Clerks Taking Questions Forum

[Anonymous User]

Is there any benefit to taking the bar exam before clerking? I’ll be clerking for NDCal/SDNY/DDC the August after graduation, and then 2/9/DC, and was wondering if I should take the bar in between graduating and starting the district court clerkship.

I understand that I’ll be paid less for my second clerkship if I don’t take the bar, but are there any other downsides? Would it affect applying to the Bristow or getting a post-clerkship firm offer? My reasons for not taking it is because I got a pretty unique opportunity for that summer, but I don’t think I can take it and study for the bar.

Thanks!

I studied for the bar while working because I got a unique opportunity. It sucks but it’s totally doable unless your “unique opportunity” is Wachtell or something.

[WilliamFaulkner]

Is there any benefit to taking the bar exam before clerking? I’ll be clerking for NDCal/SDNY/DDC the August after graduation, and then 2/9/DC, and was wondering if I should take the bar in between graduating and starting the district court clerkship.

I understand that I’ll be paid less for my second clerkship if I don’t take the bar, but are there any other downsides? Would it affect applying to the Bristow or getting a post-clerkship firm offer? My reasons for not taking it is because I got a pretty unique opportunity for that summer, but I don’t think I can take it and study for the bar.

Thanks!

Is the "pretty unique opportunity" worth 15K to you? Because that's roughly what you'd be foregoing if you don't take the bar before your second clerkship. Also, when would you take the bar? During your court of appeal clerkship? That doesn't sound fun. After your clerkships end? Will your employer be okay with that? Will you have to take time off to do so ? If so, how much would that cost?

If I were you, I'd see if you can pull off taking the bar after you graduate. If that means barely studying, so be it. The bar is a test of minimal competence and you know a decent amount of the stuff from coursework. If you landed two competitive clerkships, you can probably get away with studying less than the bar prep companies recommend. Will it be fun? No. Will you fail? Maybe, but the chances aren't high enough to not try IMO.

[Anonymous User]

I worked full-time (but only full time) for eight weeks my bar summer because I had a pretty unique opportunity come along. Working full time and studying for the bar wasn't easy or always fun, but I ended up passing with flying colors. I agree with those recommending taking the bar that summer; may as well give it a shot!

[Anonymous User]

How much time should pass before should you basically consider chance of offer slim to none after an interview? Judge I interviewed with last week said a week or two but I've heard that most offers are 24-72 hrs even when given a longer timeline?

[lavarman84]

How much time should pass before should you basically consider chance of offer slim to none after an interview? Judge I interviewed with last week said a week or two but I've heard that most offers are 24-72 hrs even when given a longer timeline?

It's idiosyncratic. If the judge said a week or two, take them at their word. There are judges who make the offer on the spot or the same day. There are judges who take months. One of the judges who hired me preferred to interview everybody and make all offers at the same time. Because of that, if you interviewed early in the process, you could end up waiting a month or two. Let your judge's timeline play out.

[Prosecutor]

If you had a choice, right after law school would it be better to do (1) federal district --> federal appellate or (2) federal appellate --> federal district?

I've heard district prepares you better for the appellate clerkship than the other way around, but that generally district is a greater workload so that might be more challenging right out of school.

[Anonymous User]

I think there are benefits to either way. The people I know who’ve done appellate then district court said they actually thought it was helpful to have that appellate background before going to the district court. And I think whether the district court is a heavier workload depends a lot on the jurisdictions involved and how they distribute work.

I think a lot of times it would just be determined by who’s hiring when.

[Anonymous User]

If you had a choice, right after law school would it be better to do (1) federal district --> federal appellate or (2) federal appellate --> federal district?

I've heard district prepares you better for the appellate clerkship than the other way around, but that generally district is a greater workload so that might be more challenging right out of school.

I would do (1) but that is not a strongly held opinion. COAs review district courts' work and as such it will be helpful to understand the work of a district court when reviewing its work. Moreover, you'll see a lot more at the district court level, which I think will better prepare you for a COA clerkship. Sure, the district court clerkship is more difficult than a COA clerkship, but after leaving law school it won't feel like anything new.

[Anonymous User]

If you had a choice, right after law school would it be better to do (1) federal district --> federal appellate or (2) federal appellate --> federal district?

I've heard district prepares you better for the appellate clerkship than the other way around, but that generally district is a greater workload so that might be more challenging right out of school.

Accidentally posted twice. See above message.

[Anonymous User]

If you had a choice, right after law school would it be better to do (1) federal district --> federal appellate or (2) federal appellate --> federal district?

I've heard district prepares you better for the appellate clerkship than the other way around, but that generally district is a greater workload so that might be more challenging right out of school.

