Top Law Schools

I'm most curious how the circuits stack up once one gets beyond 2/9/7/DC, which I figure would make up the top rung of any such ranking. Are 8/10 generally considered least prestigious/selective?

US News is ruining this country.

It's generally more about judges, not circuits.

It is generally about judges. But beyond the best circuits (DC, 2, 9) and well-known judges on "lesser" circuits, there isn't a whole lot of difference. Go where you want to practice, if possible. If your asking about a NYC Vault firm's view of, say, a 5th circuit judge in Mississippi and an 11th circuit judge in Alabama, it doesn't matter.

I'd give my left nut for any appellate clerkship. This topic is lulzy.

this thread is so stupid that i think anon might actually be warranted

Perhaps a less silly question would be which judges are most highly regarded in each circuit outside of 2/7/9/DC, to which I would respond Boudin (1), Wilkinson (4), Sutton (6), Gorsuch (10). I have no clue about the other circuits.

G.T.L Rev. has made a convincing argument that outside the D.C. Circuit, it's all about the judge's reputation and the desirability of the location. 2/9/7 are competitive not necessarily because they're more prestigious, but because the have a number of feeder judges and the judges sit in particularly desirable locations. More than half of the Second Circuit sits in New York City, more than half of the Seventh Circuit sits in Chicago, and almost three-quarters of the Ninth Circuit sits in one of: Pasadena, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, San Diego, Seattle, or Portland. Is Judge Thomas in Billings, Montana more competitive than Judge Motz in Baltimore? Probably not.

Tangerine Gleam wrote:It's generally more about judges, not circuits.

Well then obviously we need an annual ranking of the judges. How else will OP know who he is better than?

Anonymous User wrote:I'm most curious how the circuits stack up once one gets beyond 2/9/7/DC, which I figure would make up the top rung of any such ranking. Are 8/10 generally considered least prestigious/selective?

Unless you're headed to SCOTUS, they all help you tremendously. If you're not headed for SCOTUS, you should try to clerk where you want to work. In my local market, I doubt anyone has any idea that the DC Circuit is better than the local circuit. A clerkship with the local COA judge is gold, because he decides their cases, goes to their church, and plays at their golf course. People know him and a recommendation from him opens doors.

As a former 2/7/9 clerk, I approve of your promotion of the 2/7/9/DC stereotype.

Tangerine Gleam wrote:It's generally more about judges, not circuits.

Yup. Pretty sure clerking for Sutton on the 6th Cir. beats clerking for almost any judge on the 2nd Cir.

Anonymous User wrote:Perhaps a less silly question would be which judges are most highly regarded in each circuit outside of 2/7/9/DC, to which I would respond Boudin (1), Wilkinson (4), Sutton (6), Gorsuch (10). I have no clue about the other circuits.

I'm not sure why the 7th is being lumped in with 2/9/DC. Arguably the 5th has more "prestigious" judges than the 7th. That said, to echo what GTLrev has said, I would really look for a good boss/good city to live in for a year over "prestige" unless you're a SCOTUS candidate.

As a side note, while I don't know where the cutoff is for HYS (or even Columbia/Chicago), for a lower T14, you should be #1, #2, or #3 in your class to have a realistic shot at the Court.

rayiner wrote:G.T.L Rev. has made a convincing argument that outside the D.C. Circuit, it's all about the judge's reputation and the desirability of the location. 2/9/7 are competitive not necessarily because they're more prestigious, but because the have a number of feeder judges and the judges sit in particularly desirable locations. More than half of the Second Circuit sits in New York City, more than half of the Seventh Circuit sits in Chicago, and almost three-quarters of the Ninth Circuit sits in one of: Pasadena, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, San Diego, Seattle, or Portland. Is Judge Thomas in Billings, Montana more competitive than Judge Motz in Baltimore? Probably not.

Though Thomas and Motz would be an interesting discussion - liberal lion on the 4th who's finally in the majority (after 20 years of being in a conservative circuit) versus the moderating voice on the 9th?

G. T. L. Rev. wrote:I agree with most what has been said above. As has been said before, prestige for its own sake is a fool's errand. Do something that makes you happy, or that gets you something specific that you want (prestige does not count in this regard).

OP: explain why you want to clerk, what sort of clerking experience you want, and what you want to do afterwards -- both short-term and long-term. If you think you are competitive for SCOTUS, say so. Then we can give you some meaningful advice about where to look. But if your only inquiry is "tell me which judges or circuits are the most prestigious," I am not going to help.

How would you know if you are competitive for SCOTUS? Isn't that based, mostly, off of which COA judge you work for? So shouldn't you be thinking whether you are competitive for X feeder judge first? Let's say you are at Y: though your chances of getting a federal clerkship may be higher than other schools, how do you know you are a good candidate/bad candidate for SCOTUS?

