Let’s Talk DC Circuit! Forum

[Anonymous User]

anyone have an idea of what credentials would be necessary for applying from a T20?

Valedictorian LR EIC with strong connections probably, unless maybe Fed Soc from ND

Wilkins hires well below this pretty consistently.

yep, Walker does too, although ideologically.

[OPM]

anyone have an idea of what credentials would be necessary for applying from a T20?

Valedictorian LR EIC with strong connections probably, unless maybe Fed Soc from ND

Very much depends on the judge.

If you’re fedsoc, katsas requires a first usually feeder level fedsoc judge as a pretty hard pre requisite. Clerks tend to be HYSC. Walker looks all over and doesn’t have as strict academic requirements, but does rely upon friends and recommenders quite a bit. Rao tends to hire HYSC and relies upon the fedsoc network, but I think would look at someone with really strong grades and recs from a T20. Henderson’s hiring is pretty random and she hires a relatively high number of T20 grads or other less conventional candidates. Sentelle hires pretty broadly too and has conventionally set aside spots for North Carolina grads. Ginsburg is fairly open as well.

For the liberals, Srinivasan hires basically top grades from HYSCV. Rogers and Tatel hire mostly HYS with high grades. Pillard and Millett are similar, except millett has other priorities like veteran status etc. Wilkins hires a very broad range of schools, and places a premium on public interest, diversity, and your cover letter (he actually reads them). Probably your best bet if you’re liberal.

I clerked before the Biden appointees so I can’t speak to them. But more generally, if you want dc cir and don’t have conventional credentials, getting a solid first clerkship will greatly enhance your chances in my experience.

[Anonymous User]

anyone have an idea of what credentials would be necessary for applying from a T20?

Valedictorian LR EIC with strong connections probably, unless maybe Fed Soc from ND

Very much depends on the judge.

If you’re fedsoc, katsas requires a first usually feeder level fedsoc judge as a pretty hard pre requisite. Clerks tend to be HYSC. Walker looks all over and doesn’t have as strict academic requirements, but does rely upon friends and recommenders quite a bit. Rao tends to hire HYSC and relies upon the fedsoc network, but I think would look at someone with really strong grades and recs from a T20. Henderson’s hiring is pretty random and she hires a relatively high number of T20 grads or other less conventional candidates. Sentelle hires pretty broadly too and has conventionally set aside spots for North Carolina grads. Ginsburg is fairly open as well.

For the liberals, Srinivasan hires basically top grades from HYSCV. Rogers and Tatel hire mostly HYS with high grades. Pillard and Millett are similar, except millett has other priorities like veteran status etc. Wilkins hires a very broad range of schools, and places a premium on public interest, diversity, and your cover letter (he actually reads them). Probably your best bet if you’re liberal.

I clerked before the Biden appointees so I can’t speak to them. But more generally, if you want dc cir and don’t have conventional credentials, getting a solid first clerkship will greatly enhance your chances in my experience.

Tbh the DC Circuit is vastly overrated and if you aren't going for SCOTUS and have already clerked, is a waste of time for most applicants.

[Anonymous User]

anyone have an idea of what credentials would be necessary for applying from a T20?

Valedictorian LR EIC with strong connections probably, unless maybe Fed Soc from ND

Very much depends on the judge.

If you’re fedsoc, katsas requires a first usually feeder level fedsoc judge as a pretty hard pre requisite. Clerks tend to be HYSC. Walker looks all over and doesn’t have as strict academic requirements, but does rely upon friends and recommenders quite a bit. Rao tends to hire HYSC and relies upon the fedsoc network, but I think would look at someone with really strong grades and recs from a T20. Henderson’s hiring is pretty random and she hires a relatively high number of T20 grads or other less conventional candidates. Sentelle hires pretty broadly too and has conventionally set aside spots for North Carolina grads. Ginsburg is fairly open as well.

For the liberals, Srinivasan hires basically top grades from HYSCV. Rogers and Tatel hire mostly HYS with high grades. Pillard and Millett are similar, except millett has other priorities like veteran status etc. Wilkins hires a very broad range of schools, and places a premium on public interest, diversity, and your cover letter (he actually reads them). Probably your best bet if you’re liberal.

I clerked before the Biden appointees so I can’t speak to them. But more generally, if you want dc cir and don’t have conventional credentials, getting a solid first clerkship will greatly enhance your chances in my experience.

