Is it too early to go to the USAO? Forum

[Anonymous User]

I've just been offered appointment as AUSA in a district with a sizeable population in a large state but not one of the banner districts. Think a step below SDNY, EDNY, NDCA, CDCA, DDC EDVA etc.. but not a fly over in Kansas. Before I got the offer I thought it was a no brainer but I'm having second thoughts.

I graduated below median from a T14 in 2021 and have been working at a big firm known for litigation. I'd always planned to spend 5 years in BL then go to a USAO but a mentor of mine told me now is a good time to make a move given that DOJ has the money and is looking to add bodies.

Given I've only spent a year and a half in BL, I don't have as much money saved as I'd like, so taking that pay cut is going to set me back a little bit. I've started to wonder if it makes sense for me to decline the offer and reapply after 1-2 years of diligent saving.

So my question is two fold:

1) what are the pros and cons of leaving big law early to go the government?

2) is rejecting the offer a faux pas the way it is in clerkships?

3) Is it possible, given my low GPA, this will be my only chance?

Thanks

[VirginiaFan]

I've just been offered appointment as AUSA in a district with a sizeable population in a large state but not one of the banner districts. Think a step below SDNY, EDNY, NDCA, CDCA, DDC EDVA etc.. but not a fly over in Kansas. Before I got the offer I thought it was a no brainer but I'm having second thoughts.

I graduated below median from a T14 in 2021 and have been working at a big firm known for litigation. I'd always planned to spend 5 years in BL then go to a USAO but a mentor of mine told me now is a good time to make a move given that DOJ has the money and is looking to add bodies.

Given I've only spent a year and a half in BL, I don't have as much money saved as I'd like, so taking that pay cut is going to set me back a little bit. I've started to wonder if it makes sense for me to decline the offer and reapply after 1-2 years of diligent saving.

So my question is two fold:

1) what are the pros and cons of leaving big law early to go the government?

2) is rejecting the offer a faux pas the way it is in clerkships?

3) Is it possible, given my low GPA, this will be my only chance?

Thanks

It's a no-brainer. Take it.

[Anonymous User]

Well, what do you want to do long term? Do you want to stay with the USAO/do a related federal gig, or do you plan to go back to a firm? If you want to be a government lifer, I say take the job and don’t look back - the satisfaction and progression on your chosen path and government benefits will make up for the couple of years of biglaw salary you’re giving up, IMO, though that’s subjective. If you want to do a government stint and then go back to private practice, it might make sense to get a little more firm experience under your belt for when you want to go back (depending a little on how long you want to spend with the government).

I don’t think declining now is a faux pas that will burn bridges unless you handle it badly. I think you can just say that taking everything into consideration, you’ve decided now isn’t the best time to make a change. If you’re applying to the same office in future, people may remember you and that you declined, but if they liked you they’re (probably) not going to hold it against you.

Major risks is that especially if you want to get into that office specifically, you have no idea when they’ll next have an opening, so hard to plan around. Or there will be a hiring freeze more generally when you want to move. Basically, bird in the hand yadda yadda.

I don’t think this is your only shot given your gpa; you have that gpa right now and they offered you the job. You won’t get worse as a candidate by getting more practice experience. Only caveat is that if you got the job now through someone advocating for you or through a connection or something like that, which may not be the case in the future (like you know the USA, but they won’t always be there), then yes, your application may be weaker in future. Or your preferred office get a USA who’s a stickler about high GPAs (I suppose theoretically, I don’t think this is a big issue).

Because they have the money to hire and want people now doesn’t mean they’re lowering their standards. It just means they can hire more people who meet those standards.

(My gut reaction is that you should take the job and run, but I don’t know your finances.)

[Anonymous User]

I've just been offered appointment as AUSA in a district with a sizeable population in a large state but not one of the banner districts. Think a step below SDNY, EDNY, NDCA, CDCA, DDC EDVA etc.. but not a fly over in Kansas. Before I got the offer I thought it was a no brainer but I'm having second thoughts.

