Clerks Taking Questions Forum

[lavarman84]

As a mental heuristic you have to draw the line somewhere. The fact of the matter is that huge chunk of law school students are those who had no idea what to do with their lives. They have massively inflated GPAs from bullshit majors like psychology or communications or "social studies" and on top of that a lot of them come from undergrad institutions that are less than rigorous.

So if a law school is accepting fully 40% of these applicants, well...

Having to draw the line someone and drawing the line in an arbitrary manner for a bar as low as "competence" are two pretty different things.

But I'm not surprised people feel that way. It's a matter of perspective.

To be clear, I didn't mean competence as a human being in some larger sense. I meant competence to do the work of the court and conduct legal analysis of sufficiently high quality.

I guess it would depend on how high you set that bar, then. Where would you need to be at various t14 schools to convince you of competence?

[FascinatedWanderer]

As a mental heuristic you have to draw the line somewhere. The fact of the matter is that huge chunk of law school students are those who had no idea what to do with their lives. They have massively inflated GPAs from bullshit majors like psychology or communications or "social studies" and on top of that a lot of them come from undergrad institutions that are less than rigorous.

So if a law school is accepting fully 40% of these applicants, well...

Having to draw the line someone and drawing the line in an arbitrary manner for a bar as low as "competence" are two pretty different things.

But I'm not surprised people feel that way. It's a matter of perspective.

To be clear, I didn't mean competence as a human being in some larger sense. I meant competence to do the work of the court and conduct legal analysis of sufficiently high quality.

I guess it would depend on how high you set that bar, then. Where would you need to be at various t14 schools to convince you of competence?

With the caveat that obviously grades don't correlate perfectly well with ability to do the work: at Yale my main concern would be to see if you're an insufferable blowhard who can't actually handle the nitty gritty of the law.

Other than that, based on the complexity of the legal issues I've seen while clerking so far, I'd think students in the top 25% or so of the T14 (maybe a bit lower at H/S and up to the top 10% at Georgetown) can do the analysis capably.

A smaller subset of those can do the analysis and also write it up coherently and well.

[A. Nony Mouse]

I think you are placing *far* too much weight on fairly small variables. Like there is some kind of demonstrable intellectual difference between top 25% at Cornell and top 25% at Georgetown? Have you seen actual representative work to back this up?

[lavarman84]

I think you are placing *far* too much weight on fairly small variables. Like there is some kind of demonstrable intellectual difference between top 25% at Cornell and top 25% at Georgetown? Have you seen actual representative work to back this up?

Yea, I agree. I just started clerking, but the work doesn't seem so complex and difficult that few people would be capable of doing it competently. Obviously, you have to be a good researcher and writer, but beyond that, I think it's within most people's wheelhouses. The hardest adjustment for me is just learning the system and how chambers does things.(although, the people in my chambers have been amazing at offering help when it was needed)

However, I'm at the D. Ct. level. Maybe the work is a lot tougher at the COA level. I don't know.

[FascinatedWanderer]

I think you are placing *far* too much weight on fairly small variables. Like there is some kind of demonstrable intellectual difference between top 25% at Cornell and top 25% at Georgetown? Have you seen actual representative work to back this up?

I'm perfectly happy to concede this is all extremely imprecise. I'm painting in extremely broad brush strokes here.

My original much narrower point was that the writing that gets people As at the local TT I find to be completely inadequate.

[lavarman84]

I think you are placing *far* too much weight on fairly small variables. Like there is some kind of demonstrable intellectual difference between top 25% at Cornell and top 25% at Georgetown? Have you seen actual representative work to back this up?

I'm perfectly happy to concede this is all extremely imprecise. I'm painting in extremely broad brush strokes here.

My original much narrower point was that the writing that gets people As at the local TT I find to be completely inadequate.

I find my own 1L writing to be inadequate.

[Anonymous User]

I think you are placing *far* too much weight on fairly small variables. Like there is some kind of demonstrable intellectual difference between top 25% at Cornell and top 25% at Georgetown? Have you seen actual representative work to back this up?

I'm perfectly happy to concede this is all extremely imprecise. I'm painting in extremely broad brush strokes here.

My original much narrower point was that the writing that gets people As at the local TT I find to be completely inadequate.

I find my own 1L writing to be inadequate.

Fair enough, and I get that, but what I'm saying is that I don't think most 1Ls from T14s would hand in writing this bad, much less get an A for it. Even as a 1st semester 1L my writing was nowhere near as bad as what is apparently A-quality work at the local TT.

I was surprised to discover this, and it's what lead to my comment about there being a big disparity between TT and T6 students, at least writing-wise.

