Pros and cons of circuit clerkship for me Forum

[Anonymous User]

I am a lower midlevel lit associate at a lower top-tier market-paying firm in a secondary market (think a strong global firm that switched to 190 scale but typically not one that’s considered best of the best). I am not geographically flexible. I clerked for a district judge in this district. I worked in non-usao government for a few years before joining this firm and now I have been at the firm for about a year. I graduated from a t20/t25 in the region (ambiguity for anonymity).

I generally enjoy my biglaw practice and the people with whom I work and I have a good rep here. I hit my hours. That said, given circumstances specific to this group at this firm (as opposed to a me-specific issue), getting promoted directly to partner straight through appears somewhat unlikely here.

Shorter term goal is ausa in this district (they have interviewed me before, so I’m hoping to get it next go with more biglaw under my belt). Longer term goal might include state appellate judge or federal judge, tenure-track academia in my region, maybe biglaw partner. Additional goals might include moving towards a niche (and arguably higher prestige) appellate-focuses practice...though I do also enjoy the trial level stuff.

I have applied to circuit clerkships in the past and never been interviewed. However I have never applied with biglaw under my belt.

My question is whether I have more to gain than lose if I go for this again, noting that I would not start for a couple years. The way I see it, what I have to lose/risk:

Being unmarketable in what might be a slower economy by virtue of the nature strict date-date clerkship term and the size of the market, together with what will be my borderline senior associate status (although in this scenario I’d probably be amenable to taking a class hit)

Financial opportunity cost (I have a family but no debt and have a solid bit of savings at this point)

Burning bridges at firm by them having to take my experienced self off of a number of high impact cases and reassign them for a move that’s clearly just for my own career (again, note that I already fedclerked)

By extension, losing my current position which could be seen as a pretty ideal biglaw environment. I’m just not sure my group is big enough in this specific firm such that they could offer me an open invite back if I leave.

Being forced to pass on the relatively rare open ausa position in my district due to this commitment at the specific point in time

Stuff to gain:

Well, prestige (yes I suppose I’m one of those people, still)

Intellectual challenge of accomplishing this long-time goal (but I felt stronger about it before joining biglaw and getting looks from local usao)

Related enjoyment of the position.

Epic signing bonus from another firm if I got an offer (thinking Quinn, Jones day maybe, something like that)

Polishing resume further for future academia/judgeship

Helping me to hone qualifications for one of those niche (unicorn-ish) sexy appellate practices. I’m into this stuff, definitely for more than just $.

On balance, I’m leaning against it...the main reason being that the open ausa positions show up once every 1-2 years and I believe I’d have to pass on at least one of them. And the dream of ausa trumps the others, for the time being. Also a bit concerned about the financial aspect (upper midlevel market associate would be giving up a lot to do this).

Anyway that being said, I just can’t shake my desire to give it a whirl. I thought I’d outgrow this prestige-chasing nonsense by now, but maybe I haven’t yet?

Happy to answer questions to assist with people’s analysis, but apprehensive about providing more info that might assist with identification for obvious reasons

[cheaptilts]

What rank did you graduate at your school? And were you on the main journal?

[Anonymous User]

What rank did you graduate at your school? And were you on the main journal?

Landed a little below top 10% and no. For better or worse (I know what I was thinking, but I wouldn’t do it again), I specifically opted to go secondary/niche journal. Since graduating I’ve had multiple full length scholarly pieces published by a range of tier 2/3 primary journals and tier 1 secondary journals.

Frankly, my assumption (but perhaps a bad one) was that the detrimental effect of my lack of primary journal experience and not being top 5% of the class at my t25 is pretty negated by this point due to all the experience (competitive district court clerkship most particularly) and the extensive publications. Remember—I graduated some years ago.

To be clear (not that I am sure this is where you were going with it), I was not inquiring about my chances nearly as much as I was inquiring as to whether it is a good idea. After all, even though I acknowledge that getting any circuit clerkship is a long shot, if I apply it will entail a commitment to go full speed ahead of I get a look. That’s why I want to figure this out before applying. If I ultimately don’t get a look due to academic credentials, I suppose the point is moot.

[cheaptilts]

What rank did you graduate at your school? And were you on the main journal?