Tbh the DC Circuit is vastly overrated and if you aren't going for SCOTUS and have already clerked, is a waste of time for most applicants.

In terms of docket 2/7 > the other circuits incl DC > 8/10 imo unless you have a particular interest in admin. In 2 and 7 you get really good criminal and commercial work without capital lit or mountains of immigration. DC has a idiosyncratic docket you’ll either love or hate.

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone know anything about Garcia's hiring timeline now that he's been confirmed?

[Anonymous User]

anyone have an idea of what credentials would be necessary for applying from a T20?

Valedictorian LR EIC with strong connections probably, unless maybe Fed Soc from ND

Very much depends on the judge.

If you’re fedsoc, katsas requires a first usually feeder level fedsoc judge as a pretty hard pre requisite. Clerks tend to be HYSC. Walker looks all over and doesn’t have as strict academic requirements, but does rely upon friends and recommenders quite a bit. Rao tends to hire HYSC and relies upon the fedsoc network, but I think would look at someone with really strong grades and recs from a T20. Henderson’s hiring is pretty random and she hires a relatively high number of T20 grads or other less conventional candidates. Sentelle hires pretty broadly too and has conventionally set aside spots for North Carolina grads. Ginsburg is fairly open as well.

For the liberals, Srinivasan hires basically top grades from HYSCV. Rogers and Tatel hire mostly HYS with high grades. Pillard and Millett are similar, except millett has other priorities like veteran status etc. Wilkins hires a very broad range of schools, and places a premium on public interest, diversity, and your cover letter (he actually reads them). Probably your best bet if you’re liberal.

I clerked before the Biden appointees so I can’t speak to them. But more generally, if you want dc cir and don’t have conventional credentials, getting a solid first clerkship will greatly enhance your chances in my experience.

Tbh the DC Circuit is vastly overrated and if you aren't going for SCOTUS and have already clerked, is a waste of time for most applicants.

In terms of docket 2/7 > the other circuits incl DC > 8/10 imo unless you have a particular interest in admin. In 2 and 7 you get really good criminal and commercial work without capital lit or mountains of immigration. DC has a idiosyncratic docket you’ll either love or hate.

Not the point of this thread, but I'd put 9 at the bottom, even below 8 and 10, unless you like immigration. Heavy docket, active en banc sucking up time, tons of stultifying immigration.

[Anonymous User]

anyone have an idea of what credentials would be necessary for applying from a T20?

Valedictorian LR EIC with strong connections probably, unless maybe Fed Soc from ND

Very much depends on the judge.

If you’re fedsoc, katsas requires a first usually feeder level fedsoc judge as a pretty hard pre requisite. Clerks tend to be HYSC. Walker looks all over and doesn’t have as strict academic requirements, but does rely upon friends and recommenders quite a bit. Rao tends to hire HYSC and relies upon the fedsoc network, but I think would look at someone with really strong grades and recs from a T20. Henderson’s hiring is pretty random and she hires a relatively high number of T20 grads or other less conventional candidates. Sentelle hires pretty broadly too and has conventionally set aside spots for North Carolina grads. Ginsburg is fairly open as well.

For the liberals, Srinivasan hires basically top grades from HYSCV. Rogers and Tatel hire mostly HYS with high grades. Pillard and Millett are similar, except millett has other priorities like veteran status etc. Wilkins hires a very broad range of schools, and places a premium on public interest, diversity, and your cover letter (he actually reads them). Probably your best bet if you’re liberal.

I clerked before the Biden appointees so I can’t speak to them. But more generally, if you want dc cir and don’t have conventional credentials, getting a solid first clerkship will greatly enhance your chances in my experience.

Tbh the DC Circuit is vastly overrated and if you aren't going for SCOTUS and have already clerked, is a waste of time for most applicants.

In terms of docket 2/7 > the other circuits incl DC > 8/10 imo unless you have a particular interest in admin. In 2 and 7 you get really good criminal and commercial work without capital lit or mountains of immigration. DC has a idiosyncratic docket you’ll either love or hate.

Not the point of this thread, but I'd put 9 at the bottom, even below 8 and 10, unless you like immigration. Heavy docket, active en banc sucking up time, tons of stultifying immigration.

