Best and worst judges to clerk for Forum

(Seek and share information about clerkship applications, clerkship hiring timelines, and post-clerkship employment opportunities)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are sharing sensitive information about clerkship applications and clerkship hiring. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned."
Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Jun 29, 2022 6:22 pm

Which judges are especially known for “going to bat” for their clerks?

If a judge isn’t particularly aggressive about networking or actively pushing clerks for job opportunities (or a second clerkship), is that a bad thing? Or is it pretty common for judges to be more passive recommenders — like they’ll serve as a strong reference if asked and if you were a great clerk but won’t go out of their way to get you in front of people?

Just wondering if applying for the Bristow or an additional super-competitive clerkship would be basically a waste of time if my judge isn’t affirmatively reaching out to the SG’s office or a colleague, for example, to flag my application

GoneSouth

Bronze
Posts: 375
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:00 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by GoneSouth » Thu Jun 30, 2022 2:18 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jun 28, 2022 2:06 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jun 28, 2022 9:04 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jun 28, 2022 3:10 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Jun 27, 2022 11:44 am
I’ve also heard good things through the grapevine about Collins.
The Collins chambers is notoriously behind on work, and has been basically from the moment he started hearing cases. I find it hard to believe that it would be enjoyable to spend your clerkship perpetually playing catch up
Doesn’t the Miller chambers have the same issue?
I’ve heard fantastic things about the Miller experience; while slow judges can be irritating on panels, having a relatively relaxed boss isn’t necessarily bad for clerks!
I am liberal but have a lot of respect for Miller. He is incredibly smart and probably as close as anyone on that court to what I think a judge should be—non-ideological and calls it like he sees it. I hadn’t heard he was behind on work, but I feel pretty confident that nobody else is at the Collins level of backlog.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jun 30, 2022 4:52 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Jun 29, 2022 6:22 pm
Which judges are especially known for “going to bat” for their clerks?

If a judge isn’t particularly aggressive about networking or actively pushing clerks for job opportunities (or a second clerkship), is that a bad thing? Or is it pretty common for judges to be more passive recommenders — like they’ll serve as a strong reference if asked and if you were a great clerk but won’t go out of their way to get you in front of people? ....
You could try to find out before accepting an offer, if your law school maintains a list or database of former clerks.

I'm clerking for my third judge, and all three have a policy of serving only as telephonic references. This is not helpful for U.S. Attorney's Offices that require three recommendation letters.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jun 30, 2022 11:22 am

GoneSouth wrote:
Thu Jun 30, 2022 2:18 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jun 28, 2022 2:06 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jun 28, 2022 9:04 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jun 28, 2022 3:10 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Jun 27, 2022 11:44 am
I’ve also heard good things through the grapevine about Collins.
The Collins chambers is notoriously behind on work, and has been basically from the moment he started hearing cases. I find it hard to believe that it would be enjoyable to spend your clerkship perpetually playing catch up
Doesn’t the Miller chambers have the same issue?
I’ve heard fantastic things about the Miller experience; while slow judges can be irritating on panels, having a relatively relaxed boss isn’t necessarily bad for clerks!
I am liberal but have a lot of respect for Miller. He is incredibly smart and probably as close as anyone on that court to what I think a judge should be—non-ideological and calls it like he sees it. I hadn’t heard he was behind on work, but I feel pretty confident that nobody else is at the Collins level of backlog.
I just don’t see how this is possible. Miller had been on the court longer but has issued at least 10 fewer precedential majority opinions than Collins has. If you’re a Ninth Circuit clerk with some insider knowledge, then just say so, but by the bare facts, I’m not sure how you can be so confident.

To be clear, I totally respect Miller—he’s probably the closest to a true centrist and minimalist on the Ninth. But I don’t think being aggressive in calling for en banc or voicing one’s separate views is necessarily a bad thing.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jun 30, 2022 1:58 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Jun 30, 2022 11:22 am
GoneSouth wrote:
Thu Jun 30, 2022 2:18 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jun 28, 2022 2:06 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jun 28, 2022 9:04 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jun 28, 2022 3:10 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Jun 27, 2022 11:44 am
I’ve also heard good things through the grapevine about Collins.
The Collins chambers is notoriously behind on work, and has been basically from the moment he started hearing cases. I find it hard to believe that it would be enjoyable to spend your clerkship perpetually playing catch up
Doesn’t the Miller chambers have the same issue?
I’ve heard fantastic things about the Miller experience; while slow judges can be irritating on panels, having a relatively relaxed boss isn’t necessarily bad for clerks!
I am liberal but have a lot of respect for Miller. He is incredibly smart and probably as close as anyone on that court to what I think a judge should be—non-ideological and calls it like he sees it. I hadn’t heard he was behind on work, but I feel pretty confident that nobody else is at the Collins level of backlog.
I just don’t see how this is possible. Miller had been on the court longer but has issued at least 10 fewer precedential majority opinions than Collins has. If you’re a Ninth Circuit clerk with some insider knowledge, then just say so, but by the bare facts, I’m not sure how you can be so confident.