I graduated below median from a T14 in 2021 and have been working at a big firm known for litigation. I'd always planned to spend 5 years in BL then go to a USAO but a mentor of mine told me now is a good time to make a move given that DOJ has the money and is looking to add bodies.

Given I've only spent a year and a half in BL, I don't have as much money saved as I'd like, so taking that pay cut is going to set me back a little bit. I've started to wonder if it makes sense for me to decline the offer and reapply after 1-2 years of diligent saving.

So my question is two fold:

1) what are the pros and cons of leaving big law early to go the government?

2) is rejecting the offer a faux pas the way it is in clerkships?

3) Is it possible, given my low GPA, this will be my only chance?

Thanks

It's a no-brainer. Take it.

That simple???

[Anonymous User]

Well, what do you want to do long term? Do you want to stay with the USAO/do a related federal gig, or do you plan to go back to a firm? If you want to be a government lifer, I say take the job and don’t look back - the satisfaction and progression on your chosen path and government benefits will make up for the couple of years of biglaw salary you’re giving up, IMO, though that’s subjective. If you want to do a government stint and then go back to private practice, it might make sense to get a little more firm experience under your belt for when you want to go back (depending a little on how long you want to spend with the government).

I don’t think declining now is a faux pas that will burn bridges unless you handle it badly. I think you can just say that taking everything into consideration, you’ve decided now isn’t the best time to make a change. If you’re applying to the same office in future, people may remember you and that you declined, but if they liked you they’re (probably) not going to hold it against you.

Major risks is that especially if you want to get into that office specifically, you have no idea when they’ll next have an opening, so hard to plan around. Or there will be a hiring freeze more generally when you want to move. Basically, bird in the hand yadda yadda.

I don’t think this is your only shot given your gpa; you have that gpa right now and they offered you the job. You won’t get worse as a candidate by getting more practice experience. Only caveat is that if you got the job now through someone advocating for you or through a connection or something like that, which may not be the case in the future (like you know the USA, but they won’t always be there), then yes, your application may be weaker in future. Or your preferred office get a USA who’s a stickler about high GPAs (I suppose theoretically, I don’t think this is a big issue).

Because they have the money to hire and want people now doesn’t mean they’re lowering their standards. It just means they can hire more people who meet those standards.

(My gut reaction is that you should take the job and run, but I don’t know your finances.)

Long term I am interested in politics, but at a minimum I would like the option to go back to a big firm after a 4-5 year stint. I can't say with 100% certainty, but I don't plan on being an AUSA for 30 years.

It's not an office that I'm married to, and there are others I prefer over it - but it is in a location I don't mind. I would like the option to work there down the line later. Hiring freeze is a real concern to me as well especially with all this "reign in the justice department" nonsense from the right.

In terms of finances - I always planned on leaving biglaw with a big nest egg. I could make do but it would be a change for sure.

[jotarokujo]

3) Is it possible, given my low GPA, this will be my only chance?

Thanks

I don't think it's just possible, I think it is likely. Or at least it is likely you won't have a chance the moment you want to leave biglaw. Your next chance may not come until way after you want to leave biglaw. It's very unlikely it will come at the perfect time.

[Anonymous User]

3) Is it possible, given my low GPA, this will be my only chance?

Thanks

I don't think it's just possible, I think it is likely. Or at least it is likely you won't have a chance the moment you want to leave biglaw. Your next chance may not come until way after you want to leave biglaw. It's very unlikely it will come at the perfect time.

Because of my stats or extraneous factors i.e. admin change, hiring freeze, etc.

[Anonymous User]

3) Is it possible, given my low GPA, this will be my only chance?

Thanks

I don't think it's just possible, I think it is likely. Or at least it is likely you won't have a chance the moment you want to leave biglaw. Your next chance may not come until way after you want to leave biglaw. It's very unlikely it will come at the perfect time.