9 clerk here. There's a lot of immigration, but it's not like 5 has any less, and the "heavy docket" and "active en banc" both mean there's a ton of non-immigration to work on too. I felt like I had a great array of interesting admin and criminal work over the course of my year, with less commercial lit than I had expected, but that seemed to just be the luck of the draw.

[Anonymous User]

anyone have an idea of what credentials would be necessary for applying from a T20?

Valedictorian LR EIC with strong connections probably, unless maybe Fed Soc from ND

Very much depends on the judge.

If you’re fedsoc, katsas requires a first usually feeder level fedsoc judge as a pretty hard pre requisite. Clerks tend to be HYSC. Walker looks all over and doesn’t have as strict academic requirements, but does rely upon friends and recommenders quite a bit. Rao tends to hire HYSC and relies upon the fedsoc network, but I think would look at someone with really strong grades and recs from a T20. Henderson’s hiring is pretty random and she hires a relatively high number of T20 grads or other less conventional candidates. Sentelle hires pretty broadly too and has conventionally set aside spots for North Carolina grads. Ginsburg is fairly open as well.

For the liberals, Srinivasan hires basically top grades from HYSCV. Rogers and Tatel hire mostly HYS with high grades. Pillard and Millett are similar, except millett has other priorities like veteran status etc. Wilkins hires a very broad range of schools, and places a premium on public interest, diversity, and your cover letter (he actually reads them). Probably your best bet if you’re liberal.

I clerked before the Biden appointees so I can’t speak to them. But more generally, if you want dc cir and don’t have conventional credentials, getting a solid first clerkship will greatly enhance your chances in my experience.

Tbh the DC Circuit is vastly overrated and if you aren't going for SCOTUS and have already clerked, is a waste of time for most applicants.

In terms of docket 2/7 > the other circuits incl DC > 8/10 imo unless you have a particular interest in admin. In 2 and 7 you get really good criminal and commercial work without capital lit or mountains of immigration. DC has a idiosyncratic docket you’ll either love or hate.

Not the point of this thread, but I'd put 9 at the bottom, even below 8 and 10, unless you like immigration. Heavy docket, active en banc sucking up time, tons of stultifying immigration.

9 clerk here. There's a lot of immigration, but it's not like 5 has any less, and the "heavy docket" and "active en banc" both mean there's a ton of non-immigration to work on too. I felt like I had a great array of interesting admin and criminal work over the course of my year, with less commercial lit than I had expected, but that seemed to just be the luck of the draw.

Ninth Circuit clerk here also. I think it is laughable to suggest that the Ninth is at the bottom. I think it's probably the best docket overall in terms of breadth of experience you get. Yes, there is a lot of immigration by sheer *absolute* numbers but in terms of how much *time* you spend on those cases, my experience is that it isn't that much because many of the cases are easy and thus submitted on the briefs. And the immigration cases that are not easy are actually quite interesting because they deal with big questions about jurisdiction and administrative law principles more generally, many of which become SCOTUS cases. You get everything on the Ninth--from every substantive area of the law, to seeing how judges duke it out through the en banc process, to just having more cases in a variety of subject areas--so you simply get more reps in more areas of the law which is probably something you should be drawn to if your goal is to get as much experience in a short period of time as possible. If your goal is to have a chiller clerkship then, yeah, the Ninth is probably not it. But the idea that the Ninth Circuit has a bad docket is ridiculous.

[Anonymous User]

Valedictorian LR EIC with strong connections probably, unless maybe Fed Soc from ND

Very much depends on the judge.

If you’re fedsoc, katsas requires a first usually feeder level fedsoc judge as a pretty hard pre requisite. Clerks tend to be HYSC. Walker looks all over and doesn’t have as strict academic requirements, but does rely upon friends and recommenders quite a bit. Rao tends to hire HYSC and relies upon the fedsoc network, but I think would look at someone with really strong grades and recs from a T20. Henderson’s hiring is pretty random and she hires a relatively high number of T20 grads or other less conventional candidates. Sentelle hires pretty broadly too and has conventionally set aside spots for North Carolina grads. Ginsburg is fairly open as well.

For the liberals, Srinivasan hires basically top grades from HYSCV. Rogers and Tatel hire mostly HYS with high grades. Pillard and Millett are similar, except millett has other priorities like veteran status etc. Wilkins hires a very broad range of schools, and places a premium on public interest, diversity, and your cover letter (he actually reads them). Probably your best bet if you’re liberal.

