2021-2022 Clerkship Application Thread Forum

[Anonymous User]

anon who started this little tangent. Seems to me they are common. Sometimes directly asking about judicial philosophy, sometimes in terms of cases, hypotheticals, doctrine. Lots of substantive questions. I enjoyed it because I think about that anyway outside of interviews

I've had interviews with three DJT district court appointees, and I've encountered nothing of this sort. You must have been tangoing with "hard right" court of appeals judges!

[Anonymous User]

anon who started this little tangent. Seems to me they are common. Sometimes directly asking about judicial philosophy, sometimes in terms of cases, hypotheticals, doctrine. Lots of substantive questions. I enjoyed it because I think about that anyway outside of interviews

I've had interviews with three DJT district court appointees, and I've encountered nothing of this sort. You must have been tangoing with "hard right" court of appeals judges!

To be fair, though, district court judges are typically far less ideological than their circuit counterparts. Some of the DJT appointees among them are downright liberal, see, e.g., Mary Rowland in ND Il.

[Anonymous User]

In my experience (5+ interviews) Fed Soc judges or their clerks almost universally ask judicial ideology questions. Some don’t really care if you’re a purposivist or something but they want to know. Explicit political ideology questions are much rarer but can happen too.

[Wild Card]

EDNY interviews went out Wednesday, July 3, 2019.
At least one SDNY interview went out Friday, July 5, 2019.

Let's hope New York City moves before the long weekend. (Friday is the Independence Day holiday for those two district courts.)

[Anonymous User]

EDNY interviews went out Wednesday, July 3, 2019.
At least one SDNY interview went out Friday, July 5, 2019.

Let's hope New York City moves before the long weekend. (Friday is the Independence Day holiday for those two district courts.)

EDNY isn’t done? I was under the impression that SDNY and EDNY had pretty much finished

[Anonymous User]

Any updates on Brodie/Matsumoto/Chen (EDNY) or Abrams/Woods/Wood (SDNY)? I have heard that Brodie and Wood have each made at least one offer and that Woods has extended interviews. Have not heard of any movement from Matsumoto, Chen, or Abrams.

[Anonymous User]

I'll add another FedSoc data point:

FedSoc board at a T14. Grades ~top quartile. Not going to share additional details bc I've already just narrowed myself to a small population. Applied to mostly DCts. Not a nibble. So I guess maybe it helps many, but isn't a guarantee of anything.

I'll also voice my opinion that discussing judicial philosophy is fine in interviews. It's probably partly just an intellectual exercise, but judges need to ensure that you know how to think like they do.

[Anonymous User]

Anyone heard from state supreme courts (or DC court of appeals?). Can't tell if they move slower or if I just didn't make the cut.

Judge Easterly on the D.C. Court of Appeals has extended invitations for 2021-22 already; Judge Deahl is done; Chief Judge Blackburne-Rigsby won't look at 2021-22 applicants until after Labor Day.

Thank you so much! Disappointed I didn't make the cut for Easterly but trying to stay optimistic!

You could still be in the running! Her staff told me interview invitations would be extended mid-June. Because I got my invitation very late June, I assumed I wasn't a top-choice, but was happy to be given the invitation anyways. I ended up turning down the invitation to interview because I had accepted another clerkship offer.

[Anonymous User]

Has anyone heard from Judge Selya this week in particular?

[Anonymous User]

Any updates on Brodie/Matsumoto/Chen (EDNY) or Abrams/Woods/Wood (SDNY)? I have heard that Brodie and Wood have each made at least one offer and that Woods has extended interviews. Have not heard of any movement from Matsumoto, Chen, or Abrams.

Abrams was interviewing by the afternoon of the 16th, so that ship has probably sailed.

[Anonymous User]

EDNY interviews went out Wednesday, July 3, 2019.
At least one SDNY interview went out Friday, July 5, 2019.

Let's hope New York City moves before the long weekend. (Friday is the Independence Day holiday for those two district courts.)

