Let's Talk 9th Circuit! 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: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Sep 05, 2022 12:46 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Sat Aug 20, 2022 3:32 pm
Smartest judge in the country is probably a stretch. Doubtful that he is even the smartest judge on the court, given that he’s sharing company with the likes of Berzon, Fletcher, Ikuta, Watford, Friedland, Miller, etc.

BUT, I agree he is very smart, and this is coming from someone who often disagrees with him

Both Ikuta and Friedland are smarter.

Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Sep 05, 2022 8:14 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Sep 05, 2022 12:46 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Sat Aug 20, 2022 3:32 pm
Smartest judge in the country is probably a stretch. Doubtful that he is even the smartest judge on the court, given that he’s sharing company with the likes of Berzon, Fletcher, Ikuta, Watford, Friedland, Miller, etc.

BUT, I agree he is very smart, and this is coming from someone who often disagrees with him

Both Ikuta and Friedland are smarter.
Considering how smart Ikuta and Friedland are, the fact that he's being compared to them is its own compliment.

Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Sep 07, 2022 7:02 pm

Anyone know why there is a last minute Miller vacancy for 2022? Seems somewhat odd.

Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Sep 08, 2022 9:51 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Sep 07, 2022 7:02 pm
Anyone know why there is a last minute Miller vacancy for 2022? Seems somewhat odd.
I don't think it's worth the speculation. There are so many reasons why a clerk would need to drop out (e.g. family emergency; health issues; conflict with the judge; etc.). But I've only heard exceptionally good things, and his work product is very very good, so if you're interested, you should apply. (Yes, he hires many liberals)

Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Sep 08, 2022 11:36 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Sep 08, 2022 9:51 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Sep 07, 2022 7:02 pm
Anyone know why there is a last minute Miller vacancy for 2022? Seems somewhat odd.
I don't think it's worth the speculation. There are so many reasons why a clerk would need to drop out (e.g. family emergency; health issues; conflict with the judge; etc.). But I've only heard exceptionally good things, and his work product is very very good, so if you're interested, you should apply. (Yes, he hires many liberals)
Any idea what he's looking for in his clerks?

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Sep 08, 2022 3:56 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Sep 08, 2022 11:36 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Sep 08, 2022 9:51 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Sep 07, 2022 7:02 pm
Anyone know why there is a last minute Miller vacancy for 2022? Seems somewhat odd.
I don't think it's worth the speculation. There are so many reasons why a clerk would need to drop out (e.g. family emergency; health issues; conflict with the judge; etc.). But I've only heard exceptionally good things, and his work product is very very good, so if you're interested, you should apply. (Yes, he hires many liberals)
Any idea what he's looking for in his clerks?
just really high grades and the normal stuff, he’s not an ideological hirer

Seconding that it’s a great clerkship

Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Sep 08, 2022 7:11 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Sep 08, 2022 3:56 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Sep 08, 2022 11:36 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Sep 08, 2022 9:51 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Sep 07, 2022 7:02 pm
Anyone know why there is a last minute Miller vacancy for 2022? Seems somewhat odd.
I don't think it's worth the speculation. There are so many reasons why a clerk would need to drop out (e.g. family emergency; health issues; conflict with the judge; etc.). But I've only heard exceptionally good things, and his work product is very very good, so if you're interested, you should apply. (Yes, he hires many liberals)
Any idea what he's looking for in his clerks?
just really high grades and the normal stuff, he’s not an ideological hirer

Seconding that it’s a great clerkship
Thirding. He is very well-respected and very nice. My (liberal) judge has a very high opinion of him.

Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Oct 10, 2022 3:43 pm

I saw Holcomb just posted—any thoughts good or bad or in between on him?

Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Dec 15, 2022 1:43 am

Has anyone interviewed with Judge Forrest? What was the process like.

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Sat Dec 17, 2022 2:05 pm

Anyone have any idea why Bybee recently posted on OSCAR for a clerkship from Jan 23-Aug 23? Did he fire one of his clerks?

Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Sat Dec 17, 2022 2:58 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Sat Dec 17, 2022 2:05 pm
Anyone have any idea why Bybee recently posted on OSCAR for a clerkship