HYS Supreme Court clerkship placement Forum

[OsFerat]

Hey all,

I was reading over Brian Leiter's rankings of placement into Supreme Court clerkships (http://www.leiterrankings.com/new/2013_ ... ment.shtml)

Perhaps no surprise Yale does the best, any way you slice it. But how do Harvard and Stanford match up?
They seem to place the same % of their class into Supreme Court clerkships, but Harvard sends 3x the number of people (3x larger class sizes).

Which of these numbers is more salient in determining true placement opportunity? Is Harvard the credited path, or do they just consider the top x % for both classes?

I imagine having so many alumni on the bench must help, but this is pure speculation. Empirics/anecdotes much appreciated.

[Nekrowizard]

Because of the small number of clerks chosen in a given year; because clerks are only chosen from the very top of any law school’s class; because current clerks participate in the process of selecting new clerks; and because the Justices themselves have particular school loyalties, gross numbers are probably more informative, but both kinds of results are presented.

[xael]

are you asking because you are choosing a school based off of Supreme Court clerk placement? looooool

(don't do that)

[OsFerat]

Nah just curiosity, though it might be indicative of other factors. I read his commentary and it seemed logical. But if anyone has more personal experience with this process, I'd be interested in hearing what they have to say.

[pterodactyls]

To me, the proportion would make more sense.

H places more than S does, but that doesn't mean you have a higher chance of being placed if you go to H. H has 3x as many students, and places about 3x as many clerks, so your chances should be about the same at either (in theory).

[lymenheimer]

To me, the proportion would make more sense.

H places more than S does, but that doesn't mean you have a higher chance of being placed if you go to H. H has 3x as many students, and places about 3x as many clerks, so your chances should be about the same at either (in theory).

But there are more slots filled by H. So depending upon the pool of individuals vying for SC clerkships, you may have a better chance at H. See the quote from the analysis above.

[pterodactyls]

To me, the proportion would make more sense.

H places more than S does, but that doesn't mean you have a higher chance of being placed if you go to H. H has 3x as many students, and places about 3x as many clerks, so your chances should be about the same at either (in theory).

But there are more slots filled by H. So depending upon the pool of individuals vying for SC clerkships, you may have a better chance at H. See the quote from the analysis above.

I read the quote and the article. But I would think a similar % of students at both H and S apply for the SC clerkship, so I still think proportionally it'd be about the same.

The school loyalty thing is one thing to consider. But S still places very well without any justices, and places a similar proportion of graduated as H.

[jbagelboy]

your "chances" at either are extremely small. a handful from each school each year in graduating classes of hundreds over several years. this is not at all a useful metric.

[JD116]

OP, if you're conservative you will have a slight advantage at Stanford. A few of their professors are leading feeders with top conservative COA feeders to the conservative side of the bench including Kennedy. If you are more moderate/liberal your odds likely level between the two. I work with about 20 former Supreme Court clerks. Most went to Harvard but the sample size and idiosyncratic nature of clerkship hirings at SCOTUS level cause for excessive speculation.

As others here have said, DO NOT predicate your law school selection on SCOTUS placement. It really is luck of the draw for these clerkships once you make it past COA. And recent trends are showing that judges, both at COA and SCOTUS level are more and more interested in hiring attorneys (not lawyers). That added year or two of experience is considered increasingly advantageous.

[jbagelboy]

OP, if you're conservative you will have a slight advantage at Stanford. A few of their professors are leading feeders with top conservative COA feeders to the conservative side of the bench including Kennedy. If you are more moderate/liberal your odds likely level between the two. I work with about 20 former Supreme Court clerks. Most went to Harvard but the sample size and idiosyncratic nature of clerkship hirings at SCOTUS level cause for excessive speculation.

As others here have said, DO NOT predicate your law school selection on SCOTUS placement. It really is luck of the draw for these clerkships once you make it past COA. And recent trends are showing that judges, both at COA and SCOTUS level are more and more interested in hiring attorneys (not lawyers). That added year or two of experience is considered increasingly advantageous.

Not to mention that to get to feeder COA, you need to be very high in your class with the right recs.

[Mack.Hambleton]

are you asking because you are choosing a school based off of Supreme Court clerk placement? looooool

(don't do that)

[EzraFitz]

are you asking because you are choosing a school based off of Supreme Court clerk placement? looooool

(don't do that)

I mean, I chose my school because of that 1/1500 chance of getting considered for a Supreme Court clerkship. Isn't that why anyone goes into law?

But seriously, no matter what anecdotal evidence someone has, it's SO individualized a decision regarding each Justice and candidate that there is essentially nothing you can do to predict what choice is better ex ante.

[OsFerat]

OP, if you're conservative you will have a slight advantage at Stanford. A few of their professors are leading feeders with top conservative COA feeders to the conservative side of the bench including Kennedy. If you are more moderate/liberal your odds likely level between the two. I work with about 20 former Supreme Court clerks. Most went to Harvard but the sample size and idiosyncratic nature of clerkship hirings at SCOTUS level cause for excessive speculation.

As others here have said, DO NOT predicate your law school selection on SCOTUS placement. It really is luck of the draw for these clerkships once you make it past COA. And recent trends are showing that judges, both at COA and SCOTUS level are more and more interested in hiring attorneys (not lawyers). That added year or two of experience is considered increasingly advantageous.