[jrf12886]

I think you are placing *far* too much weight on fairly small variables. Like there is some kind of demonstrable intellectual difference between top 25% at Cornell and top 25% at Georgetown? Have you seen actual representative work to back this up?

Yea, I agree. I just started clerking, but the work doesn't seem so complex and difficult that few people would be capable of doing it competently. Obviously, you have to be a good researcher and writer, but beyond that, I think it's within most people's wheelhouses. The hardest adjustment for me is just learning the system and how chambers does things.(although, the people in my chambers have been amazing at offering help when it was needed)

However, I'm at the D. Ct. level. Maybe the work is a lot tougher at the COA level. I don't know.

Agree. Law actually isn't that difficult (compared to what many doctors, engineers, scientists do). To say that only a certain % of T14 school can do the job seems ridiculous to me. There are certainly people from even TTT who are great lawyers. It's more about work ethic, thoroughness, and interpersonal skills. But we have our prestiege-obsessed system and its here to stay.

[Anonymous User]

how long after an interview is it reasonable to check in with chambers? judge stressed it could be a month or two before he got back to me. are post-interview letters of continued interest considered acceptable?

[Anonymous User]

It would be reasonable to check in after about 6-7 weeks. Just an informal email or call to chambers. A letter of continued interest is unnecessary. We assume you're still interested until you tell us otherwise.

[Anonymous User]

I graduated near the bottom of my class at a lower T14. However, my grades had a significant upward trend.

There's a d. ct. judge who has a posting looking for a very specific background that I have.

Would it be a complete waste of time to apply? I'm less worried about my own time than the people who would be writing my recommendations, which includes a law professor and a biglaw partner.

Additionally, how might you view a candidate like me?

Thanks!

[anon sequitur]

I think your professor probably has a template for recommendations, so unless it's super personalized, it probably won't take much time. Also, that's part of their job. If you have biglaw experience, some judges really want that and value it more than grades/LR. If they're also asking for a relatively rare combination of skills and don't advertise a grade cut-off, I'd definitely apply. If they say top 10% grades preferred or something like that *and* those skills, I might not bother though. I think judges that advertise a grade cut-off might go somewhat below that for someone that jumps out at them for other reasons, but they're probably not going to go to the bottom of the class.

[rpupkin]

I graduated near the bottom of my class at a lower T14. However, my grades had a significant upward trend.

There's a d. ct. judge who has a posting looking for a very specific background that I have.

Would it be a complete waste of time to apply? I'm less worried about my own time than the people who would be writing my recommendations, which includes a law professor and a biglaw partner.

Additionally, how might you view a candidate like me?

Thanks!

Because of the bolded, it seems worth it to apply.

I'm not sure how to answer your question about how I would view a candidate like you. I don't know what your "very specific background" is or why this judge values it, I don't know how uncommon your specific background is, and I don't know what other things this judge looks for. I mean, depending on a bunch of variables that TLS posters couldn't possibly know based on your post, a judge's response could range from "call this applicant in for an interview immediately" to "I'm definitely not interested."

[Anonymous User]

Is is stupid to do two appellate clerkships, especially if one is on a coveted circuit like the D.C. Circuit?

[Anonymous User]

If a district court judge has a clerkship open for 20 months (the "Accepting Applications" period is 20 months), does that mean the judge is reviewing applications on a rolling basis? The posting says "Interviewing immediately."

About 10 months have passed and the position does not appear to be filled. I'm wondering if the judge is picky, or just collecting tons of resumes before making decisions for interviews.

[mjb447]

If a district court judge has a clerkship open for 20 months (the "Accepting Applications" period is 20 months), does that mean the judge is reviewing applications on a rolling basis? The posting says "Interviewing immediately."

About 10 months have passed and the position does not appear to be filled. I'm wondering if the judge is picky, or just collecting tons of resumes before making decisions for interviews.

I don't think there's much you can profitably read into this.

[radio1nowhere]

Is is stupid to do two appellate clerkships, especially if one is on a coveted circuit like the D.C. Circuit?

Assuming you mean two COA clerkships as opposed to one state supreme / other appellate + one COA: the general consensus seems to be that it's not worth it to do two clerkships at one level, since you're not going to learn that much the second year (same amount of responsibility as the first year), you already get the lion's share of the prestige/signaling just by doing one (the extra bump from a more prestigious COA is much less than the initial bump from doing any COA), and then you have answer questions from firms or whatever about whether you're really interested in working there (since you apparently love clerking so much).