I clerked before the Biden appointees so I can’t speak to them. But more generally, if you want dc cir and don’t have conventional credentials, getting a solid first clerkship will greatly enhance your chances in my experience.

Tbh the DC Circuit is vastly overrated and if you aren't going for SCOTUS and have already clerked, is a waste of time for most applicants.

In terms of docket 2/7 > the other circuits incl DC > 8/10 imo unless you have a particular interest in admin. In 2 and 7 you get really good criminal and commercial work without capital lit or mountains of immigration. DC has a idiosyncratic docket you’ll either love or hate.

Not the point of this thread, but I'd put 9 at the bottom, even below 8 and 10, unless you like immigration. Heavy docket, active en banc sucking up time, tons of stultifying immigration.

9 clerk here. There's a lot of immigration, but it's not like 5 has any less, and the "heavy docket" and "active en banc" both mean there's a ton of non-immigration to work on too. I felt like I had a great array of interesting admin and criminal work over the course of my year, with less commercial lit than I had expected, but that seemed to just be the luck of the draw.

Ninth Circuit clerk here also. I think it is laughable to suggest that the Ninth is at the bottom. I think it's probably the best docket overall in terms of breadth of experience you get. Yes, there is a lot of immigration by sheer *absolute* numbers but in terms of how much *time* you spend on those cases, my experience is that it isn't that much because many of the cases are easy and thus submitted on the briefs. And the immigration cases that are not easy are actually quite interesting because they deal with big questions about jurisdiction and administrative law principles more generally, many of which become SCOTUS cases. You get everything on the Ninth--from every substantive area of the law, to seeing how judges duke it out through the en banc process, to just having more cases in a variety of subject areas--so you simply get more reps in more areas of the law which is probably something you should be drawn to if your goal is to get as much experience in a short period of time as possible. If your goal is to have a chiller clerkship then, yeah, the Ninth is probably not it. But the idea that the Ninth Circuit has a bad docket is ridiculous.

I don’t think the Ninth’s docket is bad for all people, but the en banc and immigration caseloads make it more idiosyncratic than most, especially if you work for an active judge invested in the en banc process. As a percentage it also doesn’t have much commercial stuff which is what most clerks plan to do with their careers.

[Anonymous User]

I don’t think the Ninth’s docket is bad for all people, but the en banc and immigration caseloads make it more idiosyncratic than most, especially if you work for an active judge invested in the en banc process. As a percentage it also doesn’t have much commercial stuff which is what most clerks plan to do with their careers.

Honestly if you want a heavy commercial docket, do a district clerkship in a major city over almost any CoA. The economics of appellate work means you will see comparatively fewer commercial lit bangers akin to the major cases you'd work on in private practice and more criminal and admin (or admin-adjacent) work in a circuit clerkship. I found my circuit clerkship to be great AUSA training.

[Anonymous User]

anyone have a sense of how Katsas is as a boss, and what the experience is like? I get that he's a top feeder, so obviously a lot of people want to work for him, but I'm curious what his reputation is outside of the feeding equation

[Anonymous User]

anyone have a sense of how Katsas is as a boss, and what the experience is like? I get that he's a top feeder, so obviously a lot of people want to work for him, but I'm curious what his reputation is outside of the feeding equation

Have heard generally decent things from friends but no real specific anecdotes. Not sure how much of that was good because it was a great stepping stone tho

[Anonymous User]

Is Childs still working remotely? I noticed on OSCAR it's listed as Columbia not D.C.

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone know anything about Garcia's hiring timeline now that he's been confirmed?

He's already hired people for 24-25.

[Anonymous User]

Is Childs still working remotely? I noticed on OSCAR it's listed as Columbia not D.C.

No inside info but I would expect to work in Columbia, just like Walker works from Louisville. Post-Covid I think outsider judges moving to DC on appointment to CADC is likely a thing of the past.

[hekisan656]

Valedictorian LR EIC with strong connections probably, unless maybe Fed Soc from ND

Very much depends on the judge.

If you’re fedsoc, katsas requires a first usually feeder level fedsoc judge as a pretty hard pre requisite. Clerks tend to be HYSC. Walker looks all over and doesn’t have as strict academic requirements, but does rely upon friends and recommenders quite a bit. Rao tends to hire HYSC and relies upon the fedsoc network, but I think would look at someone with really strong grades and recs from a T20. Henderson’s hiring is pretty random and she hires a relatively high number of T20 grads or other less conventional candidates. Sentelle hires pretty broadly too and has conventionally set aside spots for North Carolina grads. Ginsburg is fairly open as well.

