Best and worst judges to clerk for Forum

[Anonymous User]

Generally have heard bad things about the the SDFL Trump judges, in terms of hours and chambers culture.

Not the one who posted this, but have heard wonderful things about Altman, Singhal, and Smith. Mixed but mostly positive about Ruiz. Heard Cannon is terrible.

[Chokenhauer]

Generally have heard bad things about the the SDFL Trump judges, in terms of hours and chambers culture.

Not the one who posted this, but have heard wonderful things about Altman, Singhal, and Smith. Mixed but mostly positive about Ruiz. Heard Cannon is terrible.

I’m always a sucker for stories about terrible district judges. (It’s the best part of gossiping with fellow clerks). Any specifics on why she’s terrible?

[Anonymous User]

To echo part of a previous comment, have heard nothing but good things about Altman.

[Anonymous User]

Generally have heard bad things about the the SDFL Trump judges, in terms of hours and chambers culture.

Not the one who posted this, but have heard wonderful things about Altman, Singhal, and Smith. Mixed but mostly positive about Ruiz. Heard Cannon is terrible.

I’m always a sucker for stories about terrible district judges. (It’s the best part of gossiping with fellow clerks). Any specifics on why she’s terrible?

Without getting into specifics, super long hours, isolates herself, unfriendly, over-works her staff.

[Anonymous User]

Generally have heard bad things about the the SDFL Trump judges, in terms of hours and chambers culture.

Not the one who posted this, but have heard wonderful things about Altman, Singhal, and Smith. Mixed but mostly positive about Ruiz. Heard Cannon is terrible.

I’m always a sucker for stories about terrible district judges. (It’s the best part of gossiping with fellow clerks). Any specifics on why she’s terrible?

Without getting into specifics, super long hours, isolates herself, unfriendly, over-works her staff.

Can you elaborate on what you've heard about the others? Altman, Singhal, Ruiz, and Smith.

[Anonymous User]

Generally have heard bad things about the the SDFL Trump judges, in terms of hours and chambers culture.

Not the one who posted this, but have heard wonderful things about Altman, Singhal, and Smith. Mixed but mostly positive about Ruiz. Heard Cannon is terrible.

I’m always a sucker for stories about terrible district judges. (It’s the best part of gossiping with fellow clerks). Any specifics on why she’s terrible?

Without getting into specifics, super long hours, isolates herself, unfriendly, over-works her staff.

Funny because this could describe Colloton, who she clerked for

[Anonymous User]

Generally have heard bad things about the the SDFL Trump judges, in terms of hours and chambers culture.

Not the one who posted this, but have heard wonderful things about Altman, Singhal, and Smith. Mixed but mostly positive about Ruiz. Heard Cannon is terrible.

I’m always a sucker for stories about terrible district judges. (It’s the best part of gossiping with fellow clerks). Any specifics on why she’s terrible?

Without getting into specifics, super long hours, isolates herself, unfriendly, over-works her staff.

Funny because this could describe Colloton, who she clerked for

I think this is *absolutely* where a lot of bad (to work for) judges come from, their own judges (or other bosses).

[Anonymous User]

Generally have heard bad things about the the SDFL Trump judges, in terms of hours and chambers culture.

Not the one who posted this, but have heard wonderful things about Altman, Singhal, and Smith. Mixed but mostly positive about Ruiz. Heard Cannon is terrible.

I’m always a sucker for stories about terrible district judges. (It’s the best part of gossiping with fellow clerks). Any specifics on why she’s terrible?

Without getting into specifics, super long hours, isolates herself, unfriendly, over-works her staff.

Only because you used the word "isolated" but I cannot picture many less desirable cities for a 25-26 year old to move to than to Cannon's base in Fort Pierce, FL. Near the beach, sure, but 100 miles away from the nearest place that's known for anything other than retirement and golf, and it is stifling from May to September.

West Palm would be a little tough on the social life too, but at least you're within shouting distance there of the more vibrant parts of South Florida. Ft. Lauderdale and Miami are great places to clerk.

[Anonymous User]

There was some discussion of Daniel Collins on the 9th as being a bad judge to clerk for. Does anyone have any info on that or was it solely based on the LA Times article complaining that he dissents a lot? Because he's been immensely successful at that and has now gotten the Court to unanimously sign onto his reasoning twice in two years: https://twitter.com/fedjudges/status/13 ... 7719495686

I have heard he can be demanding and isn't super warm and fuzzy, but nothing actually bad.