Landed a little below top 10% and no. For better or worse (I know what I was thinking, but I wouldn’t do it again), I specifically opted to go secondary/niche journal. Since graduating I’ve had multiple full length scholarly pieces published by a range of tier 2/3 primary journals and tier 1 secondary journals.

Frankly, my assumption (but perhaps a bad one) was that the detrimental effect of my lack of primary journal experience and not being top 5% of the class at my t25 is pretty negated by this point due to all the experience (competitive district court clerkship most particularly) and the extensive publications. Remember—I graduated some years ago.

To be clear (not that I am sure this is where you were going with it), I was not inquiring about my chances nearly as much as I was inquiring as to whether it is a good idea. After all, even though I acknowledge that getting any circuit clerkship is a long shot, if I apply it will entail a commitment to go full speed ahead of I get a look. That’s why I want to figure this out before applying. If I ultimately don’t get a look due to academic credentials, I suppose the point is moot.

You mentioned not getting interviews at CoA the first time around, as well as goals that included Art. 3 judgeship (can’t really plan for that ever, as it’s a political appointment), tenure-track academia, and appellate-lit groups at bigger firms.

Anecdotally, the odds of the appellate groups of Hogan Lovells/Jones Day and the like going for a candidate like you is probably pretty low. I think the CoA clerkship would be worth it to get into a general lit practice group at a well regarded litigation firm (you mentioned Quinn, for example), but I think you’re probably competitive enough now.

Obviously a CoA clerkship would be helpful for academia, but the odds of academia without an advanced degree in addition to a JD is low and rendered even lower by the fact that you didn’t graduate magna from your T25. I would check prawfsblawg to see the professors who gained tenure track positions last year (and they have a newly added chart showing who has accepted such positions this year). I don’t think your stats fit the mold.

All in all, I think you should do a CoA clerkship because you want to, and that’s enough convincing for me. The financial hit will not be super substantial given that you’d likely be a JSP 13 or 14 (the latter pushing your salary to near or above 100k in many places) and it’s only a year

[Anonymous User]

What rank did you graduate at your school? And were you on the main journal?

Landed a little below top 10% and no. For better or worse (I know what I was thinking, but I wouldn’t do it again), I specifically opted to go secondary/niche journal. Since graduating I’ve had multiple full length scholarly pieces published by a range of tier 2/3 primary journals and tier 1 secondary journals.

Frankly, my assumption (but perhaps a bad one) was that the detrimental effect of my lack of primary journal experience and not being top 5% of the class at my t25 is pretty negated by this point due to all the experience (competitive district court clerkship most particularly) and the extensive publications. Remember—I graduated some years ago.

To be clear (not that I am sure this is where you were going with it), I was not inquiring about my chances nearly as much as I was inquiring as to whether it is a good idea. After all, even though I acknowledge that getting any circuit clerkship is a long shot, if I apply it will entail a commitment to go full speed ahead of I get a look. That’s why I want to figure this out before applying. If I ultimately don’t get a look due to academic credentials, I suppose the point is moot.

You mentioned not getting interviews at CoA the first time around, as well as goals that included Art. 3 judgeship (can’t really plan for that ever, as it’s a political appointment), tenure-track academia, and appellate-lit groups at bigger firms.

Anecdotally, the odds of the appellate groups of Hogan Lovells/Jones Day and the like going for a candidate like you is probably pretty low. I think the CoA clerkship would be worth it to get into a general lit practice group at a well regarded litigation firm (you mentioned Quinn, for example), but I think you’re probably competitive enough now.

Obviously a CoA clerkship would be helpful for academia, but the odds of academia without an advanced degree in addition to a JD is low and rendered even lower by the fact that you didn’t graduate magna from your T25. I would check prawfsblawg to see the professors who gained tenure track positions last year (and they have a newly added chart showing who has accepted such positions this year). I don’t think your stats fit the mold.

All in all, I think you should do a CoA clerkship because you want to, and that’s enough convincing for me. The financial hit will not be super substantial given that you’d likely be a JSP 13 or 14 (the latter pushing your salary to near or above 100k in many places) and it’s only a year

OP here. That was a very thoughtful and informative post and I do appreciate it. Anecdotally I can tell you that in my general jurisdiction (and maybe this is an anomaly), there are examples every couple years of people with my general credentials making mid careee moves to tenure track academia (maybe more common post-ausa) though. Further, though not the norm, there is the occasional federal judge with similar resumes, and a number of state appellate judges with similar resumes as well.

