SSC v. Fed Mag Forum

[username5101520]

I can't really comment on "prestige" (because it really does matter so little), but having practiced for a half-dozen years, I'd say the MJ is much more valuable for most biglaw jobs. As a biglaw associate in most of the major markets, you'll do relatively little state court litigation and odds are you won't have a big appellate docket. But assuming you're in litigation, you're very likely to be involved in complex discovery disputes in federal court, which is a lot of what MJ's do. An MJ would have been much more relevant to the projects I had as a securities/complex commercial litigation associate at a V20 than my CoA clerkship was.

The MJ is going to be far more relevant as well if you want to be an AUSA or FPD since they handle almost everything pretrial on the criminal side.

The SSC is going to get you a bonus at more firms, and is better for getting appellate work, or if you anticipate a lot of your practice being in state court in the state where you clerked, which will be more common in midlaw than in biglaw. As others have referenced here, SCOTX is probably uniquely helpful for Texas biglaw since the tippy-top Texas firms seem to be in state court more often than the comparable firms in other big states (NY, CA, etc.).

Fwiw MJs did not do much criminal work beyond initial appearances in my district. But in some they e.g. take guilty pleas too. MJ duties will vary by district (a particularly well-known difference is SDNY vs. EDNY).

What's the SDNY to EDNY difference? I hadn't heard of that. I know there's a strong culture of consenting to MJ jurisdiction in the SDNY White Plains bar (idk about Manhattan).

[Anonymous User]

I can't really comment on "prestige" (because it really does matter so little), but having practiced for a half-dozen years, I'd say the MJ is much more valuable for most biglaw jobs. As a biglaw associate in most of the major markets, you'll do relatively little state court litigation and odds are you won't have a big appellate docket. But assuming you're in litigation, you're very likely to be involved in complex discovery disputes in federal court, which is a lot of what MJ's do. An MJ would have been much more relevant to the projects I had as a securities/complex commercial litigation associate at a V20 than my CoA clerkship was.

The MJ is going to be far more relevant as well if you want to be an AUSA or FPD since they handle almost everything pretrial on the criminal side.

The SSC is going to get you a bonus at more firms, and is better for getting appellate work, or if you anticipate a lot of your practice being in state court in the state where you clerked, which will be more common in midlaw than in biglaw. As others have referenced here, SCOTX is probably uniquely helpful for Texas biglaw since the tippy-top Texas firms seem to be in state court more often than the comparable firms in other big states (NY, CA, etc.).

Fwiw MJs did not do much criminal work beyond initial appearances in my district. But in some they e.g. take guilty pleas too. MJ duties will vary by district (a particularly well-known difference is SDNY vs. EDNY).

Yeah good point. In my district, they handle everything from initial appearance up until either a guilty plea or motion to suppress (or trial). So bail, discovery, the bulk of pretrial motions etc., are in front of MJ's.