SCOTUS clerk taking questions about federal clerkships Forum

[Anonymous User]

What kind of grades are we talking about for top 5% at HLS?

Also, the school treats two Hs as the same as a DS and P for gpa purposes - do the justices view them that way too, or is there some number of Ps that's just too many, even with off-setting DSs?

I would also be interested if you can share any information on what HLS grades make an applicant a longshot, competitive, and a strong candidate, to the extent that you can make an observations.

[Anonymous User]

Any thoughts on feeder potential or info on QOL for the former SCOTUS clerks Obama has appointed to the COA, minus the very recent ones on the 9th? Lynch (2d), Higginson (5th), Jordan (11th), Srinivasan (DC)?

[Anonymous User]

What do you know about the hiring practices of retired Justices? I recall you mentioned Stephens' short decision-making timeline, but can you share anything you might know about how JPS, Souter, and O'Connor select their annual clerk?

[Anonymous User]

What's your view on the value of "non-elite" clerkships? I'm doing COA in a major city, but not for a feeder judge, and not in the circuit/district where I want to live and practice. I may follow that with DCt, but that will also likely not be in the district where I want to ultimately practice, and also will not be SDNY/NDCal/DDC.
I understand that the experience itself is fantastic and am looking forward to it for that reason. Just wondering if it will actually add value though.

[Anonymous User]

What do you know about the hiring practices of retired Justices? I recall you mentioned Stephens' short decision-making timeline, but can you share anything you might know about how JPS, Souter, and O'Connor select their annual clerk?

Building on that, any idea how firms, etc. view a clerkship with a retired Justice? Is it treated exactly the same as a clerkship with a sitting Justice?

[Anonymous User]

I know you can't get into too much detail re: Bristows, so feel free to skip this one if it would reveal too much. Does one usually apply for Bristows at the same time as one applies for SCOTUS? Or is it generally accepted that you apply for a Bristow first, and then SCOTUS?

[Anonymous User]

I know you can't get into too much detail re: Bristows, so feel free to skip this one if it would reveal too much. Does one usually apply for Bristows at the same time as one applies for SCOTUS? Or is it generally accepted that you apply for a Bristow first, and then SCOTUS?

Not OP, but people normally apply for SCOTUS by February of the year before they'd like to start at the Court (i.e. Feb 2014 for OT 2015). To do a Bristow OT 2015, you'd apply September 1, 2014. So in that sense, folks apply to the Court first. And I've never known anyone who applied for a Bristow without having applied for SCOTUS, but I guess it happens.

Also, you probably know this, but it not permissible to do a Bristow post-SCOTUS clerkship.

[Anonymous User]

Any thoughts on feeder potential or info on QOL for the former SCOTUS clerks Obama has appointed to the COA, minus the very recent ones on the 9th? Lynch (2d), Higginson (5th), Jordan (11th), Srinivasan (DC)?

If you're willing to talk about those judges, could you also talk about Barron (1st), Millett (DC), and Harris (4th, pending)?

[Anonymous User]

I would also be interested if you can share any information on what HLS grades make an applicant a longshot, competitive, and a strong candidate, to the extent that you can make an observations.

I'd be interested in this question with respect to YLS grades. Understanding, of course, that different Justices treat this differently, is it likely that someone with no Ps will have a significant advantage over someone with one? With two?

[Anonymous User]

What's your view on the value of "non-elite" clerkships? I'm doing COA in a major city, but not for a feeder judge, and not in the circuit/district where I want to live and practice. I may follow that with DCt, but that will also likely not be in the district where I want to ultimately practice, and also will not be SDNY/NDCal/DDC.
I understand that the experience itself is fantastic and am looking forward to it for that reason. Just wondering if it will actually add value though.

I'm also interested in the answer to this question.

[Anonymous User]

If you are qualified for CADC you absolutely must apply to every CADC judge.

First, thanks for a great thread, OP.

Is the quoted advice true only if SCOTUS is your one and only life's calling? Going by your rubric toward the beginning of the thread, I'm somewhere between a realistic and strong applicant; I want to push the SCOTUS thing as far as it could go, but have very little interest in living in DC long-term. Is it a big downgrade to do a non-CADC feeder, if you could get one of the DC feeders? Or would a CADC gig transfer well to other markets, were I to get one?

