Anonymous User wrote:Also, why does "most desirable" matter? Obviously there are feeder judges, but if you don't have the c.v. for the Court to start with, what's the difference between 3d Circuit Judge X and 5th Circuit Judge Y when one of them just happens to be more selective about clerks and hire them earlier?
Judges who hire earlier and are more selective tend to be more "prestigious" in some way (although that's obviously not always the case; several COA judges have already completed hiring for 16-17, and they are not considered prestigious relative to other COA judges). Prestige of the judge can matter in more ways than just making you competitive for a SCOTUS clerkships. Some prestigious judges don't really feed, but place well into academia. Other judges don't really feed, but selective law firms recruit from those judges. Working for a prestigious judge also signals that you were one of the most competitive applicants from your school, which is a benefit when applying to certain jobs.
If none of that matters to you, then choose only on geographic preference/judge's ideology/flip a coin. But I think there are definitely a band of judges that aren't perennial feeders but who open more doors than the average COA judge.
EDIT: And hopefully we aren't talking past each other. I take "most desirable" to mean "prestigious," and I grant that just because a judge hires early/is selective doesn't necessarily mean that they are "prestigious."