Top Law Schools

If you could choose, fed or state, what would you choose and why? Does one offer more security than the other? Better benefits?

Anonymous User wrote:If you could choose, fed or state, what would you choose and why? Does one offer more security than the other? Better benefits?

TCR is certainly fed. As a general matter (noting that there will absolutely be exceptions), Resources, peers, supervisors, and most importantly pay is gonna be way better. Most would jump from biglaw to fed but fewer would jump from biglaw to state. They call it bigfed for a reason. Never heard of “bigstate.”

objctnyrhnr wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:If you could choose, fed or state, what would you choose and why? Does one offer more security than the other? Better benefits?

TCR is certainly fed. As a general matter (noting that there will absolutely be exceptions), Resources, peers, supervisors, and most importantly pay is gonna be way better. Most would jump from biglaw to fed but fewer would jump from biglaw to state. They call it bigfed for a reason. Never heard of “bigstate.”

To be a bit anal, there are some pretty sweet state and even city gigs, esp. in CA from what I understand. And there are some (relatively) less desirable fed gigs, like with Social Security or the VA or DHS. But my fellow mod is entirely correct that the general rule is that fed positions are more desirable than state positions.

QContinuum wrote:

objctnyrhnr wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:If you could choose, fed or state, what would you choose and why? Does one offer more security than the other? Better benefits?

TCR is certainly fed. As a general matter (noting that there will absolutely be exceptions), Resources, peers, supervisors, and most importantly pay is gonna be way better. Most would jump from biglaw to fed but fewer would jump from biglaw to state. They call it bigfed for a reason. Never heard of “bigstate.”

To be a bit anal, there are some pretty sweet state and even city gigs, esp. in CA from what I understand. And there are some (relatively) less desirable fed gigs, like with Social Security or the VA or DHS. But my fellow mod is entirely correct that the general rule is that fed positions are more desirable than state positions.

Absolutely correct. In my state AG’s office, for example, there are at least several units that are much “sexier” so to speak than, say, being a homeland security enforcement general lit attorney (though I suppose one could argue this depends on your politics). But on the other hand, I don’t know anybody who would pick being a general line ada (non homicide) over being a line ausa.

So maybe the more detailed answer is that in the aggregate, a given fed position will likely be better than a given state position...however, the most desirable state positions will likely be “sexier” than the relatively less desirable fed positions.

Similar positions? Almost always federal for the reasons one of the posters stated above.

In other circumstances, I wouldn't necessarily overlook county/state jobs. If your goal is to be come a federal prosecutor, you would be better served by gaining trial experience in a large county prosecutor office, as opposed to practicing administrative federal law and not having any opportunity for courtroom time. If you can start off as an AUSA or DOJ Criminal Division attorney, obviously take that option.

It's not always true that fed pay exceeds state/local salaries. Everyone knows some notable exceptions like the San Francisco DA, but there are others. At my DA's office (one of the more desirable second tier markets on the west coast), we make more than starting AUSAs, other than those with the ~20% locality pay in the major urban districts. The yearly promotions here are also generally larger. Three years in, I make $100k, and if I'd started here as my first job (instead of going defense for three years), I'd be in the $120k range. That said, it's going to be very different in more rural markets as an ADA.

Yeah, I think there’s a lot of variation in local prosecutor pay - I know people who’ve gone to a USAO because the pay is much better, but that’s not universally true. Federal pay and benefits are probably going to be more consistent around the country than state prosecutor pay. (That said, there are definitely variations in federal pay, too, by agency/role, but I think less drastic ones.)

But as to the overall question, it really depends on the job and what you want to do. If the positions are otherwise doing exactly the same thing, federal is likely going to pay more, and probably have more “prestige,” but it would depend whose opinion you’re worried about.

OP here - So the state one is PD and the other is more admin law related. Is anyone harder to “launch” from should you want to?

What would you want to launch to?

Those are pretty different options. From what I've seen and experienced, the federal job is going to give you more flexibility in general. You can probably still get a local PD job down the road if you want, but I'm not so sure that those federal doors will be open if you pass on that fed admin job now.