To be clear, I totally respect Miller—he’s probably the closest to a true centrist and minimalist on the Ninth. But I don’t think being aggressive in calling for en banc or voicing one’s separate views is necessarily a bad thing.
My impression of Miller, albeit from just my one term at the court, was that he was a bit more conservative than Milan Smith (the truest centrist on the court), but unlike Smith, Miller completely ghosts on the en banc process. Miller never shows his cards unless he needs to, and I'm not sure he's ever joined a dissental, but when he's been drawn for a panel he's seemed less likely to side with the liberals than Smith. Smith on the other hand will sometimes write a forceful dissental.

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jun 30, 2022 2:05 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Jun 30, 2022 1:58 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Jun 30, 2022 11:22 am
GoneSouth wrote:
Thu Jun 30, 2022 2:18 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jun 28, 2022 2:06 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jun 28, 2022 9:04 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jun 28, 2022 3:10 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Jun 27, 2022 11:44 am
I’ve also heard good things through the grapevine about Collins.
The Collins chambers is notoriously behind on work, and has been basically from the moment he started hearing cases. I find it hard to believe that it would be enjoyable to spend your clerkship perpetually playing catch up
Doesn’t the Miller chambers have the same issue?
I’ve heard fantastic things about the Miller experience; while slow judges can be irritating on panels, having a relatively relaxed boss isn’t necessarily bad for clerks!
I am liberal but have a lot of respect for Miller. He is incredibly smart and probably as close as anyone on that court to what I think a judge should be—non-ideological and calls it like he sees it. I hadn’t heard he was behind on work, but I feel pretty confident that nobody else is at the Collins level of backlog.
I just don’t see how this is possible. Miller had been on the court longer but has issued at least 10 fewer precedential majority opinions than Collins has. If you’re a Ninth Circuit clerk with some insider knowledge, then just say so, but by the bare facts, I’m not sure how you can be so confident.

To be clear, I totally respect Miller—he’s probably the closest to a true centrist and minimalist on the Ninth. But I don’t think being aggressive in calling for en banc or voicing one’s separate views is necessarily a bad thing.
My impression of Miller, albeit from just my one term at the court, was that he was a bit more conservative than Milan Smith (the truest centrist on the court), but unlike Smith, Miller completely ghosts on the en banc process. Miller never shows his cards unless he needs to, and I'm not sure he's ever joined a dissental, but when he's been drawn for a panel he's seemed less likely to side with the liberals than Smith. Smith on the other hand will sometimes write a forceful dissental.
Is calling for en banc rehearing frowned upon in the 9th?

Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jun 30, 2022 2:15 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Jun 30, 2022 2:05 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Jun 30, 2022 1:58 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Jun 30, 2022 11:22 am
GoneSouth wrote:
Thu Jun 30, 2022 2:18 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jun 28, 2022 2:06 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jun 28, 2022 9:04 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jun 28, 2022 3:10 am


The Collins chambers is notoriously behind on work, and has been basically from the moment he started hearing cases. I find it hard to believe that it would be enjoyable to spend your clerkship perpetually playing catch up
Doesn’t the Miller chambers have the same issue?
I’ve heard fantastic things about the Miller experience; while slow judges can be irritating on panels, having a relatively relaxed boss isn’t necessarily bad for clerks!
I am liberal but have a lot of respect for Miller. He is incredibly smart and probably as close as anyone on that court to what I think a judge should be—non-ideological and calls it like he sees it. I hadn’t heard he was behind on work, but I feel pretty confident that nobody else is at the Collins level of backlog.
I just don’t see how this is possible. Miller had been on the court longer but has issued at least 10 fewer precedential majority opinions than Collins has. If you’re a Ninth Circuit clerk with some insider knowledge, then just say so, but by the bare facts, I’m not sure how you can be so confident.