[Anonymous User]

Not the OP, but someone with multiple desirable clerkships and some knowledge:

Re SLS grades, I've been told that the top 5% cutoff varies fairly widely based on the year. E.g., because the class of 2012 was overall a very strong class, Hs were spread more widely than what is standard* and the top 5% cutoff hovered around 70% Hs/As <-> 30% Ps/<A-s (I included letter grades because so many SLS students take classes outside of the law school, and this is what was suggested to me). Obviously book awards complicate things, but my sense is that you would expect around two book awards for a student with grades like this (although the professors who I've spoken with have urged me not to put too much stock in book awards given that many classes -- due to size or tenure or cross-registration issues -- are not even eligible to give out book awards...there was apparently a student within the past five years who was pretty widely considered to be in the top 5 people in his/her class but only had two book awards despite having been the best student in far more than two classes).

*I've heard 75% Hs and As is somewhat more standard for the top 5%.

[Doorkeeper]

the top 5% cutoff hovered around 70% Hs/As <-> 30% Ps/<A-s (I included letter grades because so many SLS students take classes outside of the law school, and this is what was suggested to me).
*I've heard 75% Hs and As is somewhat more standard for the top 5%.

Wow. If this is correct, then Stanford's curve is a lot less steep than Harvard (top 5% = over 95% Hs, or all Ps with a corresponding DS - similar to book award). Hmm.

[Anonymous User]

the top 5% cutoff hovered around 70% Hs/As <-> 30% Ps/<A-s (I included letter grades because so many SLS students take classes outside of the law school, and this is what was suggested to me).
*I've heard 75% Hs and As is somewhat more standard for the top 5%.

Wow. If this is correct, then Stanford's curve is a lot less steep than Harvard (top 5% = over 95% Hs, or all Ps with a corresponding DS - similar to book award). Hmm.

A couple things:

1. I think Stanford has a harsher curve than Harvard. So there are fewer Hs to go around and more Ps.

2. All classes are curved at Stanford. I'm not sure if this is the case at Harvard. But if HLS offers upper level seminars and electives off of the curve, that would also contribute significantly to there being more Hs floating around.

3. A much bigger class size also means more variability in the quality of the students in each individual law school seminar/lecture. You're far more likely to be the only person from the top 5% in your 50 person lecture when you have 550 classmates than when you have 180. And this variability is almost certainly not random: at every law school, there are classes known for being hard and classes known for being easy. More non-random variability = more chances to maximize Hs by being strategic with your class choices (which you would expect to see manifested in an inflation of the grades of many of the tippy top students).

[Anonymous User]

Any advice for people thinking of doing a district court clerkship before trying for a feeder COA? Assume grades would be good enough for a feeder COA (not HYS but meets qualifications you mentioned for T7-25). Any judges particular that we should look at other than the obvious ones on SDNY and DDC?

[Anonymous User]

This is OP. I will try and get through the backlogged questions today.

[Anonymous User]

How would you compare, say, a non- or semi-feeder D.C. Cir. judge to a semi-feeder or feeder non-D.C. Cir. judge? I assume that the feeder judge is more desirable, but you seem to be advocating for the D.C. Cir. very strongly.

This is OP. Feeder beats non-feeder. D.C. Circuit beats every other circuit. The difference between CADC and any other circuit is substantial. Only a feeder judge (placements >= 10 or more) beats a standard CADC judge. Not so much if you get SCOTUS: then you're a SCOTUS clerk and that's all that matters. But for every other world where you don't get SCOTUS, which is for everyone the majority of worlds, DC Circuit helps you a lot more.

[Anonymous User]

OP, SLS has not placed very well at SCOTUS in recent years. Care to speculate why?

Not the OP, but the most straightforward explanation is that Rehnquist and O'Connor (both SLS grads) are no longer on the Court. It seems that all judges--even SCOTUS justices--like to hire from their alma mater. When Justice Stevens was on the Court, he would regularly hire NU grads. Now that every justice attended either YLS or HLS, the percentage of HY grads is as high as it's ever been.

This is OP. You're right re: Justice Stevens. But I did not see much evidence that Justices favored their alma mater over other T6 schools conscientiously as a rule. I think this is a totally valid use of Occam's Razor. It just didn't match my experiences. I'm hesitant to say you're wrong though.

