Let's Talk 2d Circuit! (2015-16 & beyond) Forum

[Anonymous User]

Okay man, let us know when your statistical proof of clerkship prestige variations is ready.

It would be pretty great if that's what I had said, right? Alas, I never said I would statistically prove "clerkship prestige variations." (And I never would say that, because I like to define my terms.) What I did say was that I was pretty sure I could disprove your statement that if a substantial portion of the top candidates don't apply for certain clerkships year after year, the clerks filling those positions won't be, on average, of lower quality than those filling other clerkships to which a substantial portion of the top candidates do apply.

[Anonymous User]

Okay man, let us know when your statistical proof of clerkship prestige variations is ready.

It would be pretty great if that's what I had said, right? Alas, I never said I would statistically prove "clerkship prestige variations." (And I never would say that, because I like to define my terms.) What I did say was that I was pretty sure I could disprove your statement that if a substantial portion of the top candidates don't apply for certain clerkships year after year, the clerks filling those positions won't be, on average, of lower quality than those filling other clerkships to which a substantial portion of the top candidates do apply.

I was joking, boss.

You haven't actually defined any terms (which is fine, of course), but assuming that you don't define "substantial" to mean something more than 50% of the total, it can be true both that "a substantial portion" of top candidates don't apply to 2d Cir judges outside of the city and that "a substantial portion" of top candidates do. Your paraphrase of my statement seems to imply (or to assume) that this isn't so. Even if you do define "substantial" to mean a majority or something more than a majority (I don't, though this could be context-specific), you still need to consider the number of positions. Your reasoning is surely sound that, in general, other things equal, a larger pool of applicants competing for a smaller number of positions ensures a "stronger" resulting group. But a significant reduction in the size of the pool, and even a reduction weighted toward the high end, means something very different if the number of applicants in the pool is 3 or 4 or 5 times the number of positions, or if it is dozens or hundreds of times larger than the number of positions. So long as it remains true that enough top candidates are applying to non-city 2d Cir judges that those judges can, if they choose, fill every position with them, then the number of those top candidates in the respective pools should be able to vary without a necessary reduction in quality. Maybe you don't believe that 2d Cir judges outside of the city can fill every position with top candidates from top schools, and then, fine, we're talking past each other. On the grounds of various first-hand information that I obviously won't go into on a public forum, I'm very confident that they can. I believe it's likely true that the number of absolutely amazing candidates they have to choose from is somewhat smaller than, for instance, my judge gets in the city, but they still have more than enough to choose from.

That being said, the fact that you exist and you're pressing this point is sufficient proof of something relevant to the original (now mostly lost) question: there are people who will consider your 2d Cir clerkship less prestigious solely because your judge doesn't keep his or her chambers in the city. I still suspect, though admittedly on weaker ground, that what I said earlier is true about such people being few enough in number and usually small enough in importance that original questioner shouldn't worry about it.

[Anonymous User]

This is not exactly 2nd circuit, but does anyone know why SDNY Judge Richard Sullivan has a last minute opening up on OSCAR for 2014-2015? It seems odd to have an opening this late in the process.

[Anonymous User]

Well, it's within the Second Circuit, and it's more on-topic, so let's discuss!

I practice in the Second Circuit and have been in front of Judge Sullivan and he doesn't strike me as the kind of judge who'd wait until the last minute to hire someone. Maybe some sort of emergency replacement? The "why" doesn't really matter beyond the fact that I doubt he just didn't have his act together.

[Anonymous User]

I assume Lynch has already put out his interview requests since interviews are next week?

[Anonymous User]

I assume Lynch has already put out his interview requests since interviews are next week?

Yes. Lynch is done calling people for interviews.

[Anonymous User]

Livingston, Parker, Winter, and Carney still have 2015 spots available.

[Anonymous User]

Raggi might have one spot open.

[Anonymous User]

Is Winter's hiring ideologically based? I've had experience in front of him and it makes me wonder. It's not that he's unfair, because he seems plenty fair -- just conservative.

[Anonymous User]

Is Winter's hiring ideologically based? I've had experience in front of him and it makes me wonder. It's not that he's unfair, because he seems plenty fair -- just conservative.

Based on the people I know who have clerked for him, absolutely not.