thick skull is that, with respect to your particular top 20% hypo, whether softs matter in the abstract is simply irrelevant because your hypothetical candidate is so far removed from consideration.

And that's not necessarily because they've initially used a screen you think is arbitrary (grades). Even if they swapped it for another benchmark that you might consider to be more "reasonable"--publications or diversity or whatever--there'd still be hundreds of applicants that would make that cut. Oh, and when they move to the first tiebreaker--yes, each one of them would still have better grades than you.

tl;dr: Pick whatever arbitrary criteria you think Justices should select clerks with. They'll still be able to fill their chambers twice over with people that fit that criteria better than you, and also have the benefit of being smarter than you.


I definitely agree there are always going to be people smarter than me and more competent in whatever category I or anyone else pick. That's life, someone's always got a better hand. But I think you misunderstood my question. I wasn't asking if I would qualify for it. I was asking how important diversity is and I gave hypo candidates thinkin OP would say slmethin like, "Naw. Not that much. Maybe a 5% difference but not that much." But people just freaked out. You seem the most bitter of them all

User avatar
mjb447
Posts: 1218
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 4:36 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby mjb447 » Fri May 12, 2017 5:51 pm

I'm sure this has been said already, but you don't have to have been hired by SCOTUS to review the credentials of prior clerks, at least if they go to law firms that put school, prior feeder clerkships, and latin honors on their websites.

FWIW, Lurker, you laid out these criteria a while back:
(they have top 20% grades instead of top 5% or top 10%, they're from a T14, and they don't know someone who knows the Justice, but their writing and research is proven to be good, have prior clerkships, overcame a good amount to get to where they are, and are a work horse)

I fit basically all of these, plus first in my family to graduate from college (I suppose others can be the judge of "workhorse" and research and writing skills), and I'm fully aware I have zero shot at SCOTUS. Your questions don't require any "insider info" to answer.

lawlorbust
Posts: 420
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 11:50 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby lawlorbust » Fri May 12, 2017 5:58 pm

LurkerTurnedMember wrote:
lawlorbust wrote:Grades clearly aren't sufficient for a SCOTUS clerkship. Being #1 at HLS doesn't guarantee you a slot. Conversely, softs like a Rhodes/PhD, ideological affinity, combat service, etc., obviously can help to separate someone from the rest of a hugely overachieving applicant pool.

Who knows whether "overcoming obstacles" substantively helps or not. I'm sure it could be great interview conversation fodder. The point that everyone else in this thread is trying to drill into your thick skull is that, with respect to your particular top 20% hypo, whether softs matter in the abstract is simply irrelevant because your hypothetical candidate is so far removed from consideration.

And that's not necessarily because they've initially used a screen you think is arbitrary (grades). Even if they swapped it for another benchmark that you might consider to be more "reasonable"--publications or diversity or whatever--there'd still be hundreds of applicants that would make that cut. Oh, and when they move to the first tiebreaker--yes, each one of them would still have better grades than you.

tl;dr: Pick whatever arbitrary criteria you think Justices should select clerks with. They'll still be able to fill their chambers twice over with people that fit that criteria better than you, and also have the benefit of being smarter than you.


I definitely agree there are always going to be people smarter than me and more competent in whatever category I or anyone else pick. That's life, someone's always got a better hand. But I think you misunderstood my question. I wasn't asking if I would qualify for it. I was asking how important diversity is and I gave hypo candidates thinkin OP would say slmethin like, "Naw. Not that much. Maybe a 5% difference but not that much." But people just freaked out. You seem the most bitter of them all


You're right. I'm bitter. I hate poor people.

Don't be so defensive that your hypo was completely stupid. You're talking about (great) schools that send maybe one or two clerks a year, usually none. But somehow you thought it was plausible that chambers would look through each top 20% application just to see if the resume checked off enough diversity boxes? Again, as others have pointed out, if the chambers wanted diversity (or clerks with weird birthmarks, or whatever else), they'd be more than able to get that without casting the net half as wide.

Look, I'm sure when SOC hired this guy, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Lidsky, it probably crossed her mind that he was blind. Maybe it made the difference that he overcame (what I'm sure was) incredible difficulty. But also note that he was HLR, magna, and DOJ appellate. It might be a pity that there aren't more clerks like him, but that seems like a different conversation than the one you're trying to get going.