When I still had SCOTUS-worthy grades, my mentor professor, who was a former SCOTUS clerk, and I discussed Justice Kagan specifically. Justice Kagan had called my professor to discuss an applicant, who was first in class at MVPB. Justice Kagan apparently kept querying my professor about whether the student was actually as intellectually capable as class ranking suggested. My professor was taken a bit aback. Other than one Boalt alumnus, Justice Kagan has only taken from HYS.

The applicant ended up as a SCOTUS clerk for another Justice.

This is OP. Kagan is the most Ivy-league elitist of all the Justices. And that's a competitive race.

[Anonymous User]

Is it possible to transfer from a lower T-14 to a T-6 or possibly HYS and still land a SCOTUS clerkship? Or do transfers not have a good shot since their 1L grades don't "count" at their new school?

This is OP. Yes. Transfer students, both from non-T14 schools and T14 to HYS, get SCOTUS clerkships. It's not common. But then again, transferring isn't common. But there's about one transfer student a year that gets it or maybe a bit less (say, 3 every 4 or 5 years).

I think transfer students are at a disadvantage because (1) getting LR is much harder or impossible at the new school and (2) transfer students have less time to build up institutional credibility/political capital. But if you can get around those two problems, transfer students can get the job. In fact, for out-of-T14 to T14 transfers, transferring is probably a necessary condition to getting the job.

[Anonymous User]

I've heard that all the justices on the left, perhaps in different ways, can be hard to work for. Can you comment on that at all?

This is OP. This is basically incorrect. There is no meaningful correlation between a Justice's outside appearance or politics and his or her "quality of life." In fact, the Justices are generally very genial and kind to their clerks. The work is hard. But that's just a function of the job. True across the jurisprudential spectrum.

[Anonymous User]

What kind of grades are we talking about for top 5% at HLS?

Also, the school treats two Hs as the same as a DS and P for gpa purposes - do the justices view them that way too, or is there some number of Ps that's just too many, even with off-setting DSs?

This is OP.

Essentially all Hs.

A highly qualified candidate will be literally all Hs with a few DSes.

[Anonymous User]

Any thoughts on feeder potential or info on QOL for the former SCOTUS clerks Obama has appointed to the COA, minus the very recent ones on the 9th? Lynch (2d), Higginson (5th), Jordan (11th), Srinivasan (DC)?

This is OP. Higginson is an excellent clerkship. I expect Srinivasan will be a very significant feeder someday. I hear positive things about both Lynch and Jordan but feel less confidence in these as I do not know as much there, but have heard good things still.

[Anonymous User]

What do you know about the hiring practices of retired Justices? I recall you mentioned Stephens' short decision-making timeline, but can you share anything you might know about how JPS, Souter, and O'Connor select their annual clerk?

Retired justices hire one clerk each, and usually live only a few years after retirement. Too few data points to meaningfully generalize. That said, they decide quickly, usually through former clerks and by phone calls, and in the early to mid-spring. Think March to May.

[Anonymous User]

What's your view on the value of "non-elite" clerkships? I'm doing COA in a major city, but not for a feeder judge, and not in the circuit/district where I want to live and practice. I may follow that with DCt, but that will also likely not be in the district where I want to ultimately practice, and also will not be SDNY/NDCal/DDC.
I understand that the experience itself is fantastic and am looking forward to it for that reason. Just wondering if it will actually add value though.

This is OP. Adds value to your career. Does not add value to your SCOTUS chances. But if you aren't trying to land SCOTUS, this is a solid clerkship plan and you will have a great start to your career.

For SCOTUS, the only correct clerkship moves after non-feeder non-CADC are a feeder, a CADC clerkship, SDNY, or DDC. In that order. Bristow also good.

[Anonymous User]

What kind of grades are we talking about for top 5% at HLS?

Also, the school treats two Hs as the same as a DS and P for gpa purposes - do the justices view them that way too, or is there some number of Ps that's just too many, even with off-setting DSs?

This is OP.

Essentially all Hs.

A highly qualified candidate will be literally all Hs with a few DSes.

Quick follow up - would it be better / worse / the same to have, say, 8 ds, 7 p, the rest h, or all h with only one ds?