What firm is considered the hardest to get into? Forum

[Anonymous User]

The DC offices of W&C (only in DC), WilmerHale, and Covington are up there, not too far behind Susman, Kellogg Hansen, Wachtell, Munger LA, and as if not more selective than some of the boutiques named up thread, like Molo. Certainly more selective in general than Quinn or BSF or generic NYC V10s. If you look specifically at the government and appellate litigation groups at the top DC firms, they are almost entirely populated by COA and scotus clerks.

[Anonymous User]

By W&C, are you guys referring to White & Case?

[Anonymous User]

The DC offices of W&C (only in DC), WilmerHale, and Covington are up there, not too far behind Susman, Kellogg Hansen, Wachtell, Munger LA, and as if not more selective than some of the boutiques named up thread, like Molo. Certainly more selective in general than Quinn or BSF or generic NYC V10s. If you look specifically at the government and appellate litigation groups at the top DC firms, they are almost entirely populated by COA and scotus clerks.

Wilmer is not in the same level of competitiveness as W&C and Cov. Wilmer is about as competitive as Gibson or Kirkland in DC.

[Anonymous User]

By W&C, are you guys referring to White & Case?

Williams & Connolly.

[Anonymous User]

Would it be Wachtell, some appellate firm in DC, an elite IP boutique in San Francisco?

What would you say?

Are there any firms that are notorious for turning down highly qualified candidates.

Just curious

For corporate, Wacthell.

For litigation, boutiques.

This.

Obviously the answer for litigation is "boutiques." That's presumably not all that helpful for OP because boutique acceptance rates vary wildly. Compare Susman to Mololamken: BSF will at this point take literally anybody with a pulse; Molo is difficult and selective, but not much more so than elite Big Law. Quinn is somewhere in between.

To answer OP: along the spectrum with Kellogg on one end and BSF on the other, firms that are notorious for turning down highly qualified candidates include Susman and Dovel & Luner on probably a par close to KH, and then you move in the other direction from there.

Molo is really small, I don't think this is an accurate statement of its selectivity.

[Anonymous User]

The DC offices of W&C (only in DC), WilmerHale, and Covington are up there, not too far behind Susman, Kellogg Hansen, Wachtell, Munger LA, and as if not more selective than some of the boutiques named up thread, like Molo. Certainly more selective in general than Quinn or BSF or generic NYC V10s. If you look specifically at the government and appellate litigation groups at the top DC firms, they are almost entirely populated by COA and scotus clerks.

Appellate litigation groups at all firms are obscenely selective, but they're not representative of the selectivity of the offices as a whole. Like it's harder to get hired at S&C DC's appellate group than Gibson DC.

[Anonymous User]

The DC offices of W&C (only in DC), WilmerHale, and Covington are up there, not too far behind Susman, Kellogg Hansen, Wachtell, Munger LA, and as if not more selective than some of the boutiques named up thread, like Molo. Certainly more selective in general than Quinn or BSF or generic NYC V10s. If you look specifically at the government and appellate litigation groups at the top DC firms, they are almost entirely populated by COA and scotus clerks.

Wilmer is not in the same level of competitiveness as W&C and Cov. Wilmer is about as competitive as Gibson or Kirkland in DC.

Wilmer, W&C, Covington, Gibson, and Kirkland, and for that matter Latham, all hire from the same general group of people. W&C is probably a bit fancier, but not much. If anything Covington might be a bit less selective than Wilmer because it emphasizes regulatory and doesn't do appellate.

[Anonymous User]

Kind of a joke that people are suggesting Wilmer, CovingTTTon etc over Kirkland or Gibson

1Ls out in force today

[Anonymous User]

The DC offices of W&C (only in DC), WilmerHale, and Covington are up there, not too far behind Susman, Kellogg Hansen, Wachtell, Munger LA, and as if not more selective than some of the boutiques named up thread, like Molo. Certainly more selective in general than Quinn or BSF or generic NYC V10s. If you look specifically at the government and appellate litigation groups at the top DC firms, they are almost entirely populated by COA and scotus clerks.

Wilmer is not in the same level of competitiveness as W&C and Cov. Wilmer is about as competitive as Gibson or Kirkland in DC.

This is not accurate in my experience and the experience of my classmates (top school) / COA coclerks, but ymmv. Williams & Connolly may be a cut above but Covington and Wilmer are indistinguishable in terms of selectivity, and both are pickier than Kirkland.

