DC litigation Forum

[Anonymous User]

Currently clerking on 2/9/DC. Conservative. Looking to practice in DC post-clerkship. Interested in a mix of appellate, admin/regulatory, securities, and commercial lit.

Based on the above, thoughts on whether I should prioritize or avoid any of the following (or how they rank against each other in terms of reputation in the city, quality of work, culture, etc.)? Kirkland, Wilmer, Gibson, Latham, Williams & Connolly.

Gibson sounds like the overall best fit, followed by Latham. If you want to gain trial skills Williams & Connolly could be your best option, but its appellate team is small and hard to break into (and 2/9/DC isn't really a thing outside TLS). Kirkland lost its whole appeals group and is Kirkland. You could also consider applying to Kellogg Hansen and some of the conservative litigation boutiques like Cooper & Kirk and Consovoy McCarthy.

A few things wrong here.

It's not hard to break into W&C's appellate team if you can do good work and have the right background (which OP does have).

Kirkland still has an appeals group, and it still does interesting work -- just not some of the headline-grabbing work Clement brought in.

Finally, however much the other poster would like to believe otherwise, LOL, 2/9/DC is definitely a thing outside TLS. Where do you think TLS came up with it? Concern with prestige permeates the law.

Respectfully, these responses suggest a lack of familiarity with the shorthand used in appellate practice. When I said it's hard to break into Williams & Connolly's appellate team, I didn't mean that it's hard to do work on appellate briefs. Rather, I meant that it's hard to work with Lisa Blatt and Sarah Harris on the firm's flagship SCOTUS cases. When I said Kirkland lost its appeals group, I didn't mean Kirkland never handles appeals. Rather, I meant Paul Clement and Erin Murphy's exit left Kirkland with an understaffed B-team heavily reliant on John O'Quinn's less-than-sexy IP work. And when I said 2/9/DC isn't a thing, I didn't mean prestige is irrelevant. Rather, I meant that 2/9/DC is a non-proxy for prestige in elite appellate circles, especially for conservatives.

Yeah, 2/9/DC is a thing of the past (with the exception of DC) . Individual judges >> specific circuit (other than DC).

Even in DC, the individual judge is more important. Katsas is as prestigious in conservative circles as any judge in the country, but I don't see elite appellate groups favoring Rao/Henderson/Walker clerks over feeders/semi-feeders in the regional circuits.

[Anonymous User]

Currently clerking on 2/9/DC. Conservative. Looking to practice in DC post-clerkship. Interested in a mix of appellate, admin/regulatory, securities, and commercial lit.

Based on the above, thoughts on whether I should prioritize or avoid any of the following (or how they rank against each other in terms of reputation in the city, quality of work, culture, etc.)? Kirkland, Wilmer, Gibson, Latham, Williams & Connolly.

Gibson sounds like the overall best fit, followed by Latham. If you want to gain trial skills Williams & Connolly could be your best option, but its appellate team is small and hard to break into (and 2/9/DC isn't really a thing outside TLS). Kirkland lost its whole appeals group and is Kirkland. You could also consider applying to Kellogg Hansen and some of the conservative litigation boutiques like Cooper & Kirk and Consovoy McCarthy.

A few things wrong here.

It's not hard to break into W&C's appellate team if you can do good work and have the right background (which OP does have).

Kirkland still has an appeals group, and it still does interesting work -- just not some of the headline-grabbing work Clement brought in.

Finally, however much the other poster would like to believe otherwise, LOL, 2/9/DC is definitely a thing outside TLS. Where do you think TLS came up with it? Concern with prestige permeates the law.

Respectfully, these responses suggest a lack of familiarity with the shorthand used in appellate practice. When I said it's hard to break into Williams & Connolly's appellate team, I didn't mean that it's hard to do work on appellate briefs. Rather, I meant that it's hard to work with Lisa Blatt and Sarah Harris on the firm's flagship SCOTUS cases. When I said Kirkland lost its appeals group, I didn't mean Kirkland never handles appeals. Rather, I meant Paul Clement and Erin Murphy's exit left Kirkland with an understaffed B-team heavily reliant on John O'Quinn's less-than-sexy IP work. And when I said 2/9/DC isn't a thing, I didn't mean prestige is irrelevant. Rather, I meant that 2/9/DC is a non-proxy for prestige in elite appellate circles, especially for conservatives.