I did appellate first and would 100% do it that way again. Appellate is very similar to the work of a law student. District is, IMHO, a significantly harder clerkship and I think the couple years of practice I had between the clerkships helped prepare me enormously for the daily challenges of docket management.

[Anonymous User]

If you had a choice, right after law school would it be better to do (1) federal district --> federal appellate or (2) federal appellate --> federal district?

I've heard district prepares you better for the appellate clerkship than the other way around, but that generally district is a greater workload so that might be more challenging right out of school.

I would do (1) but that is not a strongly held opinion. COAs review district courts' work and as such it will be helpful to understand the work of a district court when reviewing its work. Moreover, you'll see a lot more at the district court level, which I think will better prepare you for a COA clerkship. Sure, the district court clerkship is more difficult than a COA clerkship, but after leaving law school it won't feel like anything new.

District court work isn't necessarily any harder that appellate work. What is harder is the pace and volume that the work comes to you at. I've seen several fresh district court clerks, straight from law school, struggle to adapt. That struggle may be exacerbated by Zoom law school.

[Anonymous User]

If you had a choice, right after law school would it be better to do (1) federal district --> federal appellate or (2) federal appellate --> federal district?

I've heard district prepares you better for the appellate clerkship than the other way around, but that generally district is a greater workload so that might be more challenging right out of school.

I would do one appellate, that's it

[Anonymous User]

If you had a choice, right after law school would it be better to do (1) federal district --> federal appellate or (2) federal appellate --> federal district?

I've heard district prepares you better for the appellate clerkship than the other way around, but that generally district is a greater workload so that might be more challenging right out of school.

I would do one appellate, that's it

District courts are significantly more useful than appellate even though they’re less preftigious, and nowadays among the very top students district/appellate is now more common than just appellate, as you can see in SCOTUS hiring

(Caveat for Fed Soc types doing quintuple appellate)

[Anonymous User]

If you had a choice, right after law school would it be better to do (1) federal district --> federal appellate or (2) federal appellate --> federal district?

I've heard district prepares you better for the appellate clerkship than the other way around, but that generally district is a greater workload so that might be more challenging right out of school.

I would do one appellate, that's it

District courts are significantly more useful than appellate even though they’re less preftigious, and nowadays among the very top students district/appellate is now more common than just appellate, as you can see in SCOTUS hiring

(Caveat for Fed Soc types doing quintuple appellate)

Agreed with this. Some of it depends on your goals - if you want to do only pure appellate work post-clerkship, sure, do only an appellate clerkship. But if you’re doing lit more generally, district court is more useful.

Besides, the original question is premised on doing two, so saying to do only one isn’t really relevant.

[Anonymous User]

If you had a choice, right after law school would it be better to do (1) federal district --> federal appellate or (2) federal appellate --> federal district?

I've heard district prepares you better for the appellate clerkship than the other way around, but that generally district is a greater workload so that might be more challenging right out of school.

I would do one appellate, that's it

District courts are significantly more useful than appellate even though they’re less preftigious, and nowadays among the very top students district/appellate is now more common than just appellate, as you can see in SCOTUS hiring

(Caveat for Fed Soc types doing quintuple appellate)

Agreed with this. Some of it depends on your goals - if you want to do only pure appellate work post-clerkship, sure, do only an appellate clerkship. But if you’re doing lit more generally, district court is more useful.

Besides, the original question is premised on doing two, so saying to do only one isn’t really relevant.

You should do both if you want to do appellate work at a firm. Appellate groups are really law and motion groups, and being in the district court you get way more reps on dispositive motions practice and a broader exposure to different substantive areas of the law.

[Anonymous User]

If you do two, do you think the first judge's ideology/reputation creates a sort of pigeonholing into the second one. While being liberal myself, I have a Circuit clerkship with a right leaning judge (although he/she does not have a reputation for being a partisan warrior). If I want to apply to some more leftist district judges should I try to signal somehow in my cover letter or resume that I am more left leaning? Or, do most judges realize the nature of the game and that clerking for a conservative appointee does not necessarily mean you are highly conservative.

[lavarman84]

If you do two, do you think the first judge's ideology/reputation creates a sort of pigeonholing into the second one. While being liberal myself, I have a Circuit clerkship with a right leaning judge (although he/she does not have a reputation for being a partisan warrior). If I want to apply to some more leftist district judges should I try to signal somehow in my cover letter or resume that I am more left leaning? Or, do most judges realize the nature of the game and that clerking for a conservative appointee does not necessarily mean you are highly conservative.

I expect most judges understand the game, and absent conservative signaling on your resume (like FedSoc or working for GOP politicians), I think you'll be fine. If you're an ACS member or something like that, there's no harm in putting that on your resume when applying to liberal judges. But I don't think it's strictly necessary.