Why do you think that the OP’s low GPA would be an issue in the future if it wasn’t here? (I agree that it’s very tough to guarantee timing though.)

[hdivschool]

Long term I am interested in politics, but at a minimum I would like the option to go back to a big firm after a 4-5 year stint. I can't say with 100% certainty, but I don't plan on being an AUSA for 30 years.

I don't think going back to a big firm is likely after 4-5 years. From what I've seen, you need substantial white collar criminal experience to go back, and I'm skeptical that you'll get that kind of experience in that amount of time.

[Anonymous User]

Well, what do you want to do long term? Do you want to stay with the USAO/do a related federal gig, or do you plan to go back to a firm? If you want to be a government lifer, I say take the job and don’t look back - the satisfaction and progression on your chosen path and government benefits will make up for the couple of years of biglaw salary you’re giving up, IMO, though that’s subjective. If you want to do a government stint and then go back to private practice, it might make sense to get a little more firm experience under your belt for when you want to go back (depending a little on how long you want to spend with the government).

I don’t think declining now is a faux pas that will burn bridges unless you handle it badly. I think you can just say that taking everything into consideration, you’ve decided now isn’t the best time to make a change. If you’re applying to the same office in future, people may remember you and that you declined, but if they liked you they’re (probably) not going to hold it against you.

Major risks is that especially if you want to get into that office specifically, you have no idea when they’ll next have an opening, so hard to plan around. Or there will be a hiring freeze more generally when you want to move. Basically, bird in the hand yadda yadda.

I don’t think this is your only shot given your gpa; you have that gpa right now and they offered you the job. You won’t get worse as a candidate by getting more practice experience. Only caveat is that if you got the job now through someone advocating for you or through a connection or something like that, which may not be the case in the future (like you know the USA, but they won’t always be there), then yes, your application may be weaker in future. Or your preferred office get a USA who’s a stickler about high GPAs (I suppose theoretically, I don’t think this is a big issue).

Because they have the money to hire and want people now doesn’t mean they’re lowering their standards. It just means they can hire more people who meet those standards.

(My gut reaction is that you should take the job and run, but I don’t know your finances.)

Long term I am interested in politics, but at a minimum I would like the option to go back to a big firm after a 4-5 year stint. I can't say with 100% certainty, but I don't plan on being an AUSA for 30 years.

It's not an office that I'm married to, and there are others I prefer over it - but it is in a location I don't mind. I would like the option to work there down the line later. Hiring freeze is a real concern to me as well especially with all this "reign in the justice department" nonsense from the right.

In terms of finances - I always planned on leaving biglaw with a big nest egg. I could make do but it would be a change for sure.

I agree with hdivschool that biglaw after 4-5 years isn’t that likely. The problem with that scenario is that (if you took this job) you’d likely go back too senior for an associate and not senior enough for a partner. I also don’t think that 4-5 years would get you enough experience with the kind of white-white collar crime necessary to be interesting to a big firm.

All that said, if people in that district frequently do go back to biglaw at that point in their careers, then it sounds more reasonable. There can be variation by office culture. So it can depends.

Re: “reining in the justice department,” I think that means primarily the other side’s justice department. There was a ton of hiring under Trump.

[Anonymous User]

Well, what do you want to do long term? Do you want to stay with the USAO/do a related federal gig, or do you plan to go back to a firm? If you want to be a government lifer, I say take the job and don’t look back - the satisfaction and progression on your chosen path and government benefits will make up for the couple of years of biglaw salary you’re giving up, IMO, though that’s subjective. If you want to do a government stint and then go back to private practice, it might make sense to get a little more firm experience under your belt for when you want to go back (depending a little on how long you want to spend with the government).

I don’t think declining now is a faux pas that will burn bridges unless you handle it badly. I think you can just say that taking everything into consideration, you’ve decided now isn’t the best time to make a change. If you’re applying to the same office in future, people may remember you and that you declined, but if they liked you they’re (probably) not going to hold it against you.