Yeah, 2/9/DC is a thing of the past (with the exception of DC) . Individual judges >> specific circuit (other than DC).

Even in DC, the individual judge is more important. Katsas is as prestigious in conservative circles as any judge in the country, but I don't see elite appellate groups favoring Rao/Henderson/Walker clerks over feeders/semi-feeders in the regional circuits.

Rao has been hiring close to the top of the Fed Soc pile, she is not in the same category as Henderson and Walker

I think 2 and DC are a little special even in the "individual judges matter more" view because they have such high concentrations of individual judges who matter. Both DC and CA2 have more judges who have fed than some circuits have judges (I believe 2 has 18 and DC has 14, i.e., all of them except the Biden appointees, from a rough count). I also think the circuit correlation is weaker for conservatives than for liberals.

[Anonymous User]

Yeah, 2/9/DC is a thing of the past (with the exception of DC) . Individual judges >> specific circuit (other than DC).

Even in DC, the individual judge is more important. Katsas is as prestigious in conservative circles as any judge in the country, but I don't see elite appellate groups favoring Rao/Henderson/Walker clerks over feeders/semi-feeders in the regional circuits.

Rao has been hiring close to the top of the Fed Soc pile, she is not in the same category as Henderson and Walker

I think 2 and DC are a little special even in the "individual judges matter more" view because they have such high concentrations of individual judges who matter. Both DC and CA2 have more judges who have fed than some circuits have judges (I believe 2 has 18 and DC has 14, i.e., all of them except the Biden appointees, from a rough count). I also think the circuit correlation is weaker for conservatives than for liberals.

2/9/DC has never been a thing outside of TLS. I agree that there's a higher concentration of feeders on 2/DC, but I don't think those circuits are special except that they signal things about you that would also be obvious on your transcript/resume. They're hard to get because they're two of the top locations for lawyers in the country and lots of people want to be there, so I'll admit that I treat 2/DC as proxies for tip top grades/accomplishments/connections in a way that I wouldn't quite do for, say, the 6th Circuit (no disrespect to the 6th Circuit, anyone with any COA is winning at the law school game). But if I were hiring, I'd learn those things about you from your application anyway. And if your application somehow didn't stand up on its own, I wouldn't weight 2/DC more heavily than the 6th Cir.

[Anonymous User]

Yeah, 2/9/DC is a thing of the past (with the exception of DC) . Individual judges >> specific circuit (other than DC).

Even in DC, the individual judge is more important. Katsas is as prestigious in conservative circles as any judge in the country, but I don't see elite appellate groups favoring Rao/Henderson/Walker clerks over feeders/semi-feeders in the regional circuits.

Rao has been hiring close to the top of the Fed Soc pile, she is not in the same category as Henderson and Walker

I think 2 and DC are a little special even in the "individual judges matter more" view because they have such high concentrations of individual judges who matter. Both DC and CA2 have more judges who have fed than some circuits have judges (I believe 2 has 18 and DC has 14, i.e., all of them except the Biden appointees, from a rough count). I also think the circuit correlation is weaker for conservatives than for liberals.

2/9/DC has never been a thing outside of TLS. I agree that there's a higher concentration of feeders on 2/DC, but I don't think those circuits are special except that they signal things about you that would also be obvious on your transcript/resume. They're hard to get because they're two of the top locations for lawyers in the country and lots of people want to be there, so I'll admit that I treat 2/DC as proxies for tip top grades/accomplishments/connections in a way that I wouldn't quite do for, say, the 6th Circuit (no disrespect to the 6th Circuit, anyone with any COA is winning at the law school game). But if I were hiring, I'd learn those things about you from your application anyway. And if your application somehow didn't stand up on its own, I wouldn't weight 2/DC more heavily than the 6th Cir.

