Top Law Schools

Or is it too risky to work for the fed gov after your SA?

I'm dealing with the same situation. I know the firm hasn't been amendable to firm splits, but Im still contemplating asking about a government split, which to me seems like a completely different circumstance. I'm not sure I'd do it without asking them, though. Is that what you're contemplating?

I think we have to notify the firm. I am just wondering if it's even alright to ask them. I am not sure if I want to "split" with the firm though, as I am thinking it'd be a better idea to work for the fed AFTER the SA, if the government provides permission. I am just wondering if it is a terrible idea ITE to ask the firm if we are allowed to work for the government -- would the firm view government work as being noncommittal to the private sector?

ITE, why do you want to give a firm any reason to no-offer you? The gov't position isn't going to be paid, and unless you don't want to work for the firm after you graduate, any experience you may gain in a couple weeks in the gov't, when balanced against everything you'll need to learn at the firm once you start, isn't really worth it. I think this goes for working during your 3L year as well, assuming you received an offer. You'll have to do more conflict checks, and it just doesn't seem to have nearly enough positives to make it worth it. Just my opinion, fwiw.

I think it depends on the firm. Some firms will say ok and be fine with it, some will say ok and hold it against you, some will just say no. It's impossible to say without knowing the firm. Cleary, for instance, is supposedly very accomodating of this, whereas some other firms (Skadden comes to mind) are not.

Regardless, I think it is not worth risking unless you are seriously considering working for whatever agency you'd split with after graduation. If you just want to have an easygoing summer and see what government work is like, I wouldn't risk your SA offer.