To be clear, I totally respect Miller—he’s probably the closest to a true centrist and minimalist on the Ninth. But I don’t think being aggressive in calling for en banc or voicing one’s separate views is necessarily a bad thing.
My impression of Miller, albeit from just my one term at the court, was that he was a bit more conservative than Milan Smith (the truest centrist on the court), but unlike Smith, Miller completely ghosts on the en banc process. Miller never shows his cards unless he needs to, and I'm not sure he's ever joined a dissental, but when he's been drawn for a panel he's seemed less likely to side with the liberals than Smith. Smith on the other hand will sometimes write a forceful dissental.
Is calling for en banc rehearing frowned upon in the 9th?
Not whatsoever, which is why Miller kind of stands out. I noticed over my year that Miller just about never supported conservative en banc maneuvers (e.g., writing and joining dissentals), but never supported liberal en banc maneuvers either, and voted fairly regularly with the conservatives when he was drawn for a panel.

The other Trump appointees--Collins most notably, but even some center-right ones like Bennett--were much more active in calling cases en banc and the en banc process generally.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Sat Jul 02, 2022 12:40 am

I think Miller generally takes a narrow view of which issues are en banc worthy—i.e., he may think a decision is wrong but that it’s not important enough to be taken en banc. I think he actually wrote a concurrence on this at one point.

I do have some bit of insider knowledge and can say with confidence that Miller is not close as far behind as Collins. Simply looking at the number of published opinions they’ve issued is not a good metric because it’s largely up to the writing judge which cases they write opinions for and which ones they resolve in unpublished dispositions (obviously subject to consultation with the rest of the panel). Collins was interested in writing a lot of opinions (which require a significant amount of work) and, in my view, ended up biting off more than he could chew. Hence why he had a backlog. Miller probably took a more realistic opinion of what his chambers could handle and thus has written fewer opinions.

If you look at the number of opinions each judge has written, say in the last two years, you’ll see that it varies widely. This is more of a function of how interested each judge is in writing opinions (and a significant degree of chance in getting assigned cases likely to become opinions) as opposed to how fast or slow a judge is in getting decisions out. Several of the Trump judges came into the job with a view that a lot of Ninth Circuit law was wrong and a determination to change it (like the current SCOTUS…). They have therefore decided to publish a lot of opinions to shape the law more to their liking. Others, like Miller, have less of an agenda and are more content to resolve each case on its own terms rather than looking for vehicles to alter or make new precedent.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Sat Jul 02, 2022 2:23 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Sat Jul 02, 2022 12:40 am
I think Miller generally takes a narrow view of which issues are en banc worthy—i.e., he may think a decision is wrong but that it’s not important enough to be taken en banc. I think he actually wrote a concurrence on this at one point.

I do have some bit of insider knowledge and can say with confidence that Miller is not close as far behind as Collins. Simply looking at the number of published opinions they’ve issued is not a good metric because it’s largely up to the writing judge which cases they write opinions for and which ones they resolve in unpublished dispositions (obviously subject to consultation with the rest of the panel). Collins was interested in writing a lot of opinions (which require a significant amount of work) and, in my view, ended up biting off more than he could chew. Hence why he had a backlog. Miller probably took a more realistic opinion of what his chambers could handle and thus has written fewer opinions.

If you look at the number of opinions each judge has written, say in the last two years, you’ll see that it varies widely. This is more of a function of how interested each judge is in writing opinions (and a significant degree of chance in getting assigned cases likely to become opinions) as opposed to how fast or slow a judge is in getting decisions out. Several of the Trump judges came into the job with a view that a lot of Ninth Circuit law was wrong and a determination to change it (like the current SCOTUS…). They have therefore decided to publish a lot of opinions to shape the law more to their liking. Others, like Miller, have less of an agenda and are more content to resolve each case on its own terms rather than looking for vehicles to alter or make new precedent.
Wonderful response. Thank you for the clarity and insight!

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Jul 03, 2022 1:47 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Sat Jul 02, 2022 12:40 am
If you look at the number of opinions each judge has written, say in the last two years, you’ll see that it varies widely. This is more of a function of how interested each judge is in writing opinions (and a significant degree of chance in getting assigned cases likely to become opinions) as opposed to how fast or slow a judge is in getting decisions out. Several of the Trump judges came into the job with a view that a lot of Ninth Circuit law was wrong and a determination to change it (like the current SCOTUS…). They have therefore decided to publish a lot of opinions to shape the law more to their liking. Others, like Miller, have less of an agenda and are more content to resolve each case on its own terms rather than looking for vehicles to alter or make new precedent.
Obviously a politically biased take. Are these statistics available anywhere? It doesn't ring true at all, only maybe on en banc panels, which is where Circuit precedent is meant to be changed anyway.

