Is clerking overrated? Forum

[Holly Golightly]

My top 3 reasons for clerking:

1. I just really badly want to meet a judge.
2. ???
3. ???

You forgot about NEEDING the credential and "getting off on research."




What a pedantic ass.

[jbagelboy]

Bit of an aside, but does Williams & Connolly ever take summers after 2L, or do they really only recruit post-clerkship? Wanting highest profile white collar defense/investigations/DC lit seems like a decent reason to clerk. Not my cup of tea but for others

[jkpolk]

My top 3 reasons for clerking:

1. I just really badly want to meet a judge.
2. ???
3. ???

You forgot about NEEDING the credential and "getting off on research."




What a pedantic ass.

You sound mad.

[Holly Golightly]

Just annoyed at you being a condescending douche. God I fucking hate law students.

[Elston Gunn]

Bit of an aside, but does Williams & Connolly ever take summers after 2L, or do they really only recruit post-clerkship? Wanting highest profile white collar defense/investigations/DC lit seems like a decent reason to clerk. Not my cup of tea but for others

It happens every once in a while, I think. They don't give offers after 2L--you have to "request" one. It'd be weird to request an offer without having clerked/having a year-out clerkship lined up though, most likely.

And yeah, I think even DF (and certainly everyone else ITT) would agree that's a good reason to want to clerk. Although I have started to think these elite lit boutiques might be overrated, in that they tend to be the sweatiest of sweat shops. Though it does seem you legitimately get more meaningful experience.

[Elston Gunn]

I actually deliberately bombed my clerkship interviews because I had already achieved my dream of meeting a real-life judge in the flesh, and I didn't *need* the credential.

[alphasteve]

I just don't see the career benefits. People at my firm don't appear to be more advance because they clerked.

There is some benefit in my firm. If you are in general lit, those that have done federal clerkships are often staffed on federal court matters. Helps get work.

[rpupkin]

What a pedantic ass.

You sound mad.

Dude, you're the one railing against straw men. You seem pissed about a TLS conventional wisdom ("all sorts of people on TLS tell corporate types to clerk") that doesn't even exist.

[jkpolk]

What a pedantic ass.

You sound mad.

Dude, you're the one railing against straw men. You seem pissed about a TLS conventional wisdom ("all sorts of people on TLS tell corporate types to clerk") that doesn't even exist.

[Hutz_and_Goodman]

Transactional work --> no benefit
Irrelevant district/court---> ?
Litigation--> can be big benefit (at NYC firm you had 2nd cir./SDNY clerkship)
Appellate work--> you basically can't work in this area without having clerked

[ymmv]

What a pedantic ass.

You sound mad.

Dude, you're the one railing against straw men. You seem pissed about a TLS conventional wisdom ("all sorts of people on TLS tell corporate types to clerk") that doesn't even exist.

Honestly how have you not gotten banned by now. Like, kudos I suppose.

[alphasteve]

Transactional work --> no benefit
Irrelevant district/court---> ?
Litigation--> can be big benefit (at NYC firm you had 2nd cir./SDNY clerkship)
Appellate work--> you basically can't work in this area without having clerked

The last piece is demonstrably false, as is the second.

[rpupkin]

Dude, you're the one railing against straw men. You seem pissed about a TLS conventional wisdom ("all sorts of people on TLS tell corporate types to clerk") that doesn't even exist.

I don't get off on rescuing maidens; I get off on research.

[Holly Golightly]

And meeting judges IRL. It's, like, totally cool.

[jkpolk]

And meeting judges IRL. It's, like, totally cool.

I hear that it's like totally good for public service too.

[alphasteve]

And meeting judges IRL. It's, like, totally cool.

I hear that it's like totally good for public service too.

Is this the brand of on-topic trolls the board has these days, because if so, this is fucking pathetic.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Transactional work --> no benefit
Irrelevant district/court---> ?
Litigation--> can be big benefit (at NYC firm you had 2nd cir./SDNY clerkship)
Appellate work--> you basically can't work in this area without having clerked

The last piece is demonstrably false, as is the second.

Yeah, having clerked in a district that's irrelevant to, say, NYC biglaw, it's still been a huge benefit for me in the context of what I wanted to do.

[Hutz_and_Goodman]

Transactional work --> no benefit
Irrelevant district/court---> ?
Litigation--> can be big benefit (at NYC firm you had 2nd cir./SDNY clerkship)
Appellate work--> you basically can't work in this area without having clerked

The last piece is demonstrably false, as is the second.

Yeah, having clerked in a district that's irrelevant to, say, NYC biglaw, it's still been a huge benefit for me in the context of what I wanted to do.

That's why I put a question mark. I've heard people say it helps.

For the person saying you can do appellate without a clerkship you must not be talking about a big firm context. At my firm there may be 1 or 2 people w/o a clerkship but they're partners in their 70s.