I think it's pretty clear at this point that any negative inference as a result of the LA Times article was completely off-base. Collins has proven to be very collegial and a superb boss - patient and kind to clerks and staff alike. Also, his record before the Supreme Court has only gotten better since the original poster noted it. https://twitter.com/fedjudges/status/15 ... 9302790149

[Anonymous User]

I’ve also heard good things through the grapevine about Collins.

[Anonymous User]

There was some discussion of Daniel Collins on the 9th as being a bad judge to clerk for. Does anyone have any info on that or was it solely based on the LA Times article complaining that he dissents a lot? Because he's been immensely successful at that and has now gotten the Court to unanimously sign onto his reasoning twice in two years: https://twitter.com/fedjudges/status/13 ... 7719495686

I have heard he can be demanding and isn't super warm and fuzzy, but nothing actually bad.

I think it's pretty clear at this point that any negative inference as a result of the LA Times article was completely off-base. Collins has proven to be very collegial and a superb boss - patient and kind to clerks and staff alike. Also, his record before the Supreme Court has only gotten better since the original poster noted it. https://twitter.com/fedjudges/status/15 ... 9302790149

His colleagues were so upset he puts in an enormous amount of work to point out how wrong they are all the time they called a reporter to complain about it.

[Anonymous User]

There was some discussion of Daniel Collins on the 9th as being a bad judge to clerk for. Does anyone have any info on that or was it solely based on the LA Times article complaining that he dissents a lot? Because he's been immensely successful at that and has now gotten the Court to unanimously sign onto his reasoning twice in two years: https://twitter.com/fedjudges/status/13 ... 7719495686

I have heard he can be demanding and isn't super warm and fuzzy, but nothing actually bad.

I think it's pretty clear at this point that any negative inference as a result of the LA Times article was completely off-base. Collins has proven to be very collegial and a superb boss - patient and kind to clerks and staff alike. Also, his record before the Supreme Court has only gotten better since the original poster noted it. https://twitter.com/fedjudges/status/15 ... 9302790149

Can't speak to whether Collins is a nice person/boss (though I certainly hope that's the case), but his "record" before this SCOTUS doesn't say much other than how far to the right he is. That may be exactly what some folks are looking for in a clerkship, which is totally fine, but let's be honest - being affirmed by SCOTUS is more of an indicator of ideology than anything else these days.

[Anonymous User]

There was some discussion of Daniel Collins on the 9th as being a bad judge to clerk for. Does anyone have any info on that or was it solely based on the LA Times article complaining that he dissents a lot? Because he's been immensely successful at that and has now gotten the Court to unanimously sign onto his reasoning twice in two years: https://twitter.com/fedjudges/status/13 ... 7719495686

I have heard he can be demanding and isn't super warm and fuzzy, but nothing actually bad.

I think it's pretty clear at this point that any negative inference as a result of the LA Times article was completely off-base. Collins has proven to be very collegial and a superb boss - patient and kind to clerks and staff alike. Also, his record before the Supreme Court has only gotten better since the original poster noted it. https://twitter.com/fedjudges/status/15 ... 9302790149

Can't speak to whether Collins is a nice person/boss (though I certainly hope that's the case), but his "record" before this SCOTUS doesn't say much other than how far to the right he is. That may be exactly what some folks are looking for in a clerkship, which is totally fine, but let's be honest - being affirmed by SCOTUS is more of an indicator of ideology than anything else these days.

A good number of those have been unanimous reversals

[Anonymous User]

There was some discussion of Daniel Collins on the 9th as being a bad judge to clerk for. Does anyone have any info on that or was it solely based on the LA Times article complaining that he dissents a lot? Because he's been immensely successful at that and has now gotten the Court to unanimously sign onto his reasoning twice in two years: https://twitter.com/fedjudges/status/13 ... 7719495686

I have heard he can be demanding and isn't super warm and fuzzy, but nothing actually bad.