Some judges take way longer than others to get opinions out. It depends on lots of things, ultimately how the judge manages their workload and chambers. Some use externs, some sit in places with more straightforward cases, some don't even participate in the bench memo sharing process. It does not boil down to a preference for writing published vs. unpublished opinions and partisan politics. Panels are happy to write unpublished opinions where possible due to the universally heavy workloads.

And for what it's worth, in my experience the Trump appointees write much shorter opinions on average.
I haven't seen any discrepancy in frequency of published vs. unpublished, but I haven't seen these statistics compiled anywhere.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Jul 03, 2022 9:03 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jul 03, 2022 1:47 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Sat Jul 02, 2022 12:40 am
If you look at the number of opinions each judge has written, say in the last two years, you’ll see that it varies widely. This is more of a function of how interested each judge is in writing opinions (and a significant degree of chance in getting assigned cases likely to become opinions) as opposed to how fast or slow a judge is in getting decisions out. Several of the Trump judges came into the job with a view that a lot of Ninth Circuit law was wrong and a determination to change it (like the current SCOTUS…). They have therefore decided to publish a lot of opinions to shape the law more to their liking. Others, like Miller, have less of an agenda and are more content to resolve each case on its own terms rather than looking for vehicles to alter or make new precedent.
Obviously a politically biased take. Are these statistics available anywhere? It doesn't ring true at all, only maybe on en banc panels, which is where Circuit precedent is meant to be changed anyway.

Some judges take way longer than others to get opinions out. It depends on lots of things, ultimately how the judge manages their workload and chambers. Some use externs, some sit in places with more straightforward cases, some don't even participate in the bench memo sharing process. It does not boil down to a preference for writing published vs. unpublished opinions and partisan politics. Panels are happy to write unpublished opinions where possible due to the universally heavy workloads.

And for what it's worth, in my experience the Trump appointees write much shorter opinions on average.
I haven't seen any discrepancy in frequency of published vs. unpublished, but I haven't seen these statistics compiled anywhere.
I’m confused by this response. My experience has definitely been that judges vary significantly in how much they want to publish - some want to publish frequently, some don’t. And I’m also surprised at the idea that it’s controversial to think that judges selected expressly for their political leanings/specific jurisprudence wouldn’t be expressing that in their decisions about writing opinions. (I know everything is political blah blah blah but FedSoc has a much more focused agenda they’re seeking to advance in judicial appointments - it’s kind of the whole point.)

Obviously how a judge runs their chambers plays a big role in this but that doesn’t eliminate the political angle.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Jul 03, 2022 9:03 am

To clarify, I wasn’t saying it was purely partisan. Just that many (but not all) of the new Trump judges are interested in writing a lot of opinions. There are a handful of cases that are always going to be opinions because of their prominence or because they raise truly novel issues. But beyond that, the writing judge has a ton of discretion in deciding what they want to publish.

It’s pretty easy to see how many opinions each judge has written. The Ninth Circuit opinions page allows you to sort by authoring judge. Judge Collins has issued 32 opinions since January 1, 2021. Compare that with some of the judges who have been on the court longer: Wardlaw (17), Rawlinson (8), Watford (15), etc. Anyone who suggests that the number of published opinions doesn’t vary widely largely based on the judge’s own interest in publishing is uninformed.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Jul 03, 2022 2:16 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jul 03, 2022 9:03 am
To clarify, I wasn’t saying it was purely partisan. Just that many (but not all) of the new Trump judges are interested in writing a lot of opinions. There are a handful of cases that are always going to be opinions because of their prominence or because they raise truly novel issues. But beyond that, the writing judge has a ton of discretion in deciding what they want to publish.

It’s pretty easy to see how many opinions each judge has written. The Ninth Circuit opinions page allows you to sort by authoring judge. Judge Collins has issued 32 opinions since January 1, 2021. Compare that with some of the judges who have been on the court longer: Wardlaw (17), Rawlinson (8), Watford (15), etc. Anyone who suggests that the number of published opinions doesn’t vary widely largely based on the judge’s own interest in publishing is uninformed.
Wow I played around with that and saw Owens has only written FIVE opinions since 1/1/21. Anyone got insight into that? Surely he’s heard like 200 cases since January 2021, no way he’s only encountered a publishable issue 5 times. Rawlinson at 8 also seems really low. Are they just rubber stamping everything or something?