Public defense is difficult to transition out of. It took me several years to cross over into non-PD government work (ADA, I'm one of the posters above), despite having a number of felony jury trials and serious cases under my belt (murder, vehicular homicide, possession with intent to distribute drugs). It is extremely easy to get pigeon-holed into criminal defense. Expect questions about why you want to leave public defense and go into X type of law, especially if your target jobs are county/federal ones. The easier transition after indigent public defense will definitely be private criminal defense or small/mid-sized civil litigation, but the latter is still a tough move to make. If I could do it over, I would take any entry-level government job over a non-federal PD felony job. There are more usually options available to you after doing DUI prosecution for a small-sized city or some type of regulatory enforcement, compared to run of the mill indigent defense.

If your ultimate goal is to work as a federal attorney in some type of litigation role, at some point you need to transition into a job that requires you to carry the burden of proof. If you have the pedigree and grades, you might be able to bypass that step to some extent. Don't get me wrong -- criminal defense experience is valuable, but I've found that many/most employers undervalue it since you don't have the burden of proof and don't have to run cases the same way that a plaintiff's lawyer or prosecutor might. Depending on your ultimate goal, you may be better off working in a more transactional federal job to start with. At least then you're a federal employee, which is itself a boost of some type. On the other hand, the general trial experience you have as a local PD is still a good selling point. I think there are just some intermediary steps you're going to need to take after you leave your first PD job.

nixy wrote:What would you want to launch to?

Not sure yet ... guess I’m trying to get an understanding of career paths.

Anonymous User wrote:Those are pretty different options. From what I've seen and experienced, the federal job is going to give you more flexibility in general. You can probably still get a local PD job down the road if you want, but I'm not so sure that those federal doors will be open if you pass on that fed admin job now.

Public defense is difficult to transition out of. It took me several years to cross over into non-PD government work (ADA, I'm one of the posters above), despite having a number of felony jury trials and serious cases under my belt (murder, vehicular homicide, possession with intent to distribute drugs). It is extremely easy to get pigeon-holed into criminal defense. Expect questions about why you want to leave public defense and go into X type of law, especially if your target jobs are county/federal ones. The easier transition after indigent public defense will definitely be private criminal defense or small/mid-sized civil litigation, but the latter is still a tough move to make. If I could do it over, I would take any entry-level government job over a non-federal PD felony job. There are more usually options available to you after doing DUI prosecution for a small-sized city or some type of regulatory enforcement, compared to run of the mill indigent defense.

If your ultimate goal is to work as a federal attorney in some type of litigation role, at some point you need to transition into a job that requires you to carry the burden of proof. If you have the pedigree and grades, you might be able to bypass that step to some extent. Don't get me wrong -- criminal defense experience is valuable, but I've found that many/most employers undervalue it since you don't have the burden of proof and don't have to run cases the same way that a plaintiff's lawyer or prosecutor might. Depending on your ultimate goal, you may be better off working in a more transactional federal job to start with. At least then you're a federal employee, which is itself a boost of some type. On the other hand, the general trial experience you have as a local PD is still a good selling point. I think there are just some intermediary steps you're going to need to take after you leave your first PD job.

Thank you for taking the time to respond. This is very helpful albeit a dilemma.

QContinuum wrote:

objctnyrhnr wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:If you could choose, fed or state, what would you choose and why? Does one offer more security than the other? Better benefits?

TCR is certainly fed. As a general matter (noting that there will absolutely be exceptions), Resources, peers, supervisors, and most importantly pay is gonna be way better. Most would jump from biglaw to fed but fewer would jump from biglaw to state. They call it bigfed for a reason. Never heard of “bigstate.”

To be a bit anal, there are some pretty sweet state and even city gigs, esp. in CA from what I understand. And there are some (relatively) less desirable fed gigs, like with Social Security or the VA or DHS. But my fellow mod is entirely correct that the general rule is that fed positions are more desirable than state positions.

Why did you deem those jobs less desirable? Is it a morale thing or the possibility of being pigeonholed?

Some anecdata for State sometimes being better: Miami County Attorney’s office seems to be more desirable than S.D.Fla. AUSA civil (the comp is WAY more)

Anonymous User wrote:

QContinuum wrote:

objctnyrhnr wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:If you could choose, fed or state, what would you choose and why? Does one offer more security than the other? Better benefits?

TCR is certainly fed. As a general matter (noting that there will absolutely be exceptions), Resources, peers, supervisors, and most importantly pay is gonna be way better. Most would jump from biglaw to fed but fewer would jump from biglaw to state. They call it bigfed for a reason. Never heard of “bigstate.”

