Getting antsy Forum

[Emma.]

My recommendations are very strong. But I could have the strongest recommendations known to earth, but it makes no difference if your app never gets pulled from the pile.

In my experience, the majority of applicants have really strong recommendations.

Look, you're top 5% at a T50. There are thousands of law students in the country with stronger credentials than you have. You're just going to have to be persistent.

"Thousands?"

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think there are thousands. Even if you assume the top 10% at every top 50 school, that's maybe slightly over 1,000. And I'm in the top 5%.

I don't harbor any delusions that I would be god's gift to any judge. I'm just trying to crunch the numbers here.

I wasn't being hyperbolic. You're basically behind just about everyone at HYS, the top 25% or so in the rest of the T14, and then all the people with a better class rank than you in the next 100 or so schools. (Keep in mind that someone ranked #1-#3 in their class at a TTT is probably in a stronger position than someone who is top 5% at a T50.) Overall, we're talking about at least a couple of thousand of students ahead of you in the T14 alone, plus another thousand or so in lower-ranked schools.

"Just about everyone at HYS?"

Like I said, meritocracy is a myth.

What makes you think your application has more merit than someone who is top 25% at a T14 school or the very top of their class at a TTT?

[JackOfAllTrades]

You think that your better grades means you have more "merit" than someone from a much better school. Whatever objective truth that belief may have is irrelevant. What matters are the kinds of things that judges (and other employers) care about. If they generally value school rank over class rank, that does not mean that merit is irrelevant. It just means their valuation system differs from yours. Calling it unmeritocratic is strange when we are still talking about objective indicators (e.g., school rank, class rank) as opposed to much softer factors (e.g., the judge knows your recommender).

The fact is that you are not as qualified as you think. It is very tough to get an A3 clerkship. T14 schools are barely placing 10% of their class into federal clerkships and you happen to go to school ranked ~20-30 spots lower than those schools. That is a big difference whether you believe it to be or not. Top 10% at T14s routinely strike out of clerkships and especially routinely strike out of trying to get circuit clerkships. You have put yourself at a disadvantage by applying to only 150 judges and to mostly circuit court judges. Simply put, you need to be applying to more judges overall and more district court judges specifically if you want a federal clerkship.

"from a much better school."

I think you meant to write "from a much higher-ranked" school. If not, the fact that you believe HYS are objectively "better" than any other school basically proves my entire point.

[JackOfAllTrades]

My recommendations are very strong. But I could have the strongest recommendations known to earth, but it makes no difference if your app never gets pulled from the pile.

In my experience, the majority of applicants have really strong recommendations.

Look, you're top 5% at a T50. There are thousands of law students in the country with stronger credentials than you have. You're just going to have to be persistent.

"Thousands?"

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think there are thousands. Even if you assume the top 10% at every top 50 school, that's maybe slightly over 1,000. And I'm in the top 5%.

I don't harbor any delusions that I would be god's gift to any judge. I'm just trying to crunch the numbers here.

I wasn't being hyperbolic. You're basically behind just about everyone at HYS, the top 25% or so in the rest of the T14, and then all the people with a better class rank than you in the next 100 or so schools. (Keep in mind that someone ranked #1-#3 in their class at a TTT is probably in a stronger position than someone who is top 5% at a T50.) Overall, we're talking about at least a couple of thousand of students ahead of you in the T14 alone, plus another thousand or so in lower-ranked schools.

"Just about everyone at HYS?"

Like I said, meritocracy is a myth.

What makes you think your application has more merit than someone who is top 25% at a T14 school or the very top of their class at a TTT?

I don't think that! I think we should all at least get a look.

[emkay625]

What geographic areas are you applying to? You should focus your search on less competitive districts and on courts in the state your school is located in. Also make sure to apply to all judges who are alumni of your school.

