3 Clerkships too many? Forum

[Anonymous User]

The wiki page on the Utah dude makes him seem
legit.

[Anonymous User]

Edit: It looks like there are two answers to the question I asked above: one in Utah, one in Alaska. They seem like they're probably one-offs (especially the Alaska justice), in a way that the other two justices aren't, so I do think OP has a significantly tougher call if it's either of them.

Re: the Alaska Supreme Court. That court, probably more than any other state supreme court, consistently pulls in very high-quality clerks. It's a newer state so there is more interesting first-impression legal work, and the court is aggressive in recruiting candidates from top schools (one of the justices will be at Harvard in a couple months to interview candidates.)

So it's quite possible that the Alaska feeder is more correlation than causation.

[rpupkin]

It's a newer state so there is more interesting first-impression legal work.

LOL

[Anonymous User]

It's a newer state so there is more interesting first-impression legal work.

LOL

Well pardon me. That's at least what their recruiting materials say.

[rpupkin]

It's a newer state so there is more interesting first-impression legal work.

LOL

Well pardon me. That's at least what their recruiting materials say.

Sorry, I thought you were making a joke. Alaska is a 60-year old state, not a 6-year old state. It's not like other state supreme courts spend all their time reviewing nineteenth century precedents or something.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Yeah but there aren't enough people for lots of law to have been made already.

[Anonymous User]

Why do you want to clerk for so long OP?

It's less glorious once you actually do it. Don't get me wrong: it's been fine and nice and pretty cool in some ways. But I am already ready for my (one-year COA) clerkship to be over. It's not exactly a job that is full of glory. And the financial costs are high -- I wouldn't want to clerk twice more and lose out on two years of biglaw pay. As far as SCOTUS goes, well, let me save you the worry and tell you that unless you have some sweet connections you probably have no chance; the fact that you're not doing feeder COA off the bat pretty much tells me that.

This is flat wrong. I don't think intentionally so, but my guess is that your understanding of the clerkship process doesn't extend to the tier that OP is interested in / qualified for.

There is a significant proportion of SCOTUS clerks who don't get there off-the-bat after a feeder clerkship.

Ok, I'll admit that I may have underestimated OP's chances. If they're top 5% at T-14 then they're not dead on arrival yet (although it is still exceedingly unlikely).

As far as my experience, I don't want to blow my cover, but let's just say I have more than you think. The SCOTUS world is hypercompetitive. OP sounds like they're aware of the realities of it, so more power to them in their choices. I do think that, OP aside, there is sometimes a tendency on this board to structure life choices around pursuing brass rings more than is really advisable though. Clerking, especially in disparate geographic locations, imposes costs in terms of being able to settle down and build a life that lots of people don't, at least from my perspective, think about all that much sometimes.

I get the impression that OP's first comment about SCOTUS was just a sorta "oh and hey maybe this hail mary could happen" aside, and they didn't mean to derail their thread into a discussion of their chances. So getting back to basics: I'd advise them to consider whether the financial costs of doing three clerkships are worth it, and I'd advise them to try to get an idea of whether the judges they want to work for are good bosses (some are, some aren't), and whether the added value to their future options is worth it. I personally wouldn't want to commit that much of my life to clerking, but other people's mileage may vary.

[Anonymous User]

Why do you want to clerk for so long OP?

It's less glorious once you actually do it. Don't get me wrong: it's been fine and nice and pretty cool in some ways. But I am already ready for my (one-year COA) clerkship to be over. It's not exactly a job that is full of glory. And the financial costs are high -- I wouldn't want to clerk twice more and lose out on two years of biglaw pay. As far as SCOTUS goes, well, let me save you the worry and tell you that unless you have some sweet connections you probably have no chance; the fact that you're not doing feeder COA off the bat pretty much tells me that.

This is flat wrong. I don't think intentionally so, but my guess is that your understanding of the clerkship process doesn't extend to the tier that OP is interested in / qualified for.

There is a significant proportion of SCOTUS clerks who don't get there off-the-bat after a feeder clerkship.

Ok, I'll admit that I may have underestimated OP's chances. If they're top 5% at T-14 then they're not dead on arrival yet (although it is still exceedingly unlikely).

But while I don't want to blow my cover, I have more experience than you think. The SCOTUS world is hypercompetitive. OP sounds like they're aware of the realities of it, so more power to them in their choices. But there is sometimes a tendency on this board to encourage structuring life choices around pursuing brass rings more than is really advisable. Clerking, especially in disparate geographic locations, imposes costs in terms of being able to settle down and build a life that lots of people don't, at least from my perspective, think about all that much sometimes.