As you mentioned, particularly in this climate, I am of the belief that I already do have the resume to jump from my own top tier lit practice to something like the top of the top tier (again, like a quinn or Kirkland or something). As you mentioned, I just don’t think I have the resume now to get as niche as I might want. (Relatedly, this is something I’ve been going back and forth about—if I’m happy and pay is the same and usaos don’t care, why would I really want to jump further up on the list where I’d probably end up having to work even harder, you know?)

Even though you obviously don’t know my district, what do you think about the validity of my concern regarding ausa opportunities and having to miss one due to timing and this commitment? What about just generally getting too senior to be marketable as a lateral by the time the clerkship would be done?

Thanks again for your thoughts.

[Anonymous User]

I post a lot on these fora about TT jobs. I actually think you'd be a solid candidate with one caveat (coming later). T25 + cum laude + multiple publications + big law + D Ct + gov't experience makes you a relatively attractive applicant. A COA clerkship definitely has some value added, but I don't think it's that big of a deal. There is a big emphasis on PhDs right now, because schools want to see publications. If you have the publications, you don't need the PhD. Some solid research came out recently that shows that early career publishing is highly correlated with late career publishing. Considering law schools give tenure to 95% of tenure-track professors (this is extremely high), they are really hungry for junior scholars with a strong record of publishing. With all of this being said, your odds of getting a tenure-track academia job where you live are slim to none, at least not right away.

The caveat is that there are many people with far better credentials (e.g. magna at a T13, COA clerkship, several years V10) that only land one offer at Idaho law and have to move across the country. For the most part, that's the norm. I have seen very few candidates succeed looking only in their region. The last one I can remember who pulled off looking only in their state was a magna at a T13, COA clerkship, practiced several years at a regional V100 that was one of the state's powerhouse firms, published in some tier 1 journals, had a top 20 undergrad, had already taught several classes as an adjunct, and practiced/researched a high demand/niche area of the law. So, this is all to say that you'll have to be willing to move anywhere in the country for tenure-track academia. If you're open to that idea, I would apply for Visiting Assistant Professor positions. You seem like a solid candidate and 2 years of teaching plus publishing (in tier 1 journals preferably) would make you as close to a lock as you can get for a TT job in the legal academia market.

To answer your question, though, I don't think you have anything to lose for with a COA clerkship, but I don't necessarily think it'll be that helpful.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. Thanks again. Also super helpful. Academia is more just a thought as opposed to something I’m intensely gunning for. I do really appreciate the info. If the opportunity wasn’t in my region, I probably would not move for it.

What about the baseline marketability of a 6-8 year associate (pursuant to grad class year) coming off a CoA clerkship and looking to get into a top of the top litigation group in one specific market at one specific time (when clerkship ends)? Would this be mitigated my a willingness to take a class year hit? What if the market is more similar to the way it was in 2013? Would that make a difference?

[cheaptilts]

OP here. Thanks again. Also super helpful. Academia is more just a thought as opposed to something I’m intensely gunning for. I do really appreciate the info. If the opportunity wasn’t in my region, I probably would not move for it.

What about the baseline marketability of a 6-8 year associate (pursuant to grad class year) coming off a CoA clerkship and looking to get into a top of the top litigation group in one specific market at one specific time (when clerkship ends)? Would this be mitigated my a willingness to take a class year hit? What if the market is more similar to the way it was in 2013? Would that make a difference?

I would not do the clerkship if the end goal was to lateral into an “elite” biglaw litigation practice and you’d be coming in as 5-8 year (I start with 5th year because i assume you’d have to take at minimum a one-year class hit upon joining a firm—at minimum). I think that would be a hard sell to basically any biglaw firm, especially coupled with the fact that you would have only done 1-2 years of biglaw, tops, prior to applying for the post-clerkship position right?

If you’re okay with striking out both at your current firm and many biglaw shops upon conclusion of your clerkship, then I think you should do it.


ETA: cheaptilts

[Anonymous User]

OP here. Thanks again. Also super helpful. Academia is more just a thought as opposed to something I’m intensely gunning for. I do really appreciate the info. If the opportunity wasn’t in my region, I probably would not move for it.