As someone who just went through this process on the other end, I can tell you that 80% of the hundreds of applications we received were from people either in the top 25% at HYS (with a sig. % in the top 5%), the top 10% or so from the rest of the T14 (with a sig. % in the top 5%), and top 5% of other schools. The problem isn't that you're not qualified. The problem is that everyone is qualified. It's most likely not that you're getting beat by someone in the bottom of the class at Duke/Harvard/Columbia/insert other T14 school here. You're getting beat by people at the top of their class from those schools.

[rpupkin]

I don't think that! I think we should all at least get a look.

Do you think there's something wrong with the HLS admissions department not reading the personal statements (and all the letters of rec) from an applicant with a 145 LSAT?

[emkay625]

My recommendations are very strong. But I could have the strongest recommendations known to earth, but it makes no difference if your app never gets pulled from the pile.

In my experience, the majority of applicants have really strong recommendations.

Look, you're top 5% at a T50. There are thousands of law students in the country with stronger credentials than you have. You're just going to have to be persistent.

"Thousands?"

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think there are thousands. Even if you assume the top 10% at every top 50 school, that's maybe slightly over 1,000. And I'm in the top 5%.

I don't harbor any delusions that I would be god's gift to any judge. I'm just trying to crunch the numbers here.

I wasn't being hyperbolic. You're basically behind just about everyone at HYS, the top 25% or so in the rest of the T14, and then all the people with a better class rank than you in the next 100 or so schools. (Keep in mind that someone ranked #1-#3 in their class at a TTT is probably in a stronger position than someone who is top 5% at a T50.) Overall, we're talking about at least a couple of thousand of students ahead of you in the T14 alone, plus another thousand or so in lower-ranked schools.

"Just about everyone at HYS?"

Like I said, meritocracy is a myth.

What makes you think your application has more merit than someone who is top 25% at a T14 school or the very top of their class at a TTT?

I don't think that! I think we should all at least get a look.

As one of the people responsible for sorting through applications, I can tell you that you do all get a look. But when there are people of the same class rank (or better) than you from higher-ranked schools, unfortunately the clerks are going to pull those apps and not yours. But we do look at every app.

[JackOfAllTrades]

What geographic areas are you applying to? You should focus your search on less competitive districts and on courts in the state your school is located in. Also make sure to apply to all judges who are alumni of your school.

As someone who just went through this process on the other end, I can tell you that 80% of the hundreds of applications we received were from people either in the top 25% at HYS (with a sig. % in the top 5%), the top 10% or so from the rest of the T14 (with a sig. % in the top 5%), and top 5% of other schools. The problem isn't that you're not qualified. The problem is that everyone is qualified. It's most likely not that you're getting beat by someone in the bottom of the class at Duke/Harvard/Columbia/insert other T14 school here. You're getting beat by people at the top of their class from those schools.

I am very much focused on my own general geographic area, but I've also applied all over.

I have applied to every judge who is an alum of my school.

But I guess I just drastically over-estimated my chances.

[Emma.]

I don't think that! I think we should all at least get a look.

It isn't a small amount of work to review hundreds of applications for every single clerk slot. When I would review apps for my judges it was more like a quick scan of each one and pulling out the ones that seemed special in some way. Tippy top grades, interesting resume items, or whatever else. Those got a harder look, and some of them made it into a pile for the judge. No chambers is going to carefully review every single application and compare and contrast each one. And the standard application materials only provide so much data. So if there's an additional data point from, say, a call from someone the judge trusts, that data point is something that adds to the overall merit of the application. That doesn't mean that hiring that person is somehow nepotistic or shows that hiring isn't merit based.

[JackOfAllTrades]

I don't think that! I think we should all at least get a look.

Do you think there's something wrong with the HLS admissions department not reading the personal statements (and all the letters of rec) from an applicant with a 145 LSAT?

If that person has really good grades, then hell yes there is something wrong with that. The LSAT is a test that rich kids can literally pay to have other people teach them to take. The fact that you think a low LSAT score should immediately disqualify applicants proves my entire point.