Register now!

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

It's still FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Jul 03, 2022 2:45 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jul 03, 2022 2:16 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jul 03, 2022 9:03 am
To clarify, I wasn’t saying it was purely partisan. Just that many (but not all) of the new Trump judges are interested in writing a lot of opinions. There are a handful of cases that are always going to be opinions because of their prominence or because they raise truly novel issues. But beyond that, the writing judge has a ton of discretion in deciding what they want to publish.

It’s pretty easy to see how many opinions each judge has written. The Ninth Circuit opinions page allows you to sort by authoring judge. Judge Collins has issued 32 opinions since January 1, 2021. Compare that with some of the judges who have been on the court longer: Wardlaw (17), Rawlinson (8), Watford (15), etc. Anyone who suggests that the number of published opinions doesn’t vary widely largely based on the judge’s own interest in publishing is uninformed.
Wow I played around with that and saw Owens has only written FIVE opinions since 1/1/21. Anyone got insight into that? Surely he’s heard like 200 cases since January 2021, no way he’s only encountered a publishable issue 5 times. Rawlinson at 8 also seems really low. Are they just rubber stamping everything or something?
to be clear, I don't know anything about these specific judges and their practices, but some judges are way more conservative (for lack of a better word) about publishing than others (I mean that in an entirely non-partisan way). It doesn't mean rubber stamping cases - you can absolutely reverse the district court without choosing to publish the opinion. It's just about what kind of standard you hold for believing something should be published. And a ton of issues that appear before the court are routine and don't change anything about settled law, even if the district court gets it wrong.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Jul 03, 2022 4:34 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jul 03, 2022 1:47 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Sat Jul 02, 2022 12:40 am
If you look at the number of opinions each judge has written, say in the last two years, you’ll see that it varies widely. This is more of a function of how interested each judge is in writing opinions (and a significant degree of chance in getting assigned cases likely to become opinions) as opposed to how fast or slow a judge is in getting decisions out. Several of the Trump judges came into the job with a view that a lot of Ninth Circuit law was wrong and a determination to change it (like the current SCOTUS…). They have therefore decided to publish a lot of opinions to shape the law more to their liking. Others, like Miller, have less of an agenda and are more content to resolve each case on its own terms rather than looking for vehicles to alter or make new precedent.
Obviously a politically biased take. Are these statistics available anywhere? It doesn't ring true at all, only maybe on en banc panels, which is where Circuit precedent is meant to be changed anyway.

Some judges take way longer than others to get opinions out. It depends on lots of things, ultimately how the judge manages their workload and chambers. Some use externs, some sit in places with more straightforward cases, some don't even participate in the bench memo sharing process. It does not boil down to a preference for writing published vs. unpublished opinions and partisan politics. Panels are happy to write unpublished opinions where possible due to the universally heavy workloads.

And for what it's worth, in my experience the Trump appointees write much shorter opinions on average.
I haven't seen any discrepancy in frequency of published vs. unpublished, but I haven't seen these statistics compiled anywhere.
This is very confusing. As has been noted on here, it’s well-known in these circles that e.g. Bress and Collins want to write a ton and that e.g. Owens wants to write rarely. Some judges apply something closer to the Second Circuit’s standard for publication, i.e. that even if it’s a reversal, you only publish if you are genuinely addressing something unsettled.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Jul 04, 2022 1:52 am

^I’d thought that was the standard for pretty much all of the CA9 judges. I don’t know of any judge who wants to publish every case they reverse in—in fact, I think there are a lot of judges for whom affirming vs. reversing plays no role in whether they decide to publish. Unpublished reversals happen all the time.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Jul 04, 2022 11:58 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jul 03, 2022 2:16 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jul 03, 2022 9:03 am
To clarify, I wasn’t saying it was purely partisan. Just that many (but not all) of the new Trump judges are interested in writing a lot of opinions. There are a handful of cases that are always going to be opinions because of their prominence or because they raise truly novel issues. But beyond that, the writing judge has a ton of discretion in deciding what they want to publish.

