Top Law Schools

I just got an email from my school (T20) that lists all of this years students who received federal clerkships. One of them graduated in 2005 and is now clerking for Chief Justice Roberts. My question is: what did she do for those 5 years? Obviously, you wn't know the specifics but what kind of career path leads to this? Would one just clerk for the lower courts and apply after year 4 to the SCOTUS? Could one possibly work in the private sector for a while, and if so, what practice areas?

Thanks.

Google her name; her firm bio might still be up.

From what I remember it went something like this:

Graduated first in her class. Firm job. Elite COA Clerkship. More prestigious firm doing appellate litigation in DC. SCOTUS clerkship.

In the last couple years I've noticed people who were Assistant US Attorneys, Associate White House Counsel, associates at huge law firms, and etc. clerking for the Supreme Court. It's not just enough to clerk for COA anymore, they're apparently taking folks who also have a couple years of serious work experience in a few cases.

Anyone who's heard the whole "don't count on clerking for SCOTUS" thing should start taking it seriously.

pleasetryagain wrote:I just got an email from my school (T20) that lists all of this years students who received federal clerkships. One of them graduated in 2005 and is now clerking for Chief Justice Roberts. My question is: what did she do for those 5 years? Obviously, you wn't know the specifics but what kind of career path leads to this? Would one just clerk for the lower courts and apply after year 4 to the SCOTUS? Could one possibly work in the private sector for a while, and if so, what practice areas?

Thanks.

Usually they clerked in lower courts for a few years. I.e. perhaps for a U.S. District Court or State Supreme Court, then the Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court, as I understand it, doesn't normally like clerks right out of law school. They usually take clerks from judges they know on the federal circuit who are highly recommended.

I could be wrong, but I'd be willing to bet she did two years in a District Court and then two years in the Court of Appeals.

Poster above was correct.

First in her class, executive editor of law review, pretty cute, clerked for a DC COA judge 05-06, joined the appellate division of big shot DC firm in 07, accepted clerkship with Roberts in 09.

seems easy enough.

vanwinkle wrote:In the last couple years I've noticed people who were Assistant US Attorneys, Associate White House Counsel, associates at huge law firms, and etc. clerking for the Supreme Court. It's not just enough to clerk for COA anymore, they're apparently taking folks who also have a couple years of serious work experience in a few cases.

also seems to help if one goes to Columbia, Harvard, Yale, or Chicago. Who knew?

They will still take people right from a feeder judge, but it is true that they seem more and more to be looking for experienced candidates.

mallard wrote:They will still take people right from a feeder judge, but it is true that they seem more and more to be looking for experienced candidates.

Yep. The norm over the last few terms seems to be about 1/3 and 1/2 of the SCOTUS clerks coming in straight off of COA clerkships, with another 1/3 coming in about 1-2 years after clerking at the COA level, with the remainder about 3-5 years out. That's my rough impression, anyhow. In addition to COA clerkships (which I agree are a necessary, though often not sufficient credential), popular "feeder jobs" include Bristow Fellowships, elite DOJ divisions (e.g., Federal Programs), AUSA, high-end appellate litigation shops, and things of that nature.

Even if you do all of the above and finish 1st at a top school, landing SCOTUS is still a big time lottery given the quality of the applicant pool.

pleasetryagain wrote:Poster above was correct.

First in her class, executive editor of law review, pretty cute, clerked for a DC COA judge 05-06, joined the appellate division of big shot DC firm in 07, accepted clerkship with Roberts in 09.

seems easy enough.

Pics?

XxSpyKEx wrote:
Pics?

pm'd

pleasetryagain wrote:Poster above was correct.

First in her class, executive editor of law review, pretty cute, clerked for a DC COA judge 05-06, joined the appellate division of big shot DC firm in 07, accepted clerkship with Roberts in 09.

seems easy enough.

sexist

T14_Scholly wrote:

pleasetryagain wrote:Poster above was correct.

First in her class, executive editor of law review, pretty cute, clerked for a DC COA judge 05-06, joined the appellate division of big shot DC firm in 07, accepted clerkship with Roberts in 09.

seems easy enough.

sexist

I'm sure being a good looking guy would help with clerking for Ginsburg, or Sotomayor. Ok, well, maybe not Sotomayor.

not to mention she was a Bristow Fellow

pleasetryagain wrote:

XxSpyKEx wrote:
Pics?

pm'd

NVM!

Anonymous User wrote:PM too please

Great use of the anonymous feature: being a creepster.

MrKappus wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:PM too please

Great use of the anonymous feature: being a creepster.

Haha, it doesn't matter. I already found her identity. Google: a creeper's best friend.

Anonymous User wrote:Haha, it doesn't matter. I already found her identity. Google: a creeper's best friend.

Haha congrats. Anonymously requesting pics of someone still makes my skin crawl, but I'm glad your Google search was successful. The identities of SCOTUS clerks is a ridiculously closely guarded secret, I hear.