EDNY isn’t done? I was under the impression that SDNY and EDNY had pretty much finished

Yeah, I wouldn't generalize here. Maybe for some, but I interviewed last year in EDNY on 7/1 on a request that went out the week before.

[Anonymous User]

EDNY interviews went out Wednesday, July 3, 2019.
At least one SDNY interview went out Friday, July 5, 2019.

Let's hope New York City moves before the long weekend. (Friday is the Independence Day holiday for those two district courts.)

EDNY isn’t done? I was under the impression that SDNY and EDNY had pretty much finished

Yeah, I wouldn't generalize here. Maybe for some, but I interviewed last year in EDNY on 7/1 on a request that went out the week before.

Right, and last year I received interview requests in EDNY ~7/11, including for a judge mentioned in this most recent mini-discussion. If things are moving slower for some judges due to *gestures broadly at COVID-19 news* then things aren't fully closed for business.

[Anonymous User]

Any news on Capser (D. Mass.)?

I'm also interested in whether Casper has extended interviews/offers/is done

Datapoint: top 25% MVP, LR Board, note published, family connections to northeast and haven't heard anything from Casper.

Bumping this, anyone hear anything from Judge Casper?

[jessuan]

Curious about Judge McCafferty (D.N.H.). On OSCAR, it says she plans to interview later. Anyone have an idea when that will be?

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone know if Judge Young (D. Mass.) has moved?

[Anonymous User]

In my experience (5+ interviews) Fed Soc judges or their clerks almost universally ask judicial ideology questions. Some don’t really care if you’re a purposivist or something but they want to know. Explicit political ideology questions are much rarer but can happen too.

I think it honestly just depends. I'm not in fed soc, don't have anything on my resume that would signal I'm remotely conservative, and I'm relatively liberal. I interviewed with / got offers from 2 DJT appointees (one D.Ct. one COA) and never was asked a single question about the law or judicial ideology. All questions about fit, past experiences, and my preferred working environment.

Also, for the people claiming that you need stellar grades or connections that's blatantly untrue. I got 5 interview offers, I'm cum laude at a lower t14 (somewhere between top 35% and top 15%), and I'm a first generation law student with no legal connections that I didn't form myself. A lot of it is luck, a lot of it is having professors go to bat for you, resume, and personality.

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone know if Judge Young (D. Mass.) has moved?

has sent out a few interview invites, i believe

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone know if Judge Young (D. Mass.) has moved?

has sent out a few interview invites, i believe

Do you know for which term?

[nixy]

In my experience (5+ interviews) Fed Soc judges or their clerks almost universally ask judicial ideology questions. Some don’t really care if you’re a purposivist or something but they want to know. Explicit political ideology questions are much rarer but can happen too.

I think it honestly just depends. I'm not in fed soc, don't have anything on my resume that would signal I'm remotely conservative, and I'm relatively liberal. I interviewed with / got offers from 2 DJT appointees (one D.Ct. one COA) and never was asked a single question about the law or judicial ideology. All questions about fit, past experiences, and my preferred working environment.

Also, for the people claiming that you need stellar grades or connections that's blatantly untrue. I got 5 interview offers, I'm cum laude at a lower t14 (somewhere between top 35% and top 15%), and I'm a first generation law student with no legal connections that I didn't form myself. A lot of it is luck, a lot of it is having professors go to bat for you, resume, and personality.

I think when people talk about legal connections, they primarily mean having profs go to bat for you (not like your uncle is best friends with a COA judge). If profs went to bat for you, you had connections (and there’s nothing wrong with that; as you said, you forged those relationships yourself. But that’s what people mean by connections).

[Anonymous User]

In my experience (5+ interviews) Fed Soc judges or their clerks almost universally ask judicial ideology questions. Some don’t really care if you’re a purposivist or something but they want to know. Explicit political ideology questions are much rarer but can happen too.