To be a bit anal, there are some pretty sweet state and even city gigs, esp. in CA from what I understand. And there are some (relatively) less desirable fed gigs, like with Social Security or the VA or DHS. But my fellow mod is entirely correct that the general rule is that fed positions are more desirable than state positions.

Why did you deem those jobs less desirable? Is it a morale thing or the possibility of being pigeonholed?

There's a lower cap on your automatic promotion potential on the GS scale; you often start out at a lower grade/step as well; and the type of work is more mind-numbing "churn." Again, painting with a very broad brush here, but most of the VA/DHS/SS gigs that get posted seem to fall into this category.

A few of my friends work for ICE and are all in GS13-15 positions (ladder to 15 without supervising) so I’m not sure that they necessarily pay lower than other agencies. I interviewed for some CBP jobs that all capped at GS14, which is admittedly below GS14, but the norm for a lot of agencies (DOL, EEOC, VA OGC, HHS, etc.) at the non-supervisory level. I got schooled in another thread because I thought the board of veteran appeals capped at GS13, but someone reported they were at GS14 there. I think almost all DOJ jobs ladder to GS15, but I’m not sure how quickly you get there. I started with a DOJ agency this year as a GS14 (lateral from another agency) so I guess I’ll find out one day how fast I can move to 15. SSA pay can be really bad. I’ve seen people with 15 years of experience being paid at a GS12 writing ALJ opinions.

Calibrazy wrote:Some anecdata for State sometimes being better: Miami County Attorney’s office seems to be more desirable than S.D.Fla. AUSA civil (the comp is WAY more)

I used to be a state prosecutor in Miami before I went federal. I think it’s important to note that the county attorney’s office there is an anomaly throughout the state of Florida. They have a relatively small office and pay similar to something like the SEC. The rest of the state mostly pays garbage. There were 20 year veterans at the state attorney’s office that weren’t even making 100k.

QContinuum wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

QContinuum wrote:

objctnyrhnr wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:If you could choose, fed or state, what would you choose and why? Does one offer more security than the other? Better benefits?

TCR is certainly fed. As a general matter (noting that there will absolutely be exceptions), Resources, peers, supervisors, and most importantly pay is gonna be way better. Most would jump from biglaw to fed but fewer would jump from biglaw to state. They call it bigfed for a reason. Never heard of “bigstate.”

To be a bit anal, there are some pretty sweet state and even city gigs, esp. in CA from what I understand. And there are some (relatively) less desirable fed gigs, like with Social Security or the VA or DHS. But my fellow mod is entirely correct that the general rule is that fed positions are more desirable than state positions.

Why did you deem those jobs less desirable? Is it a morale thing or the possibility of being pigeonholed?

There's a lower cap on your automatic promotion potential on the GS scale; you often start out at a lower grade/step as well; and the type of work is more mind-numbing "churn." Again, painting with a very broad brush here, but most of the VA/DHS/SS gigs that get posted seem to fall into this category.

That’s the scary thought ... mind-numbing work. Ugh. At least being in the courtroom would switch things up.

Also, worth keeping in mind that USAOs typically are on the AD-scale, which can be similar to rural local government jobs.

Anonymous User wrote:A few of my friends work for ICE and are all in GS13-15 positions (ladder to 15 without supervising) so I’m not sure that they necessarily pay lower than other agencies. I interviewed for some CBP jobs that all capped at GS14, which is admittedly below GS14, but the norm for a lot of agencies (DOL, EEOC, VA OGC, HHS, etc.) at the non-supervisory level. I got schooled in another thread because I thought the board of veteran appeals capped at GS13, but someone reported they were at GS14 there. I think almost all DOJ jobs ladder to GS15, but I’m not sure how quickly you get there. I started with a DOJ agency this year as a GS14 (lateral from another agency) so I guess I’ll find out one day how fast I can move to 15. SSA pay can be really bad. I’ve seen people with 15 years of experience being paid at a GS12 writing ALJ opinions.

Something with a nice promotion potential would be great. Guess it’s about the search for the right one.

re: SSA - Yikes!!!!!

JOThompson wrote:Also, worth keeping in mind that USAOs typically are on the AD-scale, which can be similar to rural local government jobs.

Is it similar for PDs?