I think this is basically right. CA2/CADC have historically had good judges, but that's more correlation than causation. To take your example, there are at at least three judges on CA6 that a conservative appeals group would prefer over any judge on CA2 (Sutton/Thapar/Kethledge). CA2 is more competitive in a vacuum, but "in a vacuum" is not how the very best firms hire.

[Anonymous User]

These last few posts insisting "2/9/DC is not a thing except on TLS" are pretty short-sighted. They almost all say this, but then acknowledge that the locations (NYC, DC, West Coast) are more desirable, and competitive, and hard to get, than most other places in the country. Well, why do you think anyone might have thought 2/9/DC was prestigious? Because the numbers "2" and "9" are more valuable? It's the vey same proxies you go on to acknowledge!

If places like New York City and DC are more competitive, and hard to get, and have some of the best judges (for the very same reasons), the prestige proxies will of course track that, because the best students with the best options and best firms will. It's not some metaphysical reification of the circuits that happen to be the Second or the Ninth. It's not isolated or random, it's systematic and holistic. Some of the anti-prestige TLS navel-gazing here can just get silly...

[Anonymous User]

These last few posts insisting "2/9/DC is not a thing except on TLS" are pretty short-sighted. They almost all say this, but then acknowledge that the locations (NYC, DC, West Coast) are more desirable, and competitive, and hard to get, than most other places in the country. Well, why do you think anyone might have thought 2/9/DC was prestigious? Because the numbers "2" and "9" are more valuable? It's the vey same proxies you go on to acknowledge!

If places like New York City and DC are more competitive, and hard to get, and have some of the best judges (for the very same reasons), the prestige proxies will of course track that, because the best students with the best options and best firms will. It's not some metaphysical reification of the circuits that happen to be the Second or the Ninth. It's not isolated or random, it's systematic and holistic. Some of the anti-prestige TLS navel-gazing here can just get silly...

You're missing the point. No one here is "anti-prestige," we're in agreement that elite firms are prestige-obsessed. Our point is that [1] elite firms assess prestige on a judge-by-judge basis and [2] judges in CA2 and CA9 are not seen as the most competitive or best, especially in conservative circles. New York City is more desirable than Birmingham, but that doesn't mean Menashi (CA2) is more competitive than Pryor (CA11). Most students are willing to suck it up for a year if it means a 75% chance of SCOTUS.

[Anonymous User]

These last few posts insisting "2/9/DC is not a thing except on TLS" are pretty short-sighted. They almost all say this, but then acknowledge that the locations (NYC, DC, West Coast) are more desirable, and competitive, and hard to get, than most other places in the country. Well, why do you think anyone might have thought 2/9/DC was prestigious? Because the numbers "2" and "9" are more valuable? It's the vey same proxies you go on to acknowledge!

If places like New York City and DC are more competitive, and hard to get, and have some of the best judges (for the very same reasons), the prestige proxies will of course track that, because the best students with the best options and best firms will. It's not some metaphysical reification of the circuits that happen to be the Second or the Ninth. It's not isolated or random, it's systematic and holistic. Some of the anti-prestige TLS navel-gazing here can just get silly...

You're missing the point. No one here is "anti-prestige," we're in agreement that elite firms are prestige-obsessed. Our point is that [1] elite firms assess prestige on a judge-by-judge basis and [2] judges in CA2 and CA9 are not seen as the most competitive or best, especially in conservative circles. New York City is more desirable than Birmingham, but that doesn't mean Menashi (CA2) is more competitive than Pryor (CA11). Most students are willing to suck it up for a year if it means a 75% chance of SCOTUS.

As a general rule (for top law students), NYC is more desirable + competitive than most other places. Yes, Pryor is more desirable/competitive than a new judge on CA2, but that is an exception that proves the rule. There are maybe 10-ish true feeder judges like that in the rest of the country. And most students aren't close to being SCOTUS/feeder contenders. So the general rule is just more widely applicable.