For the liberals, Srinivasan hires basically top grades from HYSCV. Rogers and Tatel hire mostly HYS with high grades. Pillard and Millett are similar, except millett has other priorities like veteran status etc. Wilkins hires a very broad range of schools, and places a premium on public interest, diversity, and your cover letter (he actually reads them). Probably your best bet if you’re liberal.

I clerked before the Biden appointees so I can’t speak to them. But more generally, if you want dc cir and don’t have conventional credentials, getting a solid first clerkship will greatly enhance your chances in my experience.

Tbh the DC Circuit is vastly overrated and if you aren't going for SCOTUS and have already clerked, is a waste of time for most applicants.

In terms of docket 2/7 > the other circuits incl DC > 8/10 imo unless you have a particular interest in admin. In 2 and 7 you get really good criminal and commercial work without capital lit or mountains of immigration. DC has a idiosyncratic docket you’ll either love or hate.

Not the point of this thread, but I'd put 9 at the bottom, even below 8 and 10, unless you like immigration. Heavy docket, active en banc sucking up time, tons of stultifying immigration.

9 clerk here. There's a lot of immigration, but it's not like 5 has any less, and the "heavy docket" and "active en banc" both mean there's a ton of non-immigration to work on too. I felt like I had a great array of interesting admin and criminal work over the course of my year, with less commercial lit than I had expected, but that seemed to just be the luck of the draw.

Ninth Circuit clerk here also. I think it is laughable to suggest that the Ninth is at the bottom. I think it's probably the best docket overall in terms of breadth of experience you get. Yes, there is a lot of immigration by sheer *absolute* numbers but in terms of how much *time* you spend on those cases, my experience is that it isn't that much because many of the cases are easy and thus submitted on the briefs. And the immigration cases that are not easy are actually quite interesting because they deal with big questions about jurisdiction and administrative law principles more generally, many of which become SCOTUS cases. You get everything on the Ninth--from every substantive area of the law, to seeing how judges duke it out through the en banc process, to just having more cases in a variety of subject areas--so you simply get more reps in more areas of the law which is probably something you should be drawn to if your goal is to get as much experience in a short period of time as possible. If your goal is to have a chiller clerkship then, yeah, the Ninth is probably not it. But the idea that the Ninth Circuit has a bad docket is ridiculous.

Ranking the dockets might be the most chronically-online, TLS-elitist thing I've seen. For the sake of argument, 10 will have more Indian law, and if forum shopping continues, 8 will continue seeing cases like Biden v. Nebraska.

[Anonymous User]

Very much depends on the judge.

If you’re fedsoc, katsas requires a first usually feeder level fedsoc judge as a pretty hard pre requisite. Clerks tend to be HYSC. Walker looks all over and doesn’t have as strict academic requirements, but does rely upon friends and recommenders quite a bit. Rao tends to hire HYSC and relies upon the fedsoc network, but I think would look at someone with really strong grades and recs from a T20. Henderson’s hiring is pretty random and she hires a relatively high number of T20 grads or other less conventional candidates. Sentelle hires pretty broadly too and has conventionally set aside spots for North Carolina grads. Ginsburg is fairly open as well.

For the liberals, Srinivasan hires basically top grades from HYSCV. Rogers and Tatel hire mostly HYS with high grades. Pillard and Millett are similar, except millett has other priorities like veteran status etc. Wilkins hires a very broad range of schools, and places a premium on public interest, diversity, and your cover letter (he actually reads them). Probably your best bet if you’re liberal.

I clerked before the Biden appointees so I can’t speak to them. But more generally, if you want dc cir and don’t have conventional credentials, getting a solid first clerkship will greatly enhance your chances in my experience.

Tbh the DC Circuit is vastly overrated and if you aren't going for SCOTUS and have already clerked, is a waste of time for most applicants.

In terms of docket 2/7 > the other circuits incl DC > 8/10 imo unless you have a particular interest in admin. In 2 and 7 you get really good criminal and commercial work without capital lit or mountains of immigration. DC has a idiosyncratic docket you’ll either love or hate.