The main exception I can think of is for people who might have a chance at SCOTUS and for some reason accepted a non-feeder or semi-feeder COA. It might be worth it for those people to do a second clerkship with a top feeder if they want to roll the dice on SCOTUS (just spitballing here — idk what SCOTUS hiring is actually like).

As a final caveat: I do know a couple (I think only two) of the top HLS grads from this year who are doing multiple COAs with the second one in D.C. even though the first judge is already a feeder/semi-feeder, so maybe they know something I don't.

[Anonymous User]

I recently had two district court clerkship interviews. The first was in SDNY/CDCA/DDC and the second was in a flyover a few days later. I didnt get an offer for either on the spot, but the day after the flyover interview, the flyover judge called me and gave me an offer. S/he said "I know you have another interview you haven't heard back from yet, and you can think about it if you want, but I'd like for you to join my Chambers." It didn't really sound like s/he wanted to give me time and I heard from his/her previous clerks that s/he expects decisions on the spot, so I was really surprised s/he even offered that. Anyway, I accepted on the spot, without knowing about the other clerkship. I called the first judge the next day and withdrew. S/he seemed slightly disappointed or annoyed that I didn't give a heads up, I couldn't tell.

Did I make a mistake? I was so surprised when I got the SDNY/CDCA/DDC interview. That judge was definitely a reach for my credentials. I didn't mention in the first interview that I had another interview in a few days (the flyover interview). Also, I didn't want to annoy the second judge and ask for a few days. Am I overthinking this? I feel like this could have really changed my career given that my credentials are not HYS or law review at a top school (median at VPMB). I am not sure what to think. I am definitely excited, but I am not sure what to think about how I handled that. Also, I am applying to Circuit clerkships now and would like to be more prepared for something like this.

[radio1nowhere]

I recently had two district court clerkship interviews. The first was in SDNY/CDCA/DDC and the second was in a flyover a few days later. I didnt get an offer for either on the spot, but the day after the flyover interview, the flyover judge called me and gave me an offer. S/he said "I know you have another interview you haven't heard back from yet, and you can think about it if you want, but I'd like for you to join my Chambers." It didn't really sound like s/he wanted to give me time and I heard from his/her previous clerks that s/he expects decisions on the spot, so I was really surprised s/he even offered that. Anyway, I accepted on the spot, without knowing about the other clerkship. I called the first judge the next day and withdrew. S/he seemed slightly disappointed or annoyed that I didn't give a heads up, I couldn't tell.

Did I make a mistake? I was so surprised when I got the SDNY/CDCA/DDC interview. That judge was definitely a reach for my credentials. I didn't mention in the first interview that I had another interview in a few days (the flyover interview). Also, I didn't want to annoy the second judge and ask for a few days. Am I overthinking this? I feel like this could have really changed my career given that my credentials are not HYS or law review at a top school (median at VPMB). I am not sure what to think. I am definitely excited, but I am not sure what to think about how I handled that. Also, I am applying to Circuit clerkships now and would like to be more prepared for something like this.

Accepting the flyover on the spot was probably the right thing to do if you think the judge expects decisions on the spot.

However, I do think it was a mistake not to tell your first choice judge about the other interview. I would always advise telling first choice judges about other interviews — otherwise you may miss out merely because the judge didn't realize you had such a (potentially) tight timeline. Judges are used to this sort of situation, so they won't think it's weird for you to tell them; in fact, some judges regularly ask applicants if they have other interviews.

Don't beat yourself up about it though; flyovers are still really awesome opportunities! Good luck on the COA search.

[Anonymous User]

What are the "must take" classes for successfully completing a clerkship. I know that fed courts and con law are musts. Anything else?

[vonrus1]

What's the oldest anyone has seen a new clerk?

I'll be finishing military service at 32, and finishing school at 35 if I go immediately.

Is a clerkship even a possibility?

How badly would it stunt career progression at a large firm if it is?

TIA

[Anonymous User]

I clerked at over 40. It doesn't matter.

(It's a super idiosyncratic/personalized process so I'm sure some judges prefer not to hire older students. But it's not a general phenomenon.)

[Anonymous User]

I clerked at over 40. It doesn't matter.

(It's a super idiosyncratic/personalized process so I'm sure some judges prefer not to hire older students. But it's not a general phenomenon.)

Ok that's good news, thank you.

As for moving into the private sector after, is it generally the same or would I have better luck staying in government?

[BVest]

I clerked at over 40. It doesn't matter.

[BVest]

[age question]
As for moving into the private sector after, is it generally the same or would I have better luck staying in government?

I personally felt like there was a good deal of age discrimination for starting associates at biglaw (at least for 40+; friends in young 30s did okay), but once you got below biglaw, age was often an asset.