[Anonymous User]

Even within boutiques, Munger DC and Bartlit Beck are in a different category. A COA clerkship with strong grades will give you at least a chance for Kellogg, Susman, Munger LA. Munger DC practically requires a SCOTUS clerkship.

TITCR as far as "most crazy traditional credentials needed to get hired" which seems to be the gist of the OP, though I feel like Bartlit has gotten maybe a tad less picky than it used to be

There are lots of firms that want really specific things that not many people have, but that aren't necessarily just super-shiny credentials. Like Consovoy or Cooper & Kirk were mentioned above and want fancy clerkships, but even more than that hard-right ideology, which narrows the pool considerably.

[Anonymous User]

The DC offices of W&C (only in DC), WilmerHale, and Covington are up there, not too far behind Susman, Kellogg Hansen, Wachtell, Munger LA, and as if not more selective than some of the boutiques named up thread, like Molo. Certainly more selective in general than Quinn or BSF or generic NYC V10s. If you look specifically at the government and appellate litigation groups at the top DC firms, they are almost entirely populated by COA and scotus clerks.

Wilmer is not in the same level of competitiveness as W&C and Cov. Wilmer is about as competitive as Gibson or Kirkland in DC.

Wilmer, W&C, Covington, Gibson, and Kirkland, and for that matter Latham, all hire from the same general group of people. W&C is probably a bit fancier, but not much. If anything Covington might be a bit less selective than Wilmer because it emphasizes regulatory and doesn't do appellate.

This, except I wouldn’t put Latham in that group

[Anonymous User]

Kind of a joke that people are suggesting Wilmer, CovingTTTon etc over Kirkland or Gibson

1Ls out in force today

Kirkland is so easy to get into that it doesn't fit in this thread.

[Anonymous User]

Kind of a joke that people are suggesting Wilmer, CovingTTTon etc over Kirkland or Gibson

1Ls out in force today

Yep. Also Simpson Thacher is the most prestigious firm and hence the hardest to get into BY FAR.

[Anonymous User]

The DC offices of W&C (only in DC), WilmerHale, and Covington are up there, not too far behind Susman, Kellogg Hansen, Wachtell, Munger LA, and as if not more selective than some of the boutiques named up thread, like Molo. Certainly more selective in general than Quinn or BSF or generic NYC V10s. If you look specifically at the government and appellate litigation groups at the top DC firms, they are almost entirely populated by COA and scotus clerks.

Wilmer is not in the same level of competitiveness as W&C and Cov. Wilmer is about as competitive as Gibson or Kirkland in DC.

Wilmer, W&C, Covington, Gibson, and Kirkland, and for that matter Latham, all hire from the same general group of people. W&C is probably a bit fancier, but not much. If anything Covington might be a bit less selective than Wilmer because it emphasizes regulatory and doesn't do appellate.

Also, some of the smaller DC offices like Jenner and O'Melveny are just as selective as Wilmer etc., but none of these firms are among the most selective period, which are gonna be boutiques. For biglaw though all of the DC firms are significantly more selective than firms elsewhere (WLRK and MTO aside).

[Anonymous User]

For those who have experience with, and/or have friends at, some of the most "difficult" to get hired at boutiques in DC (e.g. Kellogg, MoLo, Munger DC), would you mind sharing what you've heard of those places? Frankly, I've found it hard to try and figure out how current clerks should pick amongst them, particularly given that so few lawyers have had experience at multiple firms where they could provide a proper comparison.

[Anonymous User]

The DC offices of W&C (only in DC), WilmerHale, and Covington are up there, not too far behind Susman, Kellogg Hansen, Wachtell, Munger LA, and as if not more selective than some of the boutiques named up thread, like Molo. Certainly more selective in general than Quinn or BSF or generic NYC V10s. If you look specifically at the government and appellate litigation groups at the top DC firms, they are almost entirely populated by COA and scotus clerks.

Wilmer is not in the same level of competitiveness as W&C and Cov. Wilmer is about as competitive as Gibson or Kirkland in DC.

Wilmer, W&C, Covington, Gibson, and Kirkland, and for that matter Latham, all hire from the same general group of people. W&C is probably a bit fancier, but not much. If anything Covington might be a bit less selective than Wilmer because it emphasizes regulatory and doesn't do appellate.

This reflects my OCI experience at HYS. Of these firms, W&C was the most popular summer destination but almost no one went back after clerking.

[Anonymous User]

Looking at my HYS' offer statistics...