[Anonymous User]

If you do two, do you think the first judge's ideology/reputation creates a sort of pigeonholing into the second one. While being liberal myself, I have a Circuit clerkship with a right leaning judge (although he/she does not have a reputation for being a partisan warrior). If I want to apply to some more leftist district judges should I try to signal somehow in my cover letter or resume that I am more left leaning? Or, do most judges realize the nature of the game and that clerking for a conservative appointee does not necessarily mean you are highly conservative.

I think it does to an extent, as your first judge often helps you get your second clerkship, and they’re more likely to send you to someone like them. If you’re in ACS I would put it on your resume to make it clear to liberal judges that you’re a counterclerk.

[Anonymous User]

If you do two, do you think the first judge's ideology/reputation creates a sort of pigeonholing into the second one. While being liberal myself, I have a Circuit clerkship with a right leaning judge (although he/she does not have a reputation for being a partisan warrior). If I want to apply to some more leftist district judges should I try to signal somehow in my cover letter or resume that I am more left leaning? Or, do most judges realize the nature of the game and that clerking for a conservative appointee does not necessarily mean you are highly conservative.

I think it does to an extent, as your first judge often helps you get your second clerkship, and they’re more likely to send you to someone like them. If you’re in ACS I would put it on your resume to make it clear to liberal judges that you’re a counterclerk.

Do you think ACS on resume would suffice to signal, or should I "explain myself" in my cover letter.

[Anonymous User]

If you do two, do you think the first judge's ideology/reputation creates a sort of pigeonholing into the second one. While being liberal myself, I have a Circuit clerkship with a right leaning judge (although he/she does not have a reputation for being a partisan warrior). If I want to apply to some more leftist district judges should I try to signal somehow in my cover letter or resume that I am more left leaning? Or, do most judges realize the nature of the game and that clerking for a conservative appointee does not necessarily mean you are highly conservative.

I think it does to an extent, as your first judge often helps you get your second clerkship, and they’re more likely to send you to someone like them. If you’re in ACS I would put it on your resume to make it clear to liberal judges that you’re a counterclerk.

Do you think ACS on resume would suffice to signal, or should I "explain myself" in my cover letter.

Personally I think that would be really weird.

[lavarman84]

If you do two, do you think the first judge's ideology/reputation creates a sort of pigeonholing into the second one. While being liberal myself, I have a Circuit clerkship with a right leaning judge (although he/she does not have a reputation for being a partisan warrior). If I want to apply to some more leftist district judges should I try to signal somehow in my cover letter or resume that I am more left leaning? Or, do most judges realize the nature of the game and that clerking for a conservative appointee does not necessarily mean you are highly conservative.

I think it does to an extent, as your first judge often helps you get your second clerkship, and they’re more likely to send you to someone like them. If you’re in ACS I would put it on your resume to make it clear to liberal judges that you’re a counterclerk.

Do you think ACS on resume would suffice to signal, or should I "explain myself" in my cover letter.

ACS is enough. Don't explain yourself. Trying to explain yourself would likely hurt you. You said you're not clerking for one of the partisan warriors. The vast majority of judges and law clerks (who often do the first review) will understand.

[Anonymous User]

Just got invited for a short 20 minute interview with just the clerks for a district court judge. So I guess this is sort of like an OCS type firm screener before I get a potential callback with a judge. Does anyone in this thread who has done these type of things have any idea of what to expect?

[Anonymous User]

Just got invited for a short 20 minute interview with just the clerks for a district court judge. So I guess this is sort of like an OCS type firm screener before I get a potential callback with a judge. Does anyone in this thread who has done these type of things have any idea of what to expect?

Mine was basically the same as the clerk part of an actual interview. Why this judge, questions about resume, etc

[Anonymous User]

Just got invited for a short 20 minute interview with just the clerks for a district court judge. So I guess this is sort of like an OCS type firm screener before I get a potential callback with a judge. Does anyone in this thread who has done these type of things have any idea of what to expect?

Mine was basically the same as the clerk part of an actual interview. Why this judge, questions about resume, etc

If it's COA, be prepared for more substance-- what SCOTUS case would you overturn, best/worst justice, questions about this term, etc.

[Anonymous User]

Just got invited for a short 20 minute interview with just the clerks for a district court judge. So I guess this is sort of like an OCS type firm screener before I get a potential callback with a judge. Does anyone in this thread who has done these type of things have any idea of what to expect?

Mine was basically the same as the clerk part of an actual interview. Why this judge, questions about resume, etc

If it's COA, be prepared for more substance-- what SCOTUS case would you overturn, best/worst justice, questions about this term, etc.

Would OP really be quizzed on this stuff if it was only 20 minutes though?