Not the point of this thread, but I'd put 9 at the bottom, even below 8 and 10, unless you like immigration. Heavy docket, active en banc sucking up time, tons of stultifying immigration.

9 clerk here. There's a lot of immigration, but it's not like 5 has any less, and the "heavy docket" and "active en banc" both mean there's a ton of non-immigration to work on too. I felt like I had a great array of interesting admin and criminal work over the course of my year, with less commercial lit than I had expected, but that seemed to just be the luck of the draw.

Ninth Circuit clerk here also. I think it is laughable to suggest that the Ninth is at the bottom. I think it's probably the best docket overall in terms of breadth of experience you get. Yes, there is a lot of immigration by sheer *absolute* numbers but in terms of how much *time* you spend on those cases, my experience is that it isn't that much because many of the cases are easy and thus submitted on the briefs. And the immigration cases that are not easy are actually quite interesting because they deal with big questions about jurisdiction and administrative law principles more generally, many of which become SCOTUS cases. You get everything on the Ninth--from every substantive area of the law, to seeing how judges duke it out through the en banc process, to just having more cases in a variety of subject areas--so you simply get more reps in more areas of the law which is probably something you should be drawn to if your goal is to get as much experience in a short period of time as possible. If your goal is to have a chiller clerkship then, yeah, the Ninth is probably not it. But the idea that the Ninth Circuit has a bad docket is ridiculous.

Ranking the dockets might be the most chronically-online, TLS-elitist thing I've seen. For the sake of argument, 10 will have more Indian law, and if forum shopping continues, 8 will continue seeing cases like Biden v. Nebraska.

Disagree, dockets differ more than you’d expect and have a massive effect on the clerkship experience.

8 isn’t a major forum-shopping venue because it doesn’t have reliable district courts—all of them are pretty mixed except for ND. Plus its conservative judges are less movement-y and more “prominent local lawyer who happens to be a Republican’-y; compare the big CA8 gun case from Colloton this week to CA5’s domestic violence opinion. And Colloton is one of the *most* movement-y judges on CA8.

[hekisan656]

Tbh the DC Circuit is vastly overrated and if you aren't going for SCOTUS and have already clerked, is a waste of time for most applicants.

In terms of docket 2/7 > the other circuits incl DC > 8/10 imo unless you have a particular interest in admin. In 2 and 7 you get really good criminal and commercial work without capital lit or mountains of immigration. DC has a idiosyncratic docket you’ll either love or hate.

Not the point of this thread, but I'd put 9 at the bottom, even below 8 and 10, unless you like immigration. Heavy docket, active en banc sucking up time, tons of stultifying immigration.

9 clerk here. There's a lot of immigration, but it's not like 5 has any less, and the "heavy docket" and "active en banc" both mean there's a ton of non-immigration to work on too. I felt like I had a great array of interesting admin and criminal work over the course of my year, with less commercial lit than I had expected, but that seemed to just be the luck of the draw.

Ninth Circuit clerk here also. I think it is laughable to suggest that the Ninth is at the bottom. I think it's probably the best docket overall in terms of breadth of experience you get. Yes, there is a lot of immigration by sheer *absolute* numbers but in terms of how much *time* you spend on those cases, my experience is that it isn't that much because many of the cases are easy and thus submitted on the briefs. And the immigration cases that are not easy are actually quite interesting because they deal with big questions about jurisdiction and administrative law principles more generally, many of which become SCOTUS cases. You get everything on the Ninth--from every substantive area of the law, to seeing how judges duke it out through the en banc process, to just having more cases in a variety of subject areas--so you simply get more reps in more areas of the law which is probably something you should be drawn to if your goal is to get as much experience in a short period of time as possible. If your goal is to have a chiller clerkship then, yeah, the Ninth is probably not it. But the idea that the Ninth Circuit has a bad docket is ridiculous.

Ranking the dockets might be the most chronically-online, TLS-elitist thing I've seen. For the sake of argument, 10 will have more Indian law, and if forum shopping continues, 8 will continue seeing cases like Biden v. Nebraska.

Disagree, dockets differ more than you’d expect and have a massive effect on the clerkship experience.

8 isn’t a major forum-shopping venue because it doesn’t have reliable district courts—all of them are pretty mixed except for ND. Plus its conservative judges are less movement-y and more “prominent local lawyer who happens to be a Republican’-y; compare the big CA8 gun case from Colloton this week to CA5’s domestic violence opinion. And Colloton is one of the *most* movement-y judges on CA8.