[Anonymous User]

These last few posts insisting "2/9/DC is not a thing except on TLS" are pretty short-sighted. They almost all say this, but then acknowledge that the locations (NYC, DC, West Coast) are more desirable, and competitive, and hard to get, than most other places in the country. Well, why do you think anyone might have thought 2/9/DC was prestigious? Because the numbers "2" and "9" are more valuable? It's the vey same proxies you go on to acknowledge!

If places like New York City and DC are more competitive, and hard to get, and have some of the best judges (for the very same reasons), the prestige proxies will of course track that, because the best students with the best options and best firms will. It's not some metaphysical reification of the circuits that happen to be the Second or the Ninth. It's not isolated or random, it's systematic and holistic. Some of the anti-prestige TLS navel-gazing here can just get silly...

You're missing the point. No one here is "anti-prestige," we're in agreement that elite firms are prestige-obsessed. Our point is that [1] elite firms assess prestige on a judge-by-judge basis and [2] judges in CA2 and CA9 are not seen as the most competitive or best, especially in conservative circles. New York City is more desirable than Birmingham, but that doesn't mean Menashi (CA2) is more competitive than Pryor (CA11). Most students are willing to suck it up for a year if it means a 75% chance of SCOTUS.

As a general rule (for top law students), NYC is more desirable + competitive than most other places. Yes, Pryor is more desirable/competitive than a new judge on CA2, but that is an exception that proves the rule. There are maybe 10-ish true feeder judges like that in the rest of the country. And most students aren't close to being SCOTUS/feeder contenders. So the general rule is just more widely applicable.

Pryor is more desirable for conservatives than any judge on CA2, not just new judges. And not just Pryor, you can throw in Bibas, Hardiman, Wilkinson, Oldham, Willett, Sutton, Kethledge, Thapar, Sykes, Easterbrook, Colloton, Stras, Grant, Newsom, and others also. I'll grant you that most students aren't SCOTUS/feeder contenders, but most members of the best conservative DC appellate groups (which is what OP asked about) are.

[Anonymous User]

These last few posts insisting "2/9/DC is not a thing except on TLS" are pretty short-sighted. They almost all say this, but then acknowledge that the locations (NYC, DC, West Coast) are more desirable, and competitive, and hard to get, than most other places in the country. Well, why do you think anyone might have thought 2/9/DC was prestigious? Because the numbers "2" and "9" are more valuable? It's the vey same proxies you go on to acknowledge!

If places like New York City and DC are more competitive, and hard to get, and have some of the best judges (for the very same reasons), the prestige proxies will of course track that, because the best students with the best options and best firms will. It's not some metaphysical reification of the circuits that happen to be the Second or the Ninth. It's not isolated or random, it's systematic and holistic. Some of the anti-prestige TLS navel-gazing here can just get silly...

You're missing the point. No one here is "anti-prestige," we're in agreement that elite firms are prestige-obsessed. Our point is that [1] elite firms assess prestige on a judge-by-judge basis and [2] judges in CA2 and CA9 are not seen as the most competitive or best, especially in conservative circles. New York City is more desirable than Birmingham, but that doesn't mean Menashi (CA2) is more competitive than Pryor (CA11). Most students are willing to suck it up for a year if it means a 75% chance of SCOTUS.

As a general rule (for top law students), NYC is more desirable + competitive than most other places. Yes, Pryor is more desirable/competitive than a new judge on CA2, but that is an exception that proves the rule. There are maybe 10-ish true feeder judges like that in the rest of the country. And most students aren't close to being SCOTUS/feeder contenders. So the general rule is just more widely applicable.

You’re comparing apples and oranges. NYC being more competitive and desirable *for applicants* doesn’t mean it’s automatically more prestigious *to employers* (which is who prestige matters to. I mean if you want to pat yourself on the back and consider yourself prestigious for being special enough to get hired in NYC, go for it, but that’s not really the point). You got hired in NYC through grades/accomplishments/connections that you’d have had wherever you clerked. No one thinks those things are more special because you clerked on the 2d instead of the 6th or any other circuit. The prestige of the actual *clerkship* depends on the judge.