Anonymous User wrote:A few of my friends work for ICE and are all in GS13-15 positions (ladder to 15 without supervising) so I’m not sure that they necessarily pay lower than other agencies. I interviewed for some CBP jobs that all capped at GS14, which is admittedly below GS14, but the norm for a lot of agencies (DOL, EEOC, VA OGC, HHS, etc.) at the non-supervisory level. I got schooled in another thread because I thought the board of veteran appeals capped at GS13, but someone reported they were at GS14 there. I think almost all DOJ jobs ladder to GS15, but I’m not sure how quickly you get there. I started with a DOJ agency this year as a GS14 (lateral from another agency) so I guess I’ll find out one day how fast I can move to 15. SSA pay can be really bad. I’ve seen people with 15 years of experience being paid at a GS12 writing ALJ opinions.

Thanks for chiming in and providing this additional info/corrections to my post - very helpful! I was wrong to lump all DHS jobs together - I think I had heard about CBP capping out at GS14 and mistakenly generalized that to other DHS agencies as well. And also helpful to hear that SSA is even a step worse than the GS14-capped jobs at CBP/VA.

JOThompson wrote:Also, worth keeping in mind that USAOs typically are on the AD-scale, which can be similar to rural local government jobs.

Eh, if by rural you mean low-paying, the AD-scale is less than the GS-scale, but it definitely pays better than your average rural local government job. Doesn't go as far if you're in SF or NYC, of course, but I think this comparison is a little much.

My comparison is probably using worst case scenario for AUSA salaries, but I don't think it's terribly far off in terms of rural prosecutor salaries. I worked with prosecutors who started out at $55k, in a town of 40,000 people, that was about eight hours from the nearest small large city. The only non-fed prosecutors I know making less are working in even smaller cities in the midwest, but even they're still around $45k starting.

The bottom of the AD scale is pretty hard to live on. Locality pay is what makes the AD-scale bearable at first, but even then, not until someone is 3+ years out of school. In reality, you're probably right that most newly barred AUSAs probably are above the Q1 on the AD scale.

The problem I see with the AD scale is that it doesn't track with comparable local government payscales. Especially if you don't live somewhere with a locality boost. I'd take a sizable pay cut to go to a USAO even with a 30% locality boost in a district like DC, even at 5-6 years of experience.

To answer one of the questions above :
In more progressive cities, local PDs are earning as much as local ADAs. That's still the exception to the rule though. When I started out as a public defender, we regularly made 25-35% less than our prosecutor counterparts, even though we were both employed directly by the county. Another thing to look at is the payscale. Some muni/county offices may start you out at $50k, but there can be significant pay raises every year for several years. In my county (not in SF), it's about a $10-15k pay raise each every year for the first four years.

I think there are a few things off about your assumptions re: AD scale. First, I don’t know anyone who gets paid less than Q1, and in some offices, everyone gets paid at the midpoint on up (though admittedly that varies a fair amount). Second, all offices get locality pay, some much less than others, but it’s there for everyone (you may know that, I just wasn’t clear from your post). Third, no one gets hired as a “newly barred” AUSA. Generally, you need at least three years of experience just to get hired. If you’re hired through the honors program, you still (generally) need to have to clerked first. So in practice, no one ever starts at the very bottom of the scale, and comparison with starting state salaries is unrealistic.

I think the local government payscales vary a lot, but in both districts where I’ve worked, AUSA pay is markedly better than local government. There are obviously places where this isn’t true, but it’s going to have to be examined on a case-by-case basis.

I also see plenty of PDs that don’t have such generous yearly raises at all, but again, regional variation is key.

Anonymous User wrote:

Calibrazy wrote:Some anecdata for State sometimes being better: Miami County Attorney’s office seems to be more desirable than S.D.Fla. AUSA civil (the comp is WAY more)

I used to be a state prosecutor in Miami before I went federal. I think it’s important to note that the county attorney’s office there is an anomaly throughout the state of Florida. They have a relatively small office and pay similar to something like the SEC. The rest of the state mostly pays garbage. There were 20 year veterans at the state attorney’s office that weren’t even making 100k.

Hi there. I am a 2L at a law school in Miami, FL. I am almost certain I want to be a state prosecutor here for a few years when I graduate, especially since the pay has been increased from $41,500 to $50k. Currently I am interning at an appellate court. I know common exit options after being a prosecutor are crim and insurance defense. But are there opps to move laterally within the public sector (city work, etc.)? What about probate/property litigation, would it make sense for a former prosecutor to move there?

Thanks.