We might be talking past each other, but our points aren't incompatible. I agree circuits differ in their dockets. But it's nonsense to say, without explanation like the OP did, that 2 and 7 are greater than the rest, except 8 and 10, which are yet worse still. Unless OP meant ">" to be a comment about the prestige, or intrigue, or something else about the docket. And if they did, then my points stands, insofar as someone might find the Indian law in 10 more interesting than the commercial law of 2, or immigration law of 5.

[Anonymous User]

Disagree, dockets differ more than you’d expect and have a massive effect on the clerkship experience.

8 isn’t a major forum-shopping venue because it doesn’t have reliable district courts—all of them are pretty mixed except for ND. Plus its conservative judges are less movement-y and more “prominent local lawyer who happens to be a Republican’-y; compare the big CA8 gun case from Colloton this week to CA5’s domestic violence opinion. And Colloton is one of the *most* movement-y judges on CA8.

Conservative forum-shopper here. 5, 6, and 11 are all preferable to 8 for precisely these reasons.

[Anonymous User]

anyone have an idea of what credentials would be necessary for applying from a T20?

Valedictorian LR EIC with strong connections probably, unless maybe Fed Soc from ND

OP here - how would one develop strong connections? and would it be better to wait for OSCAR to open up before applying, or send some applications after 1L for someone non-Fed Soc? any advice welcome pls

[Anonymous User]

anyone have an idea of what credentials would be necessary for applying from a T20?

Valedictorian LR EIC with strong connections probably, unless maybe Fed Soc from ND

OP here - how would one develop strong connections? and would it be better to wait for OSCAR to open up before applying, or send some applications after 1L for someone non-Fed Soc? any advice welcome pls

There are (probably) professors at your school who either have personal relationships with certain judges or are significant enough names that they are known and viewed favorably by certain judges. Take those professor's classes, do well in them, try to RA/TF for them, get a LOR (and even better, a call).

Without personal connections or professors pushing your app, I don't think that you would get looked at by non-fedsoc judges before the plan opens. I do know a few non-fedsoc people who were able to figure out clerkships before the plan opening, but they were main journal at YSH so maybe not the most exportable advice.

These things are all kinda ancillary to grades though. You need to take a black letter heavy 2L and stay at the very top of your class throughout.

[Anonymous User]

anyone have an idea of what credentials would be necessary for applying from a T20?

Valedictorian LR EIC with strong connections probably, unless maybe Fed Soc from ND

OP here - how would one develop strong connections? and would it be better to wait for OSCAR to open up before applying, or send some applications after 1L for someone non-Fed Soc? any advice welcome pls

ND has never placed a clerk at D.C. Cir. but has placed three at D.D.C. according to its records, two with Leon and one with Nichols. All VERY much the Fed Soc type and extremely aggressive from the get-go about clerkships and networking.

[Anonymous User]

anyone have an idea of what credentials would be necessary for applying from a T20?

Valedictorian LR EIC with strong connections probably, unless maybe Fed Soc from ND

OP here - how would one develop strong connections? and would it be better to wait for OSCAR to open up before applying, or send some applications after 1L for someone non-Fed Soc? any advice welcome pls

as a non-Fed Soc student applying off-plan (i.e. to Fed Soc judges) from a T20 you’d need to be pretty special. You can try, especially to judges with ties to your school or home region, but the Fed Soc judges who hire counterclerks tend to be very grade/school-selective for those slots.

[Anonymous User]

anyone have an idea of what credentials would be necessary for applying from a T20?

Valedictorian LR EIC with strong connections probably, unless maybe Fed Soc from ND

OP here - how would one develop strong connections? and would it be better to wait for OSCAR to open up before applying, or send some applications after 1L for someone non-Fed Soc? any advice welcome pls

as a non-Fed Soc student applying off-plan (i.e. to Fed Soc judges) from a T20 you’d need to be pretty special. You can try, especially to judges with ties to your school or home region, but the Fed Soc judges who hire counterclerks tend to be very grade/school-selective for those slots.

Yeah, at my T30, FedSoc kids can still clean up at "flyover" COAs/District Courts even if they aren't that close to the top but even for them DC is out of the question unless they're truly exceptional grades-wise.

[Anonymous User]

Movement from Walker