What about the baseline marketability of a 6-8 year associate (pursuant to grad class year) coming off a CoA clerkship and looking to get into a top of the top litigation group in one specific market at one specific time (when clerkship ends)? Would this be mitigated my a willingness to take a class year hit? What if the market is more similar to the way it was in 2013? Would that make a difference?

I would not do the clerkship if the end goal was to lateral into an “elite” biglaw litigation practice and you’d be coming in as 5-8 year (I start with 5th year because i assume you’d have to take at minimum a one-year class hit upon joining a firm—at minimum). I think that would be a hard sell to basically any biglaw firm, especially coupled with the fact that you would have only done 1-2 years of biglaw, tops, prior to applying for the post-clerkship position right?

If you’re okay with striking out both at your current firm and many biglaw shops upon conclusion of your clerkship, then I think you should do it.


ETA: cheaptilts

OP again. Yes, this is a huge concern of mine right here, together with missing at least one ausa opening in my home district. Thank you for your thoughts.

[LBJ's Hair]

My not-particularly-helpful advice: sit down and figure out what you wanna do with your law degree. Then decide whether you should quit your job to clerk. You've mentioned judge, academia, AUSA, BigLaw partner, appellate lit...Like it's just a laundry list of generically "prestigious" stuff, and a COA clerkship isn't really necessary to do a lot (most?) of it?

If you were a first year associate with no idea what to do with her life, sure, do the COA clerkship and figure it out later. But you're further on in your career, cost of quitting is a lot higher.

[cheaptilts]

My not-particularly-helpful advice: sit down and figure out what you wanna do with your law degree. Then decide whether you should quit your job to clerk. You've mentioned judge, academia, AUSA, BigLaw partner, appellate lit...Like it's just a laundry list of generically "prestigious" stuff, and a COA clerkship isn't really necessary to do a lot (most?) of it?

If you were a first year associate with no idea what to do with her life, sure, do the COA clerkship and figure it out later. But you're further on in your career, cost of quitting is a lot higher.

This is probably the best post in this thread so far. Do this, OP.

[Anonymous User]

My not-particularly-helpful advice: sit down and figure out what you wanna do with your law degree. Then decide whether you should quit your job to clerk. You've mentioned judge, academia, AUSA, BigLaw partner, appellate lit...Like it's just a laundry list of generically "prestigious" stuff, and a COA clerkship isn't really necessary to do a lot (most?) of it?

If you were a first year associate with no idea what to do with her life, sure, do the COA clerkship and figure it out later. But you're further on in your career, cost of quitting is a lot higher.

This is probably the best post in this thread so far. Do this, OP.

Yeah I hear you. I mean it’s a laundry list of goals, but also goals that are not mutually exclusive and (for each specific position) are relatively difficult to attain.

Top next move is ausa. My resume feels primed for it (or at least will be with a year or so more biglaw experience). And this office was already looking at me before biglaw. That said, it’s still arguably a unicorn job so far from a guarantee.

After that, or if I don’t get that, I’d be looking at any of academia, judge, or partner. For the big or even midlaw partner, I probably need to lateral somewhere else—not because of my work product but just because of the nature of this specific group unless something changes. For academia/judge, I obviously need to get crazy lucky.

I am thinking with my res, an additional year of biglaw experience will be more beneficial for usao than CoA at this point. That said, a CoA clerkship could be a nice step to lateral to somewhere where I could make partner...and maybe a new shiny thing on the road to academia.

After a recent post on this thread, I’m really now considering letting the whole CoA idea go. I’ve got the relatively competitive d court clerkship, I’ve since struck out at CoA, I’m not getting younger...time to move on. I’m most concerned about my marketability when I’m that senior, even with the new fancy clerkship.

[nixy]

I’m not claiming to know everything about how your path would be looked at everywhere, but I think a COA at this point would make your career path look kind of confusing and potentially look like you were looking for an out from biglaw. People certainly do go back and clerk after working, but my impression is that district court is more common at that point, and for people who don’t already have one. I tend to agree that sticking with your current gig will make more sense for what you want to do in future. (Only exception is maybe boutique appellate lit, but that seems the least connected to your current path and, respectfully, more of a “what prestigious thing can I do next?” goal.)