I get the impression that OP's first comment about SCOTUS was just a sorta "oh and hey maybe this hail mary could happen" aside, and they didn't mean to derail their thread into a discussion of their chances. So getting back to basics: I'd advise them to consider whether the financial costs of doing three clerkships are worth it, and I'd advise them to try to get an idea of whether the judges they want to work for are good bosses (some are, some aren't), and whether the added value to their future options is worth it. I personally wouldn't want to commit that much of my life to clerking, but other people's mileage may vary.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. Abov anon is correct, I'm not really focused on SCOTUS chances, I just wanted to get a sense of the three years of clerking. The judge I have locked up and the judge I'm interviewing with soon both have reps as great people to work for, so that aspect isn't a concern.

The reason this came up is because the SSC judge has become very involved in my clerkship process and is very actively trying to shepherd me to SCOTUS by way of some feeders CoA's she/he knows very well. Taking the D. Ct. interview, (which opportunity only just arose) might put a slight kink in that plan/make it one year longer. Recognizing that the CoA is more likely than not the end of the journey anyway, I just wanted to get general thoughts.

[Pulsar]

OP here. Abov anon is correct, I'm not really focused on SCOTUS chances, I just wanted to get a sense of the three years of clerking. The judge I have locked up and the judge I'm interviewing with soon both have reps as great people to work for, so that aspect isn't a concern.

The reason this came up is because the SSC judge has become very involved in my clerkship process and is very actively trying to shepherd me to SCOTUS by way of some feeders CoA's she/he knows very well. Taking the D. Ct. interview, (which opportunity only just arose) might put a slight kink in that plan/make it one year longer. Recognizing that the CoA is more likely than not the end of the journey anyway, I just wanted to get general thoughts.

Are you on friendly enough terms with your SSC judge to call them up and ask them what they think?

They might have good advice. Risk to asking for their advice, of course, is that once you ask you might be practically obligated to take it, whatever it is.

[rpupkin]

Yeah but there aren't enough people for lots of law to have been made already.

I guess, but states with lots of people—like California and New York—are passing new laws all the time. I'd be surprised if Alaska's legislatures (and courts) are comparatively busy dealing with legislative issues of first impression.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Yeah but there aren't enough people for lots of law to have been made already.

I guess, but states with lots of people—like California and New York—are passing new laws all the time. I'd be surprised if Alaska's legislatures (and courts) are comparatively busy dealing with legislative issues of first impression.

Yeah, it's probably a selling point as much as anything else. I do think Alaska's going to raise relatively unique legal issues, and the SSC gigs there are supposed to be competitive (may be location as much as anything else, though).

[rpupkin]

Yeah but there aren't enough people for lots of law to have been made already.

I guess, but states with lots of people—like California and New York—are passing new laws all the time. I'd be surprised if Alaska's legislatures (and courts) are comparatively busy dealing with legislative issues of first impression.

Yeah, it's probably a selling point as much as anything else. I do think Alaska's going to raise relatively unique legal issues, and the SSC gigs there are supposed to be competitive (may be location as much as anything else, though).

Yeah, I don't doubt that the Alaska SSC is competitive. I know the court regularly hires clerks from T14 schools. I was just amused by the "we're a new state!" puffery.

[DELG]

Yeah but there aren't enough people for lots of law to have been made already.

I guess, but states with lots of people—like California and New York—are passing new laws all the time. I'd be surprised if Alaska's legislatures (and courts) are comparatively busy dealing with legislative issues of first impression.

Yeah, it's probably a selling point as much as anything else. I do think Alaska's going to raise relatively unique legal issues, and the SSC gigs there are supposed to be competitive (may be location as much as anything else, though).

Yeah, I don't doubt that the Alaska SSC is competitive. I know the court regularly hires clerks from T14 schools. I was just amused by the "we're a new state!" puffery.

??? That's a real thing

[Anonymous User]

if you're interested in AUSA, it makes sense to do the district court. Just go in eyes wide open: it's a lot of time off, and I don't think the clerkships will really move the needle with w&c or Kellogg either way: if you've summered there, you have an in, and if you haven't, the odds are slim.

This isn't true.

i meant having 2 versus 3 clerkships won't move the needle.

I generally agree with that, though a third clerkship with a "feeder" (which the OP is gunning for) could help.

Anyway, I took issue with your suggestion that having summered at W&C/Kellogg was a significant factor. Those firms have small summer programs. The vast majority of their hired associates are clerks who did not summer at the firm.