[Anonymous User]

This thread's direction points to what is wrong with and weird about the upper echelon of our profession. A beautiful example of totally mindless prestige-oriented riff raff that ends up benefitting no one. Just two weirdos engaged in a heated measuring contest.

[Anonymous User]

These last few posts insisting "2/9/DC is not a thing except on TLS" are pretty short-sighted. They almost all say this, but then acknowledge that the locations (NYC, DC, West Coast) are more desirable, and competitive, and hard to get, than most other places in the country. Well, why do you think anyone might have thought 2/9/DC was prestigious? Because the numbers "2" and "9" are more valuable? It's the vey same proxies you go on to acknowledge!

If places like New York City and DC are more competitive, and hard to get, and have some of the best judges (for the very same reasons), the prestige proxies will of course track that, because the best students with the best options and best firms will. It's not some metaphysical reification of the circuits that happen to be the Second or the Ninth. It's not isolated or random, it's systematic and holistic. Some of the anti-prestige TLS navel-gazing here can just get silly...

You're missing the point. No one here is "anti-prestige," we're in agreement that elite firms are prestige-obsessed. Our point is that [1] elite firms assess prestige on a judge-by-judge basis and [2] judges in CA2 and CA9 are not seen as the most competitive or best, especially in conservative circles. New York City is more desirable than Birmingham, but that doesn't mean Menashi (CA2) is more competitive than Pryor (CA11). Most students are willing to suck it up for a year if it means a 75% chance of SCOTUS.

As a general rule (for top law students), NYC is more desirable + competitive than most other places. Yes, Pryor is more desirable/competitive than a new judge on CA2, but that is an exception that proves the rule. There are maybe 10-ish true feeder judges like that in the rest of the country. And most students aren't close to being SCOTUS/feeder contenders. So the general rule is just more widely applicable.

You’re comparing apples and oranges. NYC being more competitive and desirable *for applicants* doesn’t mean it’s automatically more prestigious *to employers* (which is who prestige matters to. I mean if you want to pat yourself on the back and consider yourself prestigious for being special enough to get hired in NYC, go for it, but that’s not really the point). You got hired in NYC through grades/accomplishments/connections that you’d have had wherever you clerked. No one thinks those things are more special because you clerked on the 2d instead of the 6th or any other circuit. The prestige of the actual *clerkship* depends on the judge.

I'd add that NYC and LA aren't everyone's cups of tea. Many conservatives would prefer a year in Nashville or Austin. Either way, geography isn't something top applicants think about much. Most top conservatives apply during their 1L year to feeders and semi-feeders all over the country.

[Anonymous User]

Former Gibson associate with a similar practice. Gibson has top-tier appellate and admin/regulatory groups, and lots of very interesting commercial litigation cases (I didn't do securities litigation, but heard good things from associates who did). I think the Gibson experience can be a bit person-specific, based on who you work for and on what, but my sense is that associates doing appellate and admin/regulatory work are mostly happy and that the senior associates and partners are mostly good to work with.

Isn't Gibson DC a sweatshop?

Former Gibson DC associate. It is not a sweatshop. It is great and I would highly recommend it.

[Anonymous User]

These last few posts insisting "2/9/DC is not a thing except on TLS" are pretty short-sighted. They almost all say this, but then acknowledge that the locations (NYC, DC, West Coast) are more desirable, and competitive, and hard to get, than most other places in the country. Well, why do you think anyone might have thought 2/9/DC was prestigious? Because the numbers "2" and "9" are more valuable? It's the vey same proxies you go on to acknowledge!

If places like New York City and DC are more competitive, and hard to get, and have some of the best judges (for the very same reasons), the prestige proxies will of course track that, because the best students with the best options and best firms will. It's not some metaphysical reification of the circuits that happen to be the Second or the Ninth. It's not isolated or random, it's systematic and holistic. Some of the anti-prestige TLS navel-gazing here can just get silly...

You're missing the point. No one here is "anti-prestige," we're in agreement that elite firms are prestige-obsessed. Our point is that [1] elite firms assess prestige on a judge-by-judge basis and [2] judges in CA2 and CA9 are not seen as the most competitive or best, especially in conservative circles. New York City is more desirable than Birmingham, but that doesn't mean Menashi (CA2) is more competitive than Pryor (CA11). Most students are willing to suck it up for a year if it means a 75% chance of SCOTUS.