This is valuable input, I appreciate it. This isn't ultimately what I'll decide on, I just want to make sure the choice I make doesn't totally shut down opportunities I may end up wanting.

[wons]

OP, if you're conservative you will have a slight advantage at Stanford. A few of their professors are leading feeders with top conservative COA feeders to the conservative side of the bench including Kennedy. If you are more moderate/liberal your odds likely level between the two. I work with about 20 former Supreme Court clerks. Most went to Harvard but the sample size and idiosyncratic nature of clerkship hirings at SCOTUS level cause for excessive speculation.

As others here have said, DO NOT predicate your law school selection on SCOTUS placement. It really is luck of the draw for these clerkships once you make it past COA. And recent trends are showing that judges, both at COA and SCOTUS level are more and more interested in hiring attorneys (not lawyers). That added year or two of experience is considered increasingly advantageous.

This is valuable input, I appreciate it. This isn't ultimately what I'll decide on, I just want to make sure the choice I make doesn't totally shut down opportunities I may end up wanting.

This is a very bad way to think about it. You should simply ignore this altogether, as no school ever "forecloses" clerking on the Supreme Court if your grades are good enough, at which point a million other amazing opportunities will be open to you from any school.

It can't be overstated enough that grades at the level necessary for good clerkships are basically reflective of arbitrarily distributed God-given talent. You will be getting As and your harder working friends will be getting Bs in the same classes. You don't plan for that eventuality, you just enjoy it if it happens to be your luck.

[Tls2016]

Don't you think professors have some idea who to watch for in their classes as potential SCOTUS clerks? I thought the identification of strong candidates as feeder judge clerks starts early in law school.

[OsFerat]

OP, if you're conservative you will have a slight advantage at Stanford. A few of their professors are leading feeders with top conservative COA feeders to the conservative side of the bench including Kennedy. If you are more moderate/liberal your odds likely level between the two. I work with about 20 former Supreme Court clerks. Most went to Harvard but the sample size and idiosyncratic nature of clerkship hirings at SCOTUS level cause for excessive speculation.

As others here have said, DO NOT predicate your law school selection on SCOTUS placement. It really is luck of the draw for these clerkships once you make it past COA. And recent trends are showing that judges, both at COA and SCOTUS level are more and more interested in hiring attorneys (not lawyers). That added year or two of experience is considered increasingly advantageous.

This is valuable input, I appreciate it. This isn't ultimately what I'll decide on, I just want to make sure the choice I make doesn't totally shut down opportunities I may end up wanting.

This is a very bad way to think about it. You should simply ignore this altogether, as no school ever "forecloses" clerking on the Supreme Court if your grades are good enough, at which point a million other amazing opportunities will be open to you from any school.

It can't be overstated enough that grades at the level necessary for good clerkships are basically reflective of arbitrarily distributed God-given talent. You will be getting As and your harder working friends will be getting Bs in the same classes. You don't plan for that eventuality, you just enjoy it if it happens to be your luck.

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that not all schools are equal in terms of SCOTUS clerkship placement. Weighing opportunities at the top might seem random, but since the BIGLAW stats are comparable for median students I don't think it is a crazy thing to think about.

[EzraFitz]

OP, if you're conservative you will have a slight advantage at Stanford. A few of their professors are leading feeders with top conservative COA feeders to the conservative side of the bench including Kennedy. If you are more moderate/liberal your odds likely level between the two. I work with about 20 former Supreme Court clerks. Most went to Harvard but the sample size and idiosyncratic nature of clerkship hirings at SCOTUS level cause for excessive speculation.

As others here have said, DO NOT predicate your law school selection on SCOTUS placement. It really is luck of the draw for these clerkships once you make it past COA. And recent trends are showing that judges, both at COA and SCOTUS level are more and more interested in hiring attorneys (not lawyers). That added year or two of experience is considered increasingly advantageous.

This is valuable input, I appreciate it. This isn't ultimately what I'll decide on, I just want to make sure the choice I make doesn't totally shut down opportunities I may end up wanting.

This is a very bad way to think about it. You should simply ignore this altogether, as no school ever "forecloses" clerking on the Supreme Court if your grades are good enough, at which point a million other amazing opportunities will be open to you from any school.

It can't be overstated enough that grades at the level necessary for good clerkships are basically reflective of arbitrarily distributed God-given talent. You will be getting As and your harder working friends will be getting Bs in the same classes. You don't plan for that eventuality, you just enjoy it if it happens to be your luck.

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that not all schools are equal in terms of SCOTUS clerkship placement. Weighing opportunities at the top might seem random, but since the BIGLAW stats are comparable for median students I don't think it is a crazy thing to think about.

It might not be absolutely crazy to have it in mind somewhere, but it shouldn't be given any real consideration. Biglaw numbers matter more because they can dictate how the median (as you mentioned) students will do, which is what most people should expect their outcome in law school to be. There is no school where median will put you in contention for a SCOTUS clerkship, so it is not something to consider having literally noinformation about how an individual applicant will actually stack up in law school.

The only time SCOTUS numbers should matter for school is if LITERALLY everything else is equivalent to the applicant (cost, location, how much they like campus, etc.), and then MAYBE they should think about it. But otherwise it's just not a useful metric.