I think it's pretty clear at this point that any negative inference as a result of the LA Times article was completely off-base. Collins has proven to be very collegial and a superb boss - patient and kind to clerks and staff alike. Also, his record before the Supreme Court has only gotten better since the original poster noted it. https://twitter.com/fedjudges/status/15 ... 9302790149

Can't speak to whether Collins is a nice person/boss (though I certainly hope that's the case), but his "record" before this SCOTUS doesn't say much other than how far to the right he is. That may be exactly what some folks are looking for in a clerkship, which is totally fine, but let's be honest - being affirmed by SCOTUS is more of an indicator of ideology than anything else these days.

A good number of those have been unanimous reversals

Several of the Trump judges on the 9th have just had it with the court's precedent, which was mostly written by now-deceased Carter appointees who were well to the left of the Clinton and Obama appointees. That precedent is now well out of step with where the Supreme Court is, so they're trying more actively to get SCOTUS to review it, through one dissental at a time. The Reagan/Bush era conservatives on the 9th mostly limited their dissentals to new law, and didn't push back as firmly on the circuit's long-established liberal precedent as Collins, VanDyke, etc. have. It's created some fissures on what was previously one of the most collegial circuits.

[Anonymous User]

There was some discussion of Daniel Collins on the 9th as being a bad judge to clerk for. Does anyone have any info on that or was it solely based on the LA Times article complaining that he dissents a lot? Because he's been immensely successful at that and has now gotten the Court to unanimously sign onto his reasoning twice in two years: https://twitter.com/fedjudges/status/13 ... 7719495686

I have heard he can be demanding and isn't super warm and fuzzy, but nothing actually bad.

I think it's pretty clear at this point that any negative inference as a result of the LA Times article was completely off-base. Collins has proven to be very collegial and a superb boss - patient and kind to clerks and staff alike. Also, his record before the Supreme Court has only gotten better since the original poster noted it. https://twitter.com/fedjudges/status/15 ... 9302790149

Can't speak to whether Collins is a nice person/boss (though I certainly hope that's the case), but his "record" before this SCOTUS doesn't say much other than how far to the right he is. That may be exactly what some folks are looking for in a clerkship, which is totally fine, but let's be honest - being affirmed by SCOTUS is more of an indicator of ideology than anything else these days.

A good number of those have been unanimous reversals

Several of the Trump judges on the 9th have just had it with the court's precedent, which was mostly written by now-deceased Carter appointees who were well to the left of the Clinton and Obama appointees. That precedent is now well out of step with where the Supreme Court is, so they're trying more actively to get SCOTUS to review it, through one dissental at a time. The Reagan/Bush era conservatives on the 9th mostly limited their dissentals to new law, and didn't push back as firmly on the circuit's long-established liberal precedent as Collins, VanDyke, etc. have. It's created some fissures on what was previously one of the most collegial circuits.

Maybe this applies to Dai, but I don't see how this applies to Cooley, Pakdel, Washington, or Rivas-Villegas. In fact, Washington was written by a Bush appointee.

[Anonymous User]

Generally have heard bad things about the the SDFL Trump judges, in terms of hours and chambers culture.

Not the one who posted this, but have heard wonderful things about Altman, Singhal, and Smith. Mixed but mostly positive about Ruiz. Heard Cannon is terrible.

Cannon has only been on the bench for a year and a half or so. Does she really already have this bad of a reputation?

[Necho2]

In unrelated Collins news, the ideological split of this en banc panel reversing his (fairly aggressive procedurally and doctrinally) decision re CA schools is fascinating.

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/ ... -56291.pdf

[Anonymous User]

I’ve also heard good things through the grapevine about Collins.

The Collins chambers is notoriously behind on work, and has been basically from the moment he started hearing cases. I find it hard to believe that it would be enjoyable to spend your clerkship perpetually playing catch up

[Anonymous User]

I’ve also heard good things through the grapevine about Collins.

The Collins chambers is notoriously behind on work, and has been basically from the moment he started hearing cases. I find it hard to believe that it would be enjoyable to spend your clerkship perpetually playing catch up

Doesn’t the Miller chambers have the same issue?

[Anonymous User]

In unrelated Collins news, the ideological split of this en banc panel reversing his (fairly aggressive procedurally and doctrinally) decision re CA schools is fascinating.