As a general rule (for top law students), NYC is more desirable + competitive than most other places. Yes, Pryor is more desirable/competitive than a new judge on CA2, but that is an exception that proves the rule. There are maybe 10-ish true feeder judges like that in the rest of the country. And most students aren't close to being SCOTUS/feeder contenders. So the general rule is just more widely applicable.

Pryor is more desirable for conservatives than any judge on CA2, not just new judges. And not just Pryor, you can throw in Bibas, Hardiman, Wilkinson, Oldham, Willett, Sutton, Kethledge, Thapar, Sykes, Easterbrook, Colloton, Stras, Grant, Newsom, and others also. I'll grant you that most students aren't SCOTUS/feeder contenders, but most members of the best conservative DC appellate groups (which is what OP asked about) are.

There are lots of preftigious judges outside of DC, but the idea that Colloton or Stras are more preftigious for conservatives than Livingston or Park is laughable. Beyond the huge feeders like Pryor that’s just a list of semi-feeders, which 2 has no shortage of. Also Easterbrook doesn’t even hire his own clerks and Wilkinson is past it.

And while everyone on this thread agrees that location matters less for conservative feeders, it’s not a coincidence that all of the Fed Soc judges on 2 and DC feed, which is not true for any other circuit. Plus 2 and DC have most of the top Fed Soc DJs. Even for conservatives, they’re areas with disproportionate concentrations of especially fancy clerks and judges.

Though it’s mostly correlation, not causation, this is right insofar as that it’s ultimately individual judges’ desirability that drives it on the right. 2 does have a better docket and better panels than e.g. 8, but neither most applicants nor employers really consider that.

[Anonymous User]

These last few posts insisting "2/9/DC is not a thing except on TLS" are pretty short-sighted. They almost all say this, but then acknowledge that the locations (NYC, DC, West Coast) are more desirable, and competitive, and hard to get, than most other places in the country. Well, why do you think anyone might have thought 2/9/DC was prestigious? Because the numbers "2" and "9" are more valuable? It's the vey same proxies you go on to acknowledge!

If places like New York City and DC are more competitive, and hard to get, and have some of the best judges (for the very same reasons), the prestige proxies will of course track that, because the best students with the best options and best firms will. It's not some metaphysical reification of the circuits that happen to be the Second or the Ninth. It's not isolated or random, it's systematic and holistic. Some of the anti-prestige TLS navel-gazing here can just get silly...

You're missing the point. No one here is "anti-prestige," we're in agreement that elite firms are prestige-obsessed. Our point is that [1] elite firms assess prestige on a judge-by-judge basis and [2] judges in CA2 and CA9 are not seen as the most competitive or best, especially in conservative circles. New York City is more desirable than Birmingham, but that doesn't mean Menashi (CA2) is more competitive than Pryor (CA11). Most students are willing to suck it up for a year if it means a 75% chance of SCOTUS.

As a general rule (for top law students), NYC is more desirable + competitive than most other places. Yes, Pryor is more desirable/competitive than a new judge on CA2, but that is an exception that proves the rule. There are maybe 10-ish true feeder judges like that in the rest of the country. And most students aren't close to being SCOTUS/feeder contenders. So the general rule is just more widely applicable.

Pryor is more desirable for conservatives than any judge on CA2, not just new judges. And not just Pryor, you can throw in Bibas, Hardiman, Wilkinson, Oldham, Willett, Sutton, Kethledge, Thapar, Sykes, Easterbrook, Colloton, Stras, Grant, Newsom, and others also. I'll grant you that most students aren't SCOTUS/feeder contenders, but most members of the best conservative DC appellate groups (which is what OP asked about) are.

There are lots of preftigious judges outside of DC, but the idea that Colloton or Stras are more preftigious for conservatives than Livingston or Park is laughable. Beyond the huge feeders like Pryor that’s just a list of semi-feeders, which 2 has no shortage of. Also Easterbrook doesn’t even hire his own clerks and Wilkinson is past it.