[alphasteve]

That's why I put a question mark. I've heard people say it helps.

For the person saying you can do appellate without a clerkship you must not be talking about a big firm context. At my firm there may be 1 or 2 people w/o a clerkship but they're partners in their 70s.

My big firm has a substantial and well-regarded appellate practice and is staffed primarily with associates that do not have appellate clerkships.


Fuck, I've billed time to appellate matters doing research and portions of briefs, and I have no clerkship whatsoever.

[Elston Gunn]

That's why I put a question mark. I've heard people say it helps.

For the person saying you can do appellate without a clerkship you must not be talking about a big firm context. At my firm there may be 1 or 2 people w/o a clerkship but they're partners in their 70s.

My big firm has a substantial and well-regarded appellate practice and is staffed primarily with associates that do not have appellate clerkships.


Fuck, I've billed time to appellate matters doing research and portions of briefs, and I have no clerkship whatsoever.

I wonder if this isn't basically a D.C. thing. (The requiring CoA for doing mostly appellate work.)

[alphasteve]

That's why I put a question mark. I've heard people say it helps.

For the person saying you can do appellate without a clerkship you must not be talking about a big firm context. At my firm there may be 1 or 2 people w/o a clerkship but they're partners in their 70s.

My big firm has a substantial and well-regarded appellate practice and is staffed primarily with associates that do not have appellate clerkships.


Fuck, I've billed time to appellate matters doing research and portions of briefs, and I have no clerkship whatsoever.

I wonder if this isn't basically a D.C. thing. (The requiring CoA for doing mostly appellate work.)

It doesn't categorically hold true there, either.

Most likely, this is more on a firm-by-firm basis.

[rayiner]

Just did a quick survey of three big philly offices. Together, they have six associates who seem to do substantially or primarily appellate litigation. Of those, five have a COA clerkship. Philly is not a particularly prestige-conscious market, but appellate groups are small and need very few full-time associates, and it's easy for them to fill the spots with clerks. YMMV, but I don't think the CW that you need a clerkship to be assigned primarily to an appellate group is wrong. At least, it's very helpful if that's what you really want to do.

[OutCold]

Bit of an aside, but does Williams & Connolly ever take summers after 2L, or do they really only recruit post-clerkship? Wanting highest profile white collar defense/investigations/DC lit seems like a decent reason to clerk. Not my cup of tea but for others

It's rare. I did a screener with one of the hiring committee partners after 2L, but was told outright that I would have a much better shot coming off a clerkship. They do consider 3L applications though.

[alphasteve]

Just did a quick survey of three big philly offices. Together, they have six associates who seem to do substantially or primarily appellate litigation. Of those, five have a COA clerkship. Philly is not a particularly prestige-conscious market, but appellate groups are small and need very few full-time associates, and it's easy for them to fill the spots with clerks. YMMV, but I don't think the CW that you need a clerkship to be assigned primarily to an appellate group is wrong. At least, it's very helpful if that's what you really want to do.

I would agree that it is exceedingly helpful, and opens doors to start in an appellate practice right away. I did a very unscientific poll until I got bored, and Gibson Dunn's (Vault #1 appellate shop) Appellate practice (as found by searching based on practice area) is composed of roughly 1/3 appellate clerks. That is based on looking at profiles through the letter F. I was too lazy to continue. Williams and Connolly (Vault #2) does not list associates in the supreme court and appellate practice, but every partner, save a few, had appellate clerkships. I stopped there to write this message. So, I think it depends on firm. Definitely valuable if you want to do appellate work (and even more so if you want to do it your first year).

I only contest that there is a near categorical bar to appellate work without an appellate clerkship.

[DELG]

Just did a quick survey of three big philly offices. Together, they have six associates who seem to do substantially or primarily appellate litigation. Of those, five have a COA clerkship. Philly is not a particularly prestige-conscious market, but appellate groups are small and need very few full-time associates, and it's easy for them to fill the spots with clerks. YMMV, but I don't think the CW that you need a clerkship to be assigned primarily to an appellate group is wrong. At least, it's very helpful if that's what you really want to do.

I would agree that it is exceedingly helpful, and opens doors to start in an appellate practice right away. I did a very unscientific poll until I got bored, and Gibson Dunn's (Vault #1 appellate shop) Appellate practice (as found by searching based on practice area) is composed of roughly 1/3 appellate clerks. That is based on looking at profiles through the letter F. I was too lazy to continue. Williams and Connolly (Vault #2) does not list associates in the supreme court and appellate practice, but every partner, save a few, had appellate clerkships. I stopped there to write this message. So, I think it depends on firm. Definitely valuable if you want to do appellate work (and even more so if you want to do it your first year).

I only contest that there is a near categorical bar to appellate work without an appellate clerkship.

1) you are not nearly aspie enough for this game

2) rayiner instead of proving you are aspie enough how about do that preemption check we talked about