I can't speak for Kellogg as I have not researched them closely, but I don't think its fair to say W&C hires the vast majority of its associates outside the summer program. W&C Is a 250 person firm and takes on a summer class around around 40.

Old but all I could find: https://www.nalpdirectory.com/content/O ... t_4404.pdf

Re: Kellog, I've heard from an alum that their summer class is part "students we might hire down the road" and part "students who got the job through personal connections and could never get hired as associates." No one from either group expects an offer, and no offers are given.

The chatter on W&C is slightly different - word is they will hire you for a gap year if you have an impressive clerkship lined up down the road, but otherwise doesn't make offers to new grads.

[Goldie]

Yeah but there aren't enough people for lots of law to have been made already.

I guess, but states with lots of people—like California and New York—are passing new laws all the time. I'd be surprised if Alaska's legislatures (and courts) are comparatively busy dealing with legislative issues of first impression.

Yeah, it's probably a selling point as much as anything else. I do think Alaska's going to raise relatively unique legal issues, and the SSC gigs there are supposed to be competitive (may be location as much as anything else, though).

Yeah, I don't doubt that the Alaska SSC is competitive. I know the court regularly hires clerks from T14 schools. I was just amused by the "we're a new state!" puffery.

??? That's a real thing

Current Alaska SSC clerks:

T14 schools:
Yale: 1
Harvard: 2
Stanford: 2
Columbia: 1
NYU: 2
Berkeley: 1
Michigan: 5
Duke: 1
Northwestern: 1

And then one from Wake Forest University, one from University of Seattle, one from University of Dayton, two from University of Oregon, and one from Golden Gate University.

So it's at least a 2:1 T14 to non-T14 ratio.

[DELG]

Yeah but there aren't enough people for lots of law to have been made already.

I guess, but states with lots of people—like California and New York—are passing new laws all the time. I'd be surprised if Alaska's legislatures (and courts) are comparatively busy dealing with legislative issues of first impression.

Yeah, it's probably a selling point as much as anything else. I do think Alaska's going to raise relatively unique legal issues, and the SSC gigs there are supposed to be competitive (may be location as much as anything else, though).

Yeah, I don't doubt that the Alaska SSC is competitive. I know the court regularly hires clerks from T14 schools. I was just amused by the "we're a new state!" puffery.

??? That's a real thing

Current Alaska SSC clerks:

T14 schools:
Yale: 1
Harvard: 2
Stanford: 2
Columbia: 1
NYU: 2
Berkeley: 1
Michigan: 5
Duke: 1
Northwestern: 1

And then one from Wake Forest University, one from University of Seattle, one from University of Dayton, two from University of Oregon, and one from Golden Gate University.

So it's at least a 2:1 T14 to non-T14 ratio.

I mean whatever I'm just saying the "new state" thing in fact is a real selling point to potential clerks

[Anonymous User]

I mean whatever I'm just saying the "new state" thing in fact is a real selling point to potential clerks

I bet it is. I had some interviews in Reno, Nevada several years ago. More than one interviewer pointed out that because Nevada had been really really small until Las Vegas blew up in the 1990s and 2000s, and because there was no intermediate appellate court, there wasn't much precedent on lots of issues. They saw this as a selling point because it gave lawyers an opportunity to help shape the state's legal landscape or whatever. It wasn't enough to sell me on Reno.

[Anonymous User]

if you're interested in AUSA, it makes sense to do the district court. Just go in eyes wide open: it's a lot of time off, and I don't think the clerkships will really move the needle with w&c or Kellogg either way: if you've summered there, you have an in, and if you haven't, the odds are slim.

This isn't true.

i meant having 2 versus 3 clerkships won't move the needle.

I generally agree with that, though a third clerkship with a "feeder" (which the OP is gunning for) could help.

Anyway, I took issue with your suggestion that having summered at W&C/Kellogg was a significant factor. Those firms have small summer programs. The vast majority of their hired associates are clerks who did not summer at the firm.

I can't speak for Kellogg as I have not researched them closely, but I don't think its fair to say W&C hires the vast majority of its associates outside the summer program. W&C Is a 250 person firm and takes on a summer class around around 40.

Old but all I could find: https://www.nalpdirectory.com/content/O ... t_4404.pdf

Re: Kellog, I've heard from an alum that their summer class is part "students we might hire down the road" and part "students who got the job through personal connections and could never get hired as associates." No one from either group expects an offer, and no offers are given.

The chatter on W&C is slightly different - word is they will hire you for a gap year if you have an impressive clerkship lined up down the road, but otherwise doesn't make offers to new grads.

Your chatter about W&C is incorrect. Summers do go straight back to W&C after law school but most chose to clerk.