Anonymous User
Posts: 301180
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby Anonymous User » Fri May 12, 2017 7:00 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
mjb447 wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Typically you are allowed to be a term clerk for up to four years. Is SCOTUS exempt from this?

For example, let's say I do a two year district court clerkship, followed by a one year term with a non-feeder COA judge, which then flows into a one year term with a COA feeder judge. If I then try to go clerk for SCOTUS, what happens in terms of my four year cap?

Also, just curious, are SCOTUS clerks on the JSP plan, or do they have their own?


bump.

We tried figuring the first question out in the Clerks Taking Questions thread, but no one there knew. I think the best answers (if you manage to end up in that situation) were to see if they'd take you on for free or hope that they amend the rule to not apply to SCOTUS. viewtopic.php?f=34&t=146252&start=1825#p9613302


Ah, thanks.

For that matter though, are SCOTUS clerks even on the JSP? Does the (only one person per chamber) JSP 14 rule apply to them?


SCOTUS Clerks are capped at GS-12, IIRC.

Barrred
Posts: 139
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2016 6:49 pm

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby Barrred » Fri May 12, 2017 7:25 pm

lawlorbust wrote:Look, I'm sure when SOC hired this guy, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Lidsky, it probably crossed her mind that he was blind. Maybe it made the difference that he overcame (what I'm sure was) incredible difficulty. But also note that he was HLR, magna, and DOJ appellate. It might be a pity that there aren't more clerks like him, but that seems like a different conversation than the one you're trying to get going.

Not a good example of a SCOTUS diversity hire, SDO and RBG are purportedly huge "Saved By the Bell: The New Class" fans. Ps. You clearly hate poor people.

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 28414
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Fri May 12, 2017 7:34 pm

LurkerTurnedMember wrote:I was asking how important diversity is and I gave hypo candidates thinkin OP would say slmethin like, "Naw. Not that much. Maybe a 5% difference but not that much." But people just freaked out. You seem the most bitter of them all

I think there's a difference between bitterness and incredulity. People on this site tend to be very focused on dispelling illusions.

lolwat
Posts: 1095
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 2:30 pm

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby lolwat » Fri May 12, 2017 7:36 pm

mjb447 wrote:I'm sure this has been said already, but you don't have to have been hired by SCOTUS to review the credentials of prior clerks, at least if they go to law firms that put school, prior feeder clerkships, and latin honors on their websites.

FWIW, Lurker, you laid out these criteria a while back:
(they have top 20% grades instead of top 5% or top 10%, they're from a T14, and they don't know someone who knows the Justice, but their writing and research is proven to be good, have prior clerkships, overcame a good amount to get to where they are, and are a work horse)

I fit basically all of these, plus first in my family to graduate from college (I suppose others can be the judge of "workhorse" and research and writing skills), and I'm fully aware I have zero shot at SCOTUS. Your questions don't require any "insider info" to answer.


I'm probably 70% overlap with you, so why'd you have to crush my SCOTUS dreams?

LurkerTurnedMember
Posts: 225
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:31 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby LurkerTurnedMember » Sun May 14, 2017 11:08 pm

lawlorbust wrote:
LurkerTurnedMember wrote:
lawlorbust wrote:Grades clearly aren't sufficient for a SCOTUS clerkship. Being #1 at HLS doesn't guarantee you a slot. Conversely, softs like a Rhodes/PhD, ideological affinity, combat service, etc., obviously can help to separate someone from the rest of a hugely overachieving applicant pool.

Who knows whether "overcoming obstacles" substantively helps or not. I'm sure it could be great interview conversation fodder. The point that everyone else in this thread is trying to drill into your thick skull is that, with respect to your particular top 20% hypo, whether softs matter in the abstract is simply irrelevant because your hypothetical candidate is so far removed from consideration.

And that's not necessarily because they've initially used a screen you think is arbitrary (grades). Even if they swapped it for another benchmark that you might consider to be more "reasonable"--publications or diversity or whatever--there'd still be hundreds of applicants that would make that cut. Oh, and when they move to the first tiebreaker--yes, each one of them would still have better grades than you.

tl;dr: Pick whatever arbitrary criteria you think Justices should select clerks with. They'll still be able to fill their chambers twice over with people that fit that criteria better than you, and also have the benefit of being smarter than you.


