Gibson v. WilmerHale (DC) Forum

[Anonymous User]

CoA clerkship lined up, liberal-leaning, interested in going into government after ten years or so. Want to do appellate and investigations. Want to do a district clerkship after CoA clerkship.

[Elston Gunn]

Don’t think you can go wrong with either option given your goals. Obviously Gibson will have a few more conservatives, but that shouldn’t be determinative. Personally, I would lean Wilmer on the off chance you decide in a few years you want to pursue a regulatory/substantive practice (which have a lot of advantages over litigation). At this point in your career, it’s good to leave yourself options. But this is one where it’s fine to just go with your gut.

[Anonymous User]

Summered at a peer firm to these in DC and have friends at both. I don't think there's much of a difference. As I'm sure you know, Gibson and Wilmer have two of the largest appellate practices in the country and both are Band 1 in white collar.

Appellate and investigations is an unusual combination of interests in practice fwiw even though it's a common one for 1Ls applying in DC. Appellate attorneys are essentially research-and-writing specialists while investigations attorneys are very much not. I'd make sure you actually know what white collar/investigations attorneys do day-to-day, it's one of the most misunderstood practices by law students without firm experience.

Two things you might think about are what else you might plausibly be interested in--Wilmer is stronger in regulatory, Gibson in commercial lit--and whether you can get appellate work at one or both without being a rock star. I hesitantly think you can at both because their practices are so large, and I'm pretty sure that's right with respect to Gibson, but I'm not 100% positive.

Also, government after ten years seems like quite a long time to plan to stay in private practice. In all likelihood you will leave voluntarily or involuntarily well before then. I don't think wanting a government exit at some point leans in one way or the other, though.

I don't think your politics are relevant to making this choice.

[justanotherlurker]

Agree that "appellate and investigations" are somewhat polar opposites.

I'd add that politics may matter , if you're envisioning a political position within an administration. Wilmer is more likely to have left-leaning ties than Gibson, which is more right-leaning.

How the groups are structured and how work is assigned is probably most important. Is Appellate its own siloed practice group? At some firms it very much is, and at some firms it's not. Do you have to be in the Appellate group to do primarily appellate work? Do associates in that group do exclusively appellate work, or can they do other lit/reg work too? These are all questions to ask at the interview, or via your network if you do informational interviews with people there.

[Anonymous User]

Appellate attorneys are essentially research-and-writing specialists while investigations attorneys are very much not. I'd make sure you actually know what white collar/investigations attorneys do day-to-day, it's one of the most misunderstood practices by law students without firm experience.

Could you please elaborate on this? - I am 2l interested in white collar/investigations work.

[Elston Gunn]

While the others are right that appellate and white collar are extremely different, OP I don’t think you need to sweat that too much (assuming you’re a 2L). It’ll be years until you’re actually at the firm, which will give time for your goals to develop.

[Anonymous User]

GDC mid-level here. I dunno about WilmerHale, but at Gibson you could easily do both Appellate and WC work for a couple years as a junior associate, given the free market system. Appellate stuff is a little hard to get staffed on (because its popular, so appellate partners have their pick of the litter of associates to work with), but with a COA clerkship under your belt you should be fine (and because there are no practice group limitations, in my experience you can always just keep badgering the partners doing the kind of work you want to do until they give in and add you to one of their cases). Ignore the stuff about Gibson being "conservative." Most of my associate colleagues lean liberal, and 95% of the work you'll be doing, even in appellate, is apolitical. There are of course conservative partners and associates here, but I've found zero correlation between personal political ideology and a partner's reputation for being good to work for at Gibson.

[Anonymous User]

Don’t think you can go wrong with either option given your goals. Obviously Gibson will have a few more conservatives, but that shouldn’t be determinative. Personally, I would lean Wilmer on the off chance you decide in a few years you want to pursue a regulatory/substantive practice (which have a lot of advantages over litigation). At this point in your career, it’s good to leave yourself options. But this is one where it’s fine to just go with your gut.

OP here- thanks all! I know the practice groups are polar opposites but trying to figure out some stuff during 2L summer without being pinned down for post-clerkship. Appreciate all the advice!