Major risks is that especially if you want to get into that office specifically, you have no idea when they’ll next have an opening, so hard to plan around. Or there will be a hiring freeze more generally when you want to move. Basically, bird in the hand yadda yadda.

I don’t think this is your only shot given your gpa; you have that gpa right now and they offered you the job. You won’t get worse as a candidate by getting more practice experience. Only caveat is that if you got the job now through someone advocating for you or through a connection or something like that, which may not be the case in the future (like you know the USA, but they won’t always be there), then yes, your application may be weaker in future. Or your preferred office get a USA who’s a stickler about high GPAs (I suppose theoretically, I don’t think this is a big issue).

Because they have the money to hire and want people now doesn’t mean they’re lowering their standards. It just means they can hire more people who meet those standards.

(My gut reaction is that you should take the job and run, but I don’t know your finances.)

Long term I am interested in politics, but at a minimum I would like the option to go back to a big firm after a 4-5 year stint. I can't say with 100% certainty, but I don't plan on being an AUSA for 30 years.

It's not an office that I'm married to, and there are others I prefer over it - but it is in a location I don't mind. I would like the option to work there down the line later. Hiring freeze is a real concern to me as well especially with all this "reign in the justice department" nonsense from the right.

In terms of finances - I always planned on leaving biglaw with a big nest egg. I could make do but it would be a change for sure.

I agree with hdivschool that biglaw after 4-5 years isn’t that likely. The problem with that scenario is that (if you took this job) you’d likely go back too senior for an associate and not senior enough for a partner. I also don’t think that 4-5 years would get you enough experience with the kind of white-white collar crime necessary to be interesting to a big firm.

All that said, if people in that district frequently do go back to biglaw at that point in their careers, then it sounds more reasonable. There can be variation by office culture. So it can depends.

Re: “reining in the justice department,” I think that means primarily the other side’s justice department. There was a ton of hiring under Trump.

If I left now and did four years I could go back as a sixth year. Three years would make me a fourth year

[trebekismyhero]

If you actually want to be an AUSA even for just a few years, go now. I think you could probably get back to big law after 4-5 years, but you would likely have to take a class cut. At my old firm, it was a revolving door to the AUSA office, but most ppl that came from the AUSA office did so after a decade or so and came in as a partner.

[Anonymous User]

Well, what do you want to do long term? Do you want to stay with the USAO/do a related federal gig, or do you plan to go back to a firm? If you want to be a government lifer, I say take the job and don’t look back - the satisfaction and progression on your chosen path and government benefits will make up for the couple of years of biglaw salary you’re giving up, IMO, though that’s subjective. If you want to do a government stint and then go back to private practice, it might make sense to get a little more firm experience under your belt for when you want to go back (depending a little on how long you want to spend with the government).

I don’t think declining now is a faux pas that will burn bridges unless you handle it badly. I think you can just say that taking everything into consideration, you’ve decided now isn’t the best time to make a change. If you’re applying to the same office in future, people may remember you and that you declined, but if they liked you they’re (probably) not going to hold it against you.

Major risks is that especially if you want to get into that office specifically, you have no idea when they’ll next have an opening, so hard to plan around. Or there will be a hiring freeze more generally when you want to move. Basically, bird in the hand yadda yadda.

I don’t think this is your only shot given your gpa; you have that gpa right now and they offered you the job. You won’t get worse as a candidate by getting more practice experience. Only caveat is that if you got the job now through someone advocating for you or through a connection or something like that, which may not be the case in the future (like you know the USA, but they won’t always be there), then yes, your application may be weaker in future. Or your preferred office get a USA who’s a stickler about high GPAs (I suppose theoretically, I don’t think this is a big issue).

Because they have the money to hire and want people now doesn’t mean they’re lowering their standards. It just means they can hire more people who meet those standards.

(My gut reaction is that you should take the job and run, but I don’t know your finances.)