I think it honestly just depends. I'm not in fed soc, don't have anything on my resume that would signal I'm remotely conservative, and I'm relatively liberal. I interviewed with / got offers from 2 DJT appointees (one D.Ct. one COA) and never was asked a single question about the law or judicial ideology. All questions about fit, past experiences, and my preferred working environment.

Also, for the people claiming that you need stellar grades or connections that's blatantly untrue. I got 5 interview offers, I'm cum laude at a lower t14 (somewhere between top 35% and top 15%), and I'm a first generation law student with no legal connections that I didn't form myself. A lot of it is luck, a lot of it is having professors go to bat for you, resume, and personality.

I think when people talk about legal connections, they primarily mean having profs go to bat for you (not like your uncle is best friends with a COA judge). If profs went to bat for you, you had connections (and there’s nothing wrong with that; as you said, you forged those relationships yourself. But that’s what people mean by connections).

I don't think this is what people mean when they talk about connections.

Those kinds of connections are very powerful - don't forget, federal judges are often extremely well-connected in the political/legal environment and had a lot of people go to bat for them to be nominated - plus a lifetime of friends/family/connection - all of whom are pushing their acquaintances. Plus their law school is probably pushing those students "oh don't you want to hire from your alma mater!!!" (Plus their local community schools are pushing them to hire the top local grads). And, they have 1-4 spots per year (or less).

I say this not to be negative but just to manage expectations.

[Anonymous User]

Anyone hear anything regarding Livingston for 2022 or 2023?

[Anonymous User]

Any movement from Reeves in S.D. Miss.?

[nixy]

In my experience (5+ interviews) Fed Soc judges or their clerks almost universally ask judicial ideology questions. Some don’t really care if you’re a purposivist or something but they want to know. Explicit political ideology questions are much rarer but can happen too.

I think it honestly just depends. I'm not in fed soc, don't have anything on my resume that would signal I'm remotely conservative, and I'm relatively liberal. I interviewed with / got offers from 2 DJT appointees (one D.Ct. one COA) and never was asked a single question about the law or judicial ideology. All questions about fit, past experiences, and my preferred working environment.

Also, for the people claiming that you need stellar grades or connections that's blatantly untrue. I got 5 interview offers, I'm cum laude at a lower t14 (somewhere between top 35% and top 15%), and I'm a first generation law student with no legal connections that I didn't form myself. A lot of it is luck, a lot of it is having professors go to bat for you, resume, and personality.

I think when people talk about legal connections, they primarily mean having profs go to bat for you (not like your uncle is best friends with a COA judge). If profs went to bat for you, you had connections (and there’s nothing wrong with that; as you said, you forged those relationships yourself. But that’s what people mean by connections).

I don't think this is what people mean when they talk about connections.

Those kinds of connections are very powerful - don't forget, federal judges are often extremely well-connected in the political/legal environment and had a lot of people go to bat for them to be nominated - plus a lifetime of friends/family/connection - all of whom are pushing their acquaintances. Plus their law school is probably pushing those students "oh don't you want to hire from your alma mater!!!" (Plus their local community schools are pushing them to hire the top local grads). And, they have 1-4 spots per year (or less).

I say this not to be negative but just to manage expectations.

I think connections in the sense of friends/family/acquaintances can play a huge role in legal hiring, generally - I meant in the context of clerkship hiring specifically, where I’m sure traditional connections help, but a lot of discussion has focused on getting profs to go to bat for you. I think alma maters and local schools pushing their students is along the lines of profs making calls for people - these are things you can benefit from even if you don’t have any other legal connections at all (first gen/no legal experience/no relatives in the field etc.). Not sure if you’re the anon I was replying to, but my point was that if someone is trying to claim to be an exception to the stellar grades/connections requirement, but they had profs going to bat for them, then they had connections and they’re not an exception.

[Anonymous User]

Any movement from Reeves in S.D. Miss.?

He's definitely interviewed people from HYS

[Anonymous User]

Any movement from Reeves in S.D. Miss.?

He's definitely interviewed people from HYS

Tremendous news for us mere mortals.