It’s pretty easy to see how many opinions each judge has written. The Ninth Circuit opinions page allows you to sort by authoring judge. Judge Collins has issued 32 opinions since January 1, 2021. Compare that with some of the judges who have been on the court longer: Wardlaw (17), Rawlinson (8), Watford (15), etc. Anyone who suggests that the number of published opinions doesn’t vary widely largely based on the judge’s own interest in publishing is uninformed.
Wow I played around with that and saw Owens has only written FIVE opinions since 1/1/21. Anyone got insight into that? Surely he’s heard like 200 cases since January 2021, no way he’s only encountered a publishable issue 5 times. Rawlinson at 8 also seems really low. Are they just rubber stamping everything or something?
Rawlinson is s l o o o o o o o w. As in painfully, waiting six months for her to concur in a 3 page memorandum disposition slow. I think that her count of 8 opinions is probably a product of her backlog, her reluctance to take on new opinions, and perhaps other judges being reluctant to assign her opinions when she does not chair the panel (although these days, she's going to be chairing most of the panels she sits on).

Get unlimited access to all forums and topics

Register now!

I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...


Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Jul 06, 2022 5:22 pm

Several of the Trump judges came into the job with a view that a lot of Ninth Circuit law was wrong and a determination to change it (like the current SCOTUS…). They have therefore decided to publish a lot of opinions to shape the law more to their liking. Others, like Miller, have less of an agenda and are more content to resolve each case on its own terms rather than looking for vehicles to alter or make new precedent.
Can confirm. I would also add that their are several of these judges who see to be more likely to push a case into an opinion when they are in dissent, so that they can have their dissent published. Even when, in my view, new law was really not being made. Which is incredibly annoying if you're the clerk for the writing judge being forced to write an opinion for no real reason, and then often you have wait a long while for their dissent and the inevitable back and forth...

I also want to add, in case it is not clear, that there is an actual backlog report that gets sent around at various times where you can see a judge's backlog, so those of us who are saying it's clear who has a backlog are speaking about cold hard fact in terms of the backlog existing. WHY it exists (decision to write lots of opinions vs. spending a lot of time on en banc calls vs. internal chambers processes that just take a while) is more up for speculation.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Jul 06, 2022 10:11 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Jul 06, 2022 5:22 pm
Several of the Trump judges came into the job with a view that a lot of Ninth Circuit law was wrong and a determination to change it (like the current SCOTUS…). They have therefore decided to publish a lot of opinions to shape the law more to their liking. Others, like Miller, have less of an agenda and are more content to resolve each case on its own terms rather than looking for vehicles to alter or make new precedent.
Can confirm. I would also add that their are several of these judges who see to be more likely to push a case into an opinion when they are in dissent, so that they can have their dissent published. Even when, in my view, new law was really not being made. Which is incredibly annoying if you're the clerk for the writing judge being forced to write an opinion for no real reason, and then often you have wait a long while for their dissent and the inevitable back and forth...

I also want to add, in case it is not clear, that there is an actual backlog report that gets sent around at various times where you can see a judge's backlog, so those of us who are saying it's clear who has a backlog are speaking about cold hard fact in terms of the backlog existing. WHY it exists (decision to write lots of opinions vs. spending a lot of time on en banc calls vs. internal chambers processes that just take a while) is more up for speculation.
Isn't this the nature of dissenting...? It would be strange to have a mem dispo with a dissent, since memorandum dispositions indicate straightforward application of law with no disagreement among the panel. If there's a valid, good faith disagreement between two judges on a panel, I'd expect them to publicly explain their views and the nature of the disagreement in a published opinion. This has been fundamental to appellate jurisprudence for over 500 years. I'm sorry you find it annoying, but I'm not sure what a clerk would do if the judges were just agreeing with each other all the time.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jul 07, 2022 12:01 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Jul 06, 2022 10:11 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Jul 06, 2022 5:22 pm
Several of the Trump judges came into the job with a view that a lot of Ninth Circuit law was wrong and a determination to change it (like the current SCOTUS…). They have therefore decided to publish a lot of opinions to shape the law more to their liking. Others, like Miller, have less of an agenda and are more content to resolve each case on its own terms rather than looking for vehicles to alter or make new precedent.
Can confirm. I would also add that their are several of these judges who see to be more likely to push a case into an opinion when they are in dissent, so that they can have their dissent published. Even when, in my view, new law was really not being made. Which is incredibly annoying if you're the clerk for the writing judge being forced to write an opinion for no real reason, and then often you have wait a long while for their dissent and the inevitable back and forth...