I definitely agree there are always going to be people smarter than me and more competent in whatever category I or anyone else pick. That's life, someone's always got a better hand. But I think you misunderstood my question. I wasn't asking if I would qualify for it. I was asking how important diversity is and I gave hypo candidates thinkin OP would say slmethin like, "Naw. Not that much. Maybe a 5% difference but not that much." But people just freaked out. You seem the most bitter of them all


You're right. I'm bitter. I hate poor people.

Don't be so defensive that your hypo was completely stupid. You're talking about (great) schools that send maybe one or two clerks a year, usually none. But somehow you thought it was plausible that chambers would look through each top 20% application just to see if the resume checked off enough diversity boxes? Again, as others have pointed out, if the chambers wanted diversity (or clerks with weird birthmarks, or whatever else), they'd be more than able to get that without casting the net half as wide.

Look, I'm sure when SOC hired this guy, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Lidsky, it probably crossed her mind that he was blind. Maybe it made the difference that he overcame (what I'm sure was) incredible difficulty. But also note that he was HLR, magna, and DOJ appellate. It might be a pity that there aren't more clerks like him, but that seems like a different conversation than the one you're trying to get going.


I asked if someone like that would "have a shot." I didn't say it was a regular thing. I'm well aware of the types of people that get hired. Is it that bad that maybe just maybe there could be 0.000000000001% chance that someone who doesn't have top 5% grades gets hired because of his or her background, which indicates in place of grades that they can be a good fit? Is it that bad to think that? I have a couple friends that are just top 20% and got juicy feeder clerkships before. It can't be the case that they're automatically barred from S. Ct. just for that. Having a feeder judge recommend alone I think would beat a top 5% with no similar recommendation.

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 28414
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Sun May 14, 2017 11:19 pm

What is the point of thinking it if it isn't true?

I still don't get your issue here - you asked if such a person would have a shot, got told no, and now you ask why everyone thinks that would be a bad thing. No one thinks it would be a bad thing for such a person to have a shot. They just think it's highly unrealistic, for a variety of reasons.

(Although also having a 0.000000000001% chance isn't what I'd call having a shot, either. Sure, such a person probably has at least a 0.0000000000001% chance.)

Edit to add: addressing the bit you added - sure, someone who lands a feeder probably has a better shot. Because they have the connection with a feeder. You seemed to exclude connections from your profile originally. And have any of them made it to SCOTUS? (Besides, they might well lose out to top 5% grades PLUS a feeder rec.)

User avatar
mjb447
Posts: 1218
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 4:36 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby mjb447 » Sun May 14, 2017 11:22 pm

If those are the odds, you'd be orders of magnitude better off buying powerball tickets with the money you would have spent on postage. (I know they're probably not that bad, but at some point a very slim chance is slim enough to be zero chance for all practical purposes.)

LurkerTurnedMember
Posts: 225
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:31 am

Re: SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships

Postby LurkerTurnedMember » Sun May 14, 2017 11:40 pm

A. Nony Mouse wrote:What is the point of thinking it if it isn't true?

I still don't get your issue here - you asked if such a person would have a shot, got told no, and now you ask why everyone thinks that would be a bad thing. No one thinks it would be a bad thing for such a person to have a shot. They just think it's highly unrealistic, for a variety of reasons.

(Although also having a 0.000000000001% chance isn't what I'd call having a shot, either. Sure, such a person probably has at least a 0.0000000000001% chance.)

Edit to add: addressing the bit you added - sure, someone who lands a feeder probably has a better shot. Because they have the connection with a feeder. You seemed to exclude connections from your profile originally. And have any of them made it to SCOTUS? (Besides, they might well lose out to top 5% grades PLUS a feeder rec.)


They didn't apply to SCOTUS. And I asked thinking someone who knew directly of the hiring process would answer, i.e., SCOTUS clerk taking question. I instead got a bunch of people who haven't even clerked for a feeder let alone SCOTUS tell me there's no way. Zero chance. Like Donald Trump, "Everyone knows it. He knows it. She knows it. We all here know it. See all the threads peddling the same answer here on TLS. You thinking otherwise and asking for evidenced responses is stupid. You're stupid. The person in your hypo is stupid. Totaly stupid. I'm awesome." 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.




Return to “Judicial Clerkships”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.