Long term I am interested in politics, but at a minimum I would like the option to go back to a big firm after a 4-5 year stint. I can't say with 100% certainty, but I don't plan on being an AUSA for 30 years.

It's not an office that I'm married to, and there are others I prefer over it - but it is in a location I don't mind. I would like the option to work there down the line later. Hiring freeze is a real concern to me as well especially with all this "reign in the justice department" nonsense from the right.

In terms of finances - I always planned on leaving biglaw with a big nest egg. I could make do but it would be a change for sure.

I agree with hdivschool that biglaw after 4-5 years isn’t that likely. The problem with that scenario is that (if you took this job) you’d likely go back too senior for an associate and not senior enough for a partner. I also don’t think that 4-5 years would get you enough experience with the kind of white-white collar crime necessary to be interesting to a big firm.

All that said, if people in that district frequently do go back to biglaw at that point in their careers, then it sounds more reasonable. There can be variation by office culture. So it can depends.

Re: “reining in the justice department,” I think that means primarily the other side’s justice department. There was a ton of hiring under Trump.

If I left now and did four years I could go back as a sixth year. Three years would make me a fourth year

I kinda don’t see the point of being an AUSA for only 3-4 years. That goes really fast. But yeah, I think you’d definitely have to take a class cut if they took you back at that point.

[moxcoal]

If you need the money, stick with biglaw until you've saved enough. If you can get an offer as an AUSA now, you can do it later too. No need to jump the gun. The opportunity to make money at a firm is underplayed. For people who want to stay in public service (I think like yourself), get yourself into a comfortable place. No/little loans, on the path to ownership. Don't set yourself back by needing to jump back into private practice early because you need the money.

[Anonymous User]

If you need the money, stick with biglaw until you've saved enough. If you can get an offer as an AUSA now, you can do it later too. No need to jump the gun. The opportunity to make money at a firm is underplayed. For people who want to stay in public service (I think like yourself), get yourself into a comfortable place. No/little loans, on the path to ownership. Don't set yourself back by needing to jump back into private practice early because you need the money.

There are many other ways to handle loans through public service. Also, you will make good enough money with the federal government, even in a high cost of living area (source: I am an AUSA and live in DC). It’s no big law salary so I understand the hesitancy.

But to be completely honest, government hiring is a crap shoot. That’s why people are saying you may not have another shot at this. A few years from now, the process may be the same, but the people handling it will be different. However, I do find it odd you only want to be there for a few years. If this isn’t really what you want, don’t take it. But if your dream is to be an AUSA it’s a no brainer.

[CanadianWolf]

I've just been offered appointment as AUSA in a district with a sizeable population in a large state but not one of the banner districts. Think a step below SDNY, EDNY, NDCA, CDCA, DDC EDVA etc.. but not a fly over in Kansas. Before I got the offer I thought it was a no brainer but I'm having second thoughts.

I graduated below median from a T14 in 2021 and have been working at a big firm known for litigation. I'd always planned to spend 5 years in BL then go to a USAO but a mentor of mine told me now is a good time to make a move given that DOJ has the money and is looking to add bodies.

Given I've only spent a year and a half in BL, I don't have as much money saved as I'd like, so taking that pay cut is going to set me back a little bit. I've started to wonder if it makes sense for me to decline the offer and reapply after 1-2 years of diligent saving.

So my question is two fold:

1) what are the pros and cons of leaving big law early to go the government?

2) is rejecting the offer a faux pas the way it is in clerkships?

3) Is it possible, given my low GPA, this will be my only chance?

Thanks

Do you have any student loans ? If yes, then stay in biglaw until all debt is paid off.

[crazywafflez]

It sounds like you don't really want to be an AUSA but just want the "prestige" of it, which is fine. I think that your GPA doesn't matter, it's just tough to get these gigs and it may not come around again. Go with what you prefer though- either one will set you up for politics, hah. Politics is about shaking hands and kissing babies, doesn't matter if you're a lawyer or a millionaire business person. Make connections with your community, go to fundraisers and then run for office.