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/ ... -56291.pdf

That's fascinating because Collins (and the visiting judge who joined his panel opinion) got zero votes from the en banc court. Six judges (all liberals) disagreed with him on mootness, and the other five (the two most liberal and the three conservatives) agreed with him on mootness but disagreed with him on the merits, which makes me presume the other six liberals also would have disagreed with Collins if they had reached the merits. I don't recall ever seeing an 11-0 en banc vote during my time at the court.

[Anonymous User]

In unrelated Collins news, the ideological split of this en banc panel reversing his (fairly aggressive procedurally and doctrinally) decision re CA schools is fascinating.

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/ ... -56291.pdf

That's fascinating because Collins (and the visiting judge who joined his panel opinion) got zero votes from the en banc court. Six judges (all liberals) disagreed with him on mootness, and the other five (the two most liberal and the three conservatives) agreed with him on mootness but disagreed with him on the merits, which makes me presume the other six liberals also would have disagreed with Collins if they had reached the merits. I don't recall ever seeing an 11-0 en banc vote during my time at the court.

This is an inaccurate description of what happened. Collins held in favor of the parents based on the Meyers/Pierce substantive due process right; the dissent claimed that this argument wasn’t properly in the pleadings below. But Collins and the en banc dissenters all agree that there’s no general claim for a minimum level of education under the due process clause. Only Berzon outright disagreed with Collins’s view on Meyers/Pierce.

[Anonymous User]

In unrelated Collins news, the ideological split of this en banc panel reversing his (fairly aggressive procedurally and doctrinally) decision re CA schools is fascinating.

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/ ... -56291.pdf

That's fascinating because Collins (and the visiting judge who joined his panel opinion) got zero votes from the en banc court. Six judges (all liberals) disagreed with him on mootness, and the other five (the two most liberal and the three conservatives) agreed with him on mootness but disagreed with him on the merits, which makes me presume the other six liberals also would have disagreed with Collins if they had reached the merits. I don't recall ever seeing an 11-0 en banc vote during my time at the court.

This is an inaccurate description of what happened. Collins held in favor of the parents based on the Meyers/Pierce substantive due process right; the dissent claimed that this argument wasn’t properly in the pleadings below. But Collins and the en banc dissenters all agree that there’s no general claim for a minimum level of education under the due process clause. Only Berzon outright disagreed with Collins’s view on Meyers/Pierce.

Fair, thanks--I missed that there was a third layer here (mootness, whether Meyers/Pierce was properly raised below, and the interpretation of Meyers/Pierce).

[Anonymous User]

In unrelated Collins news, the ideological split of this en banc panel reversing his (fairly aggressive procedurally and doctrinally) decision re CA schools is fascinating.

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/ ... -56291.pdf

That's fascinating because Collins (and the visiting judge who joined his panel opinion) got zero votes from the en banc court. Six judges (all liberals) disagreed with him on mootness, and the other five (the two most liberal and the three conservatives) agreed with him on mootness but disagreed with him on the merits, which makes me presume the other six liberals also would have disagreed with Collins if they had reached the merits. I don't recall ever seeing an 11-0 en banc vote during my time at the court.

This is an inaccurate description of what happened. Collins held in favor of the parents based on the Meyers/Pierce substantive due process right; the dissent claimed that this argument wasn’t properly in the pleadings below. But Collins and the en banc dissenters all agree that there’s no general claim for a minimum level of education under the due process clause. Only Berzon outright disagreed with Collins’s view on Meyers/Pierce.

Fair, thanks--I missed that there was a third layer here (mootness, whether Meyers/Pierce was properly raised below, and the interpretation of Meyers/Pierce).

It’s like 4 layers! Honestly, just a crazy case that arose out of crazy circumstances—everyone tried their best to grapple with it

[Anonymous User]

I’ve also heard good things through the grapevine about Collins.

The Collins chambers is notoriously behind on work, and has been basically from the moment he started hearing cases. I find it hard to believe that it would be enjoyable to spend your clerkship perpetually playing catch up

Doesn’t the Miller chambers have the same issue?

I’ve heard fantastic things about the Miller experience; while slow judges can be irritating on panels, having a relatively relaxed boss isn’t necessarily bad for clerks!

[Anonymous User]

To echo part of a previous comment, have heard nothing but good things about Altman.

Echoing this as well