[emkay625]

What geographic areas are you applying to? You should focus your search on less competitive districts and on courts in the state your school is located in. Also make sure to apply to all judges who are alumni of your school.

As someone who just went through this process on the other end, I can tell you that 80% of the hundreds of applications we received were from people either in the top 25% at HYS (with a sig. % in the top 5%), the top 10% or so from the rest of the T14 (with a sig. % in the top 5%), and top 5% of other schools. The problem isn't that you're not qualified. The problem is that everyone is qualified. It's most likely not that you're getting beat by someone in the bottom of the class at Duke/Harvard/Columbia/insert other T14 school here. You're getting beat by people at the top of their class from those schools.

I am very much focused on my own general geographic area, but I've also applied all over.

I have applied to every judge who is an alum of my school.

But I guess I just drastically over-estimated my chances.

If you really want to clerk, keep at it. As candidates get snatched up, there are slowly but surely less applicants for each position.

Also, apply to less desirable cities - middle of nowhere, courts along the border, etc. Those places get less applicants.

[JackOfAllTrades]

I don't think that! I think we should all at least get a look.

It isn't a small amount of work to review hundreds of applications for every single clerk slot. When I would review apps for my judges it was more like a quick scan of each one and pulling out the ones that seemed special in some way. Tippy top grades, interesting resume items, or whatever else. Those got a harder look, and some of them made it into a pile for the judge. No chambers is going to carefully review every single application and compare and contrast each one. And the standard application materials only provide so much data. So if there's an additional data point from, say, a call from someone the judge trusts, that data point is something that adds to the overall merit of the application. That doesn't mean that hiring that person is somehow nepotistic or shows that hiring isn't merit based.

This seems like an argument for requiring judges to exclusively use Oscar. Two reasons:

1) Oscar, unlike snail-mail, can limit the number of applications you submit. This would likely drastically cut down on the number of apps judges receive.

2) Oscar is free. It is incredibly expensive to send out mail applications. Which again, benefits students with more money and more time because they don't have to work their way through law school.

[JackOfAllTrades]

What geographic areas are you applying to? You should focus your search on less competitive districts and on courts in the state your school is located in. Also make sure to apply to all judges who are alumni of your school.

As someone who just went through this process on the other end, I can tell you that 80% of the hundreds of applications we received were from people either in the top 25% at HYS (with a sig. % in the top 5%), the top 10% or so from the rest of the T14 (with a sig. % in the top 5%), and top 5% of other schools. The problem isn't that you're not qualified. The problem is that everyone is qualified. It's most likely not that you're getting beat by someone in the bottom of the class at Duke/Harvard/Columbia/insert other T14 school here. You're getting beat by people at the top of their class from those schools.

I am very much focused on my own general geographic area, but I've also applied all over.

I have applied to every judge who is an alum of my school.

But I guess I just drastically over-estimated my chances.

If you really want to clerk, keep at it. As candidates get snatched up, there are slowly but surely less applicants for each position.

Also, apply to less desirable cities - middle of nowhere, courts along the border, etc. Those places get less applicants.

thanks, this is good advice. I will keep at it. Just frustrated and lashing out.

[robotrick]

I was gonna respond, but then I realized you were a troll. Had me going for a minute!

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 0#p8336590

looking back on that post, I regret writing that.

That's mature of you to say. Perhaps in a year's time you'll feel the same way about this thread.

[Emma.]

I don't think that! I think we should all at least get a look.

It isn't a small amount of work to review hundreds of applications for every single clerk slot. When I would review apps for my judges it was more like a quick scan of each one and pulling out the ones that seemed special in some way. Tippy top grades, interesting resume items, or whatever else. Those got a harder look, and some of them made it into a pile for the judge. No chambers is going to carefully review every single application and compare and contrast each one. And the standard application materials only provide so much data. So if there's an additional data point from, say, a call from someone the judge trusts, that data point is something that adds to the overall merit of the application. That doesn't mean that hiring that person is somehow nepotistic or shows that hiring isn't merit based.