And while everyone on this thread agrees that location matters less for conservative feeders, it’s not a coincidence that all of the Fed Soc judges on 2 and DC feed, which is not true for any other circuit. Plus 2 and DC have most of the top Fed Soc DJs. Even for conservatives, they’re areas with disproportionate concentrations of especially fancy clerks and judges.

Though it’s mostly correlation, not causation, this is right insofar as that it’s ultimately individual judges’ desirability that drives it on the right. 2 does have a better docket and better panels than e.g. 8, but neither most applicants nor employers really consider that.

I'd say Colloton and Stras are about equal with Park in terms of FedSoc prestige here in DC. Livingston is known to be more competitive than them, but she's not ideological in hiring and it hurts her ability to feed to conservative justices. Great judge though. I'm not aware of Bianco, Menashi, or Nardini ever feeding, and certainly their names don't go as far in the appellate world as semifeeders in random circuits.

[Anonymous User]

Menashi has fed. Desirability is about more than feeding, and any evaluation of Colloton has to take into account (1) that he is only generously a semi-feeder (3 in 20 years), (2) that he is widely reputed to be a notably poor boss, and (3) that his location and circuit are not desirable for most. Stras is less glaring, but I do not think he is a destination for top applicants the way that the CA2/DC judges are (though the CA2 ones in particular hire a lot of liberals, except for Menashi).

[Anonymous User]

Menashi has fed. Desirability is about more than feeding, and any evaluation of Colloton has to take into account (1) that he is only generously a semi-feeder (3 in 20 years), (2) that he is widely reputed to be a notably poor boss, and (3) that his location and circuit are not desirable for most. Stras is less glaring, but I do not think he is a destination for top applicants the way that the CA2/DC judges are (though the CA2 ones in particular hire a lot of liberals, except for Menashi).

Who has Menashi fed to? I'm not questioning you, I'm just curious. I don't think I've seen this announced anywhere.

[Anonymous User]

Menashi has fed. Desirability is about more than feeding, and any evaluation of Colloton has to take into account (1) that he is only generously a semi-feeder (3 in 20 years), (2) that he is widely reputed to be a notably poor boss, and (3) that his location and circuit are not desirable for most. Stras is less glaring, but I do not think he is a destination for top applicants the way that the CA2/DC judges are (though the CA2 ones in particular hire a lot of liberals, except for Menashi).

Who has Menashi fed to? I'm not questioning you, I'm just curious. I don't think I've seen this announced anywhere.

Alito, not public yet.

[Anonymous User]

Menashi has fed. Desirability is about more than feeding, and any evaluation of Colloton has to take into account (1) that he is only generously a semi-feeder (3 in 20 years), (2) that he is widely reputed to be a notably poor boss, and (3) that his location and circuit are not desirable for most. Stras is less glaring, but I do not think he is a destination for top applicants the way that the CA2/DC judges are (though the CA2 ones in particular hire a lot of liberals, except for Menashi).

Who has Menashi fed to? I'm not questioning you, I'm just curious. I don't think I've seen this announced anywhere.

Alito, not public yet.

colloton has fed more than three, i believe 5. but i agree with your point that you have to consider the type of boss he is.

[Anonymous User]

Menashi has fed. Desirability is about more than feeding, and any evaluation of Colloton has to take into account (1) that he is only generously a semi-feeder (3 in 20 years), (2) that he is widely reputed to be a notably poor boss, and (3) that his location and circuit are not desirable for most. Stras is less glaring, but I do not think he is a destination for top applicants the way that the CA2/DC judges are (though the CA2 ones in particular hire a lot of liberals, except for Menashi).

Who has Menashi fed to? I'm not questioning you, I'm just curious. I don't think I've seen this announced anywhere.

Alito, not public yet.

colloton has fed more than three, i believe 5. but i agree with your point that you have to consider the type of boss he is.

He has at least one more coming, too. Seconding (thirding?) that he's a difficult boss.