Keker > Jenner DC = Munger LA > Susman = W&C = WLRK > Gibson DC = Covington DC = Wilmer DC = Cravath = Latham DC = Hogan DC > S&C NY >>> Kirkland DC = Jones Day DC > Gibson NY = Kirkland SF = MoFo DC

Should note that while this represents median % of Hs, some firms have very narrow ranges (Jenner, Munger, Gibson) others go significantly deeper in the class, I assume on fit (Keker, Susman, WLRK)

Edited: added firms

[Anonymous User]

Looking at my HYS' offer statistics...

Keker > Jenner DC = Munger LA > Susman = W&C = WLRK > Gibson DC = Covington DC = Wilmer DC = Cravath = Latham DC = Hogan DC > S&C NY >>> Kirkland DC = Jones Day DC > Gibson NY = Kirkland SF = MoFo DC

Should note that while this represents median % of Hs, some firms have very narrow ranges (Jenner, Munger, Gibson) others go significantly deeper in the class, I assume on fit (Keker, Susman, WLRK)

Edited: added firms

Similar here except (i) I haven't seen enough data to make a real assessment of Jenner DC among this list, (ii) Keker becomes less fiercely competitive coming off a clerkship so I'm not sure it deserves top billing, and (iii) Cravath is much less picky, placing it below Cov/Wilmer/GDC, which come in behind Munger/Susman/W&C/WLRK.

[Anonymous User]

For those who have experience with, and/or have friends at, some of the most "difficult" to get hired at boutiques in DC (e.g. Kellogg, MoLo, Munger DC), would you mind sharing what you've heard of those places? Frankly, I've found it hard to try and figure out how current clerks should pick amongst them, particularly given that so few lawyers have had experience at multiple firms where they could provide a proper comparison.

Munger DC is going to be the hardest by far to get into - SCOTUS clerkship is going to be almost mandatory, but not sufficient.

I wasn’t even aware MoLo has a DC presence.

Kellogg is attainable if you have excellent grades, they care about “fit” more than anything else. I assume this means showcasing the capability to work 2800+ hrs without complaining. Most of their associates are there to get top notch experience and truckloads of cash before leaving in 2 years.

[Anonymous User]

Gupta Wessler

[Anonymous User]

Looking at my HYS' offer statistics...

Keker > Jenner DC = Munger LA > Susman = W&C = WLRK > Gibson DC = Covington DC = Wilmer DC = Cravath = Latham DC = Hogan DC > S&C NY >>> Kirkland DC = Jones Day DC > Gibson NY = Kirkland SF = MoFo DC

Should note that while this represents median % of Hs, some firms have very narrow ranges (Jenner, Munger, Gibson) others go significantly deeper in the class, I assume on fit (Keker, Susman, WLRK)

Edited: added firms

Similar here except (i) I haven't seen enough data to make a real assessment of Jenner DC among this list, (ii) Keker becomes less fiercely competitive coming off a clerkship so I'm not sure it deserves top billing, and (iii) Cravath is much less picky, placing it below Cov/Wilmer/GDC, which come in behind Munger/Susman/W&C/WLRK.

The original list is weird. Cravath and S&C have no business being in this conversation. 6Hs will get you an auto-offer at S&C and Cravath regularly dips to median. Neither does Gibson NYC belong in this conversation. It's the least competitive office in the firm, both the LA and Dallas offices are significantly harder to get than NYC (for litigation at least), for example. Gibson is a great spot for lit, but they have a weaker NYC office relative to other centers of gravity within the firm. Keker isn't harder to get than Munger and Susman. Also, for a lot of these DC offices, the level of selectivity depends in large part on whether or not you're gunning for appellate. For example, Jones Day Issues & Appeals is probably harder to get than most of the better boutiques. But general lit is much easier, etc.

[Anonymous User]

Agree that “offer statistics” are kind of meaningless for this conversation because the level of selectivity varies so widely by group within the same office. In DC, Jones Day I&A or Paul Clement’s Appellate group at KE are gonna be extremely tough to land but general litigation at both of those offices will be less selective than W&C or Covington (or Gibson); I wouldn’t put Wilmer in that category though.

[Anonymous User]

Where does Kaplan Hecker fall?

[Anonymous User]

Where does Kaplan Hecker fall?

The hard part is staying and taking the abuse, not getting in

[Anonymous User]

Agree that “offer statistics” are kind of meaningless for this conversation because the level of selectivity varies so widely by group within the same office. In DC, Jones Day I&A or Paul Clement’s Appellate group at KE are gonna be extremely tough to land but general litigation at both of those offices will be less selective than W&C or Covington (or Gibson); I wouldn’t put Wilmer in that category though.

But the question was about firm, not about group within firm.