I also want to add, in case it is not clear, that there is an actual backlog report that gets sent around at various times where you can see a judge's backlog, so those of us who are saying it's clear who has a backlog are speaking about cold hard fact in terms of the backlog existing. WHY it exists (decision to write lots of opinions vs. spending a lot of time on en banc calls vs. internal chambers processes that just take a while) is more up for speculation.
Isn't this the nature of dissenting...? It would be strange to have a mem dispo with a dissent, since memorandum dispositions indicate straightforward application of law with no disagreement among the panel. If there's a valid, good faith disagreement between two judges on a panel, I'd expect them to publicly explain their views and the nature of the disagreement in a published opinion. This has been fundamental to appellate jurisprudence for over 500 years. I'm sorry you find it annoying, but I'm not sure what a clerk would do if the judges were just agreeing with each other all the time.
Regardless of what you think has happened in the last 500 years, memdispo dissents are fairly common. I bet if you looked at the ninth circuit unpublished opinions page that there have been close to a dozen in the last month.

There are plenty of reasons why judges could disagree but there still wouldn’t be a need to publish to make new law—for example, if the judges agreed on the law but disagreed about the factual inferences to be drawn from a particular record

Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jul 07, 2022 10:02 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Jun 29, 2022 6:22 pm
Which judges are especially known for “going to bat” for their clerks?

If a judge isn’t particularly aggressive about networking or actively pushing clerks for job opportunities (or a second clerkship), is that a bad thing? Or is it pretty common for judges to be more passive recommenders — like they’ll serve as a strong reference if asked and if you were a great clerk but won’t go out of their way to get you in front of people?

Just wondering if applying for the Bristow or an additional super-competitive clerkship would be basically a waste of time if my judge isn’t affirmatively reaching out to the SG’s office or a colleague, for example, to flag my application
Like somebody said earlier, Boasberg is known for going to bat for his clerks. Moss also.

While I don’t have first-hand knowledge of the SDNY/EDNY/2 world, friends have told me that Furman is especially known for going all-in for his clerks by introducing them to people, making phone calls, etc.

Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.

Register now, it's still FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jul 07, 2022 12:56 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Jul 07, 2022 10:02 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Jun 29, 2022 6:22 pm
Which judges are especially known for “going to bat” for their clerks?

If a judge isn’t particularly aggressive about networking or actively pushing clerks for job opportunities (or a second clerkship), is that a bad thing? Or is it pretty common for judges to be more passive recommenders — like they’ll serve as a strong reference if asked and if you were a great clerk but won’t go out of their way to get you in front of people?

Just wondering if applying for the Bristow or an additional super-competitive clerkship would be basically a waste of time if my judge isn’t affirmatively reaching out to the SG’s office or a colleague, for example, to flag my application
Like somebody said earlier, Boasberg is known for going to bat for his clerks. Moss also.

While I don’t have first-hand knowledge of the SDNY/EDNY/2 world, friends have told me that Furman is especially known for going all-in for his clerks by introducing them to people, making phone calls, etc.
Based on my (also) limited knowledge, I'd add Oetken and Abrams as SDNY judges who really go to bat for their clerks.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jul 07, 2022 4:46 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Jul 07, 2022 12:01 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Jul 06, 2022 10:11 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Jul 06, 2022 5:22 pm
Several of the Trump judges came into the job with a view that a lot of Ninth Circuit law was wrong and a determination to change it (like the current SCOTUS…). They have therefore decided to publish a lot of opinions to shape the law more to their liking. Others, like Miller, have less of an agenda and are more content to resolve each case on its own terms rather than looking for vehicles to alter or make new precedent.
Can confirm. I would also add that their are several of these judges who see to be more likely to push a case into an opinion when they are in dissent, so that they can have their dissent published. Even when, in my view, new law was really not being made. Which is incredibly annoying if you're the clerk for the writing judge being forced to write an opinion for no real reason, and then often you have wait a long while for their dissent and the inevitable back and forth...