This seems like an argument for requiring judges to exclusively use Oscar. Two reasons:

1) Oscar, unlike snail-mail, can limit the number of applications you submit. This would likely drastically cut down on the number of apps judges receive.

2) Oscar is free. It is incredibly expensive to send out mail applications. Which again, benefits students with more money and more time because they don't have to work their way through law school.

OSCAR is a giant pain in the ass. One of my judges took applications by email and it was far far easier to review those than it was to review apps for the judge who used OSCAR. This isn't about you. Or students generally. Clerkships are jobs, not some extension of law school. Judges will (and should) use whatever process works best for them.

[bk1]

Just frustrated and lashing out.

I'm gonna be blunt: based on your posts, you seem insufferable and my suggestion is to try and ensure that that doesn't seep through in your applications or in any interviews you may have.

[JackOfAllTrades]

I don't think that! I think we should all at least get a look.

It isn't a small amount of work to review hundreds of applications for every single clerk slot. When I would review apps for my judges it was more like a quick scan of each one and pulling out the ones that seemed special in some way. Tippy top grades, interesting resume items, or whatever else. Those got a harder look, and some of them made it into a pile for the judge. No chambers is going to carefully review every single application and compare and contrast each one. And the standard application materials only provide so much data. So if there's an additional data point from, say, a call from someone the judge trusts, that data point is something that adds to the overall merit of the application. That doesn't mean that hiring that person is somehow nepotistic or shows that hiring isn't merit based.

This seems like an argument for requiring judges to exclusively use Oscar. Two reasons:

1) Oscar, unlike snail-mail, can limit the number of applications you submit. This would likely drastically cut down on the number of apps judges receive.

2) Oscar is free. It is incredibly expensive to send out mail applications. Which again, benefits students with more money and more time because they don't have to work their way through law school.

OSCAR is a giant pain in the ass. One of my judges took applications by email and it was far far easier to review those than it was to review apps for the judge who used OSCAR. This isn't about you. Or students generally. Clerkships are jobs, not some extension of law school. Judges will (and should) use whatever process works best for them.

Email solves problem #2, but not problem #1, and problem #1 is about helping judges, not helping me.

[JackOfAllTrades]

Just frustrated and lashing out.

I'm gonna be blunt: based on your posts, you seem insufferable and my suggestion is to try and ensure that that doesn't seep through in your applications or in any interviews you may have.

the feeling is mutual

[Emma.]

Just frustrated and lashing out.

I'm gonna be blunt: based on your posts, you seem insufferable and my suggestion is to try and ensure that that doesn't seep through in your applications or in any interviews you may have.

I was thinking the same. I don't mean to be harsh, but if I caught even a sniff of the sentiment you are expressing here when I was reviewing your apps or interviewing you, that would be the end of your candidacy in my judge's chambers.

[rawrpalooza]

Just frustrated and lashing out.

I'm gonna be blunt: based on your posts, you seem insufferable and my suggestion is to try and ensure that that doesn't seep through in your applications or in any interviews you may have.

the feeling is mutual

You realize that pretty much everyone in this thread (including and especially bk1) is trying to help you right? Not only is your attachment to some conception of "meritocracy" strange, you also come across as incredibly entitled and lacking any kind of self-awareness.

[JackOfAllTrades]

Just frustrated and lashing out.

I'm gonna be blunt: based on your posts, you seem insufferable and my suggestion is to try and ensure that that doesn't seep through in your applications or in any interviews you may have.

the feeling is mutual

You realize that pretty much everyone in this thread (including and especially bk1) is trying to help you right? Not only is your attachment to some conception of "meritocracy" strange, you also come across as incredibly entitled and lacking any kind of self-awareness.

I get it, guys. I'm a huge asshole. Thanks.

[rpupkin]

Just frustrated and lashing out.