Anonymous User wrote:

G. T. L. Rev. wrote:I agree with most what has been said above. As has been said before, prestige for its own sake is a fool's errand. Do something that makes you happy, or that gets you something specific that you want (prestige does not count in this regard).

OP: explain why you want to clerk, what sort of clerking experience you want, and what you want to do afterwards -- both short-term and long-term. If you think you are competitive for SCOTUS, say so. Then we can give you some meaningful advice about where to look. But if your only inquiry is "tell me which judges or circuits are the most prestigious," I am not going to help.

How would you know if you are competitive for SCOTUS? Isn't that based, mostly, off of which COA judge you work for? So shouldn't you be thinking whether you are competitive for X feeder judge first? Let's say you are at Y: though your chances of getting a federal clerkship may be higher than other schools, how do you know you are a good candidate/bad candidate for SCOTUS?

Pretty sure the school will contact you if you are competitive for SCOTUS.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Perhaps a less silly question would be which judges are most highly regarded in each circuit outside of 2/7/9/DC, to which I would respond Boudin (1), Wilkinson (4), Sutton (6), Gorsuch (10). I have no clue about the other circuits.

I'm not sure why the 7th is being lumped in with 2/9/DC. Arguably the 5th has more "prestigious" judges than the 7th. That said, to echo what GTLrev has said, I would really look for a good boss/good city to live in for a year over "prestige" unless you're a SCOTUS candidate.

As a side note, while I don't know where the cutoff is for HYS (or even Columbia/Chicago), for a lower T14, you should be #1, #2, or #3 in your class to have a realistic shot at the Court.

Who on the 5th has a more prestigious rep. than Richard Posner, Frank Easterbook, Diane Wood, and Sykes?? Edith??? You put out of view that the 7th cir. has only a fraction of the judges on the 5th. 4 out of the 10 actives have huge reputations.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Perhaps a less silly question would be which judges are most highly regarded in each circuit outside of 2/7/9/DC, to which I would respond Boudin (1), Wilkinson (4), Sutton (6), Gorsuch (10). I have no clue about the other circuits.

I'm not sure why the 7th is being lumped in with 2/9/DC. Arguably the 5th has more "prestigious" judges than the 7th. That said, to echo what GTLrev has said, I would really look for a good boss/good city to live in for a year over "prestige" unless you're a SCOTUS candidate.

As a side note, while I don't know where the cutoff is for HYS (or even Columbia/Chicago), for a lower T14, you should be #1, #2, or #3 in your class to have a realistic shot at the Court.

Who on the 5th has a more prestigious rep. than Richard Posner, Frank Easterbook, Diane Wood, and Sykes?? Edith??? You put out of view that the 7th cir. has only a fraction of the judges on the 5th. 4 out of the 10 actives have huge reputations.

Certainly not more prestigious, but still prestigious: King, Jones, Smith, Higginbotham. In recent years, Judge Jones has put more people on the Court than Easterbrook, Wood, and Sykes. Judge King has put a couple people on the Court the last couple years. Judges Smith and Higginbotham have a pretty extraordinary network of former clerks (and back in the Rehnquist days put a number of clerks on the Court).

And, if you're going by feeders alone, Boudin in the 1st alone puts more people on the Court than the entire 7th.

But, all this taking about which circuit has more "prestigious" judges is silly. Clerking on the 7th doesn't get you anything that, say clerking on the 8th, doesn't get you if you're not clerking for a "prestigious" judge.

Re: 7th versus 5th, the latter does not have a single city where anyone would want to live. That surely impacts competition for slots.

.

rayiner wrote:Re: 7th versus 5th, the latter does not have a single city where anyone would want to live. That surely impacts competition for slots.

...

rayiner wrote:Re: 7th versus 5th, the latter does not have a single city where anyone would want to live. That surely impacts competition for slots.

New Orleans

forza wrote:

rayiner wrote:Re: 7th versus 5th, the latter does not have a single city where anyone would want to live. That surely impacts competition for slots.

New Orleans

Not to mention Austin!

forza wrote:

rayiner wrote:Re: 7th versus 5th, the latter does not have a single city where anyone would want to live. That surely impacts competition for slots.

New Orleans

People think of New Orleans as a third world country.

Austin and NO> Chicago

Easily

But Austin doesn't have COA, only district

Borhas wrote:Austin and NO> Chicago

Easily

But Austin doesn't have COA, only district

Regarding NO: yes, because flooding and abject poverty is so awesome.
Regarding Austin: only good compared to how terrible the rest of Texas is.