I also want to add, in case it is not clear, that there is an actual backlog report that gets sent around at various times where you can see a judge's backlog, so those of us who are saying it's clear who has a backlog are speaking about cold hard fact in terms of the backlog existing. WHY it exists (decision to write lots of opinions vs. spending a lot of time on en banc calls vs. internal chambers processes that just take a while) is more up for speculation.
Isn't this the nature of dissenting...? It would be strange to have a mem dispo with a dissent, since memorandum dispositions indicate straightforward application of law with no disagreement among the panel. If there's a valid, good faith disagreement between two judges on a panel, I'd expect them to publicly explain their views and the nature of the disagreement in a published opinion. This has been fundamental to appellate jurisprudence for over 500 years. I'm sorry you find it annoying, but I'm not sure what a clerk would do if the judges were just agreeing with each other all the time.
Regardless of what you think has happened in the last 500 years, memdispo dissents are fairly common. I bet if you looked at the ninth circuit unpublished opinions page that there have been close to a dozen in the last month.

There are plenty of reasons why judges could disagree but there still wouldn’t be a need to publish to make new law—for example, if the judges agreed on the law but disagreed about the factual inferences to be drawn from a particular record
But in that case it wouldn't be very onerous to write the published vs. unpublished opinion if you're in the majority. Unpublished opinions have only been around for a generation or so, published dissents have been around for much longer than 500 years.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428122
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jul 07, 2022 9:37 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Jul 07, 2022 4:46 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Jul 07, 2022 12:01 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Jul 06, 2022 10:11 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Jul 06, 2022 5:22 pm
Several of the Trump judges came into the job with a view that a lot of Ninth Circuit law was wrong and a determination to change it (like the current SCOTUS…). They have therefore decided to publish a lot of opinions to shape the law more to their liking. Others, like Miller, have less of an agenda and are more content to resolve each case on its own terms rather than looking for vehicles to alter or make new precedent.
Can confirm. I would also add that their are several of these judges who see to be more likely to push a case into an opinion when they are in dissent, so that they can have their dissent published. Even when, in my view, new law was really not being made. Which is incredibly annoying if you're the clerk for the writing judge being forced to write an opinion for no real reason, and then often you have wait a long while for their dissent and the inevitable back and forth...

I also want to add, in case it is not clear, that there is an actual backlog report that gets sent around at various times where you can see a judge's backlog, so those of us who are saying it's clear who has a backlog are speaking about cold hard fact in terms of the backlog existing. WHY it exists (decision to write lots of opinions vs. spending a lot of time on en banc calls vs. internal chambers processes that just take a while) is more up for speculation.
Isn't this the nature of dissenting...? It would be strange to have a mem dispo with a dissent, since memorandum dispositions indicate straightforward application of law with no disagreement among the panel. If there's a valid, good faith disagreement between two judges on a panel, I'd expect them to publicly explain their views and the nature of the disagreement in a published opinion. This has been fundamental to appellate jurisprudence for over 500 years. I'm sorry you find it annoying, but I'm not sure what a clerk would do if the judges were just agreeing with each other all the time.
Regardless of what you think has happened in the last 500 years, memdispo dissents are fairly common. I bet if you looked at the ninth circuit unpublished opinions page that there have been close to a dozen in the last month.

There are plenty of reasons why judges could disagree but there still wouldn’t be a need to publish to make new law—for example, if the judges agreed on the law but disagreed about the factual inferences to be drawn from a particular record
But in that case it wouldn't be very onerous to write the published vs. unpublished opinion if you're in the majority. Unpublished opinions have only been around for a generation or so, published dissents have been around for much longer than 500 years.
Tell us you don't know how opinions vs. memorandum dispositions on the ninth work without telling us you don't know how they work. A mem dispo can be written in a day. Even the easiest opinion is significantly more work than that.

lavarman84

Platinum
Posts: 8502
Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 5:01 pm

Re: Best and worst judges to clerk for

Post by lavarman84 » Thu Jul 07, 2022 10:05 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Jul 07, 2022 9:37 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Jul 07, 2022 4:46 pm
But in that case it wouldn't be very onerous to write the published vs. unpublished opinion if you're in the majority. Unpublished opinions have only been around for a generation or so, published dissents have been around for much longer than 500 years.
Tell us you don't know how opinions vs. memorandum dispositions on the ninth work without telling us you don't know how they work. A mem dispo can be written in a day. Even the easiest opinion is significantly more work than that.
TBF to the first Anon, on other COAs, the unpublished opinions aren't that different from the published opinions. But yes, you're right. To the first anon, a memorandum disposition is generally 5 pages or less. (I'd say most of mine were 3-4 pages.) It's very cursory.

Seriously? What are you waiting for?

Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!


Post Reply Post Anonymous Reply  

Return to “Judicial Clerkships”