I'm gonna be blunt: based on your posts, you seem insufferable and my suggestion is to try and ensure that that doesn't seep through in your applications or in any interviews you may have.

the feeling is mutual

You realize that pretty much everyone in this thread (including and especially bk1) is trying to help you right? Not only is your attachment to some conception of "meritocracy" strange, you also come across as incredibly entitled and lacking any kind of self-awareness.

I get it, guys. I'm a huge asshole. Thanks.

Wow. You really don't get it.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Judges don't want OSCAR to limit applications. They want to limit applications according to their own criteria.

[JackOfAllTrades]

Judges don't want OSCAR to limit applications. They want to limit applications according to their own criteria.

Some clerks on this thread have suggested that the reason judges don't pull apps is because there are just too many applications to go through, but this comment makes clear that judges don't want fewer applications. They want as many applications as they can possibly get, because they're going to filter through them with their "criteria." And we've established that the "criteria" is usually HYS, the T-14, or whatever school they went to.

But, clearly the notion that maybe, just maybe, a legal training system that's given us a Supreme Court made up of exclusively of alumni of TWO schools is nepotistic and self-fulfilling, is very controversial on this forum.

Anyway, I'll keep applying and hoping that I get lucky. But my two cents, whether a student gets a clerkship shouldn't depend on whether they have a professor who knows a judge or two. Maybe that's a radical notion!

[A. Nony Mouse]

No, you're misreading me because you've made up your mind about this already. My comment was not meant to suggest that judges don't have to filter (or limit which applications they look at), it's that they want to filter on their own terms, not based on who gets their application into OSCAR first. Of course they have "criteria" (not sure why you needed that to be in scare quotes). All jobs have criteria. See the Scalia article linked earlier for why judges might filter by school. Your assumptions about how top 5% at one school compares to median at HYS etc are just that, assumptions; other people hold different ones.

Keep in mind judges are not being altruistic when they hire. They want to find the person who is best going to help them do their job, and they have to go through this process every year (or maybe every other), and they're busy, and it's a pain in the ass. They want to choose the right person, and they want it to be as easy as possible to do that, and they also get to define right person. Nobody is owed a clerkship.

And drawing generalizations about the whole legal profession based on the pedigree of 9 SCOTUS judges seems a little overwrought. It's not a meritocracy, but nothing is. It also doesn't mean that the people who get the jobs aren't qualified. This profession is filled with thousands of highly qualified people. The #1 student in the class at my lower T1 couldn't get a federal clerkship, and they totally deserved one.

[legalmindedfellow]

Two things. First - to maximize your chances of getting a clerkship, you need to cut circuit courts out of your apps, you need to apply more widely to a greater # of district courts, you probably need to follow up with the people who wrote you letters to see if there's more they can do, you need to consider that you might have to apply widely over multiple cycles, and (beyond anything else) you should think about adding state supreme courts to the list. You also need to delete everything you have in your head about the process from your brain before you go into any interviews. I imagine something is out there, somewhere, but you have to go out and find it. Every incremental odds-increasing thing you do could make the difference, and nothing can substitute for that besides sending out more apps and pushing at more doors.

Second, the above advice, and the better advice from others in this thread - this is all assuming you want to clerk because it's a cool job and a good learning experience and it beats a year at a firm, or whatever other reasons that actually answer "why clerk" with something other than "because." But there's nothing a clerkship will give you, and nothing we can say to you in the thread, that will transform you into a gold-plated, externally validated rising star of the legal profession. That's not going to happen. Sorry. It sucks. But it's still in your control to be a better, happier, and more valuable-to-the-world lawyer than other people who have the resume. Maybe what you learn in a clerkship will be a part of becoming that, and maybe it won't. There are other ways to be awesome and expanding the horizons a bit wouldn't hurt. (Or hell, if all things are clerkship-oriented, it will give you stuff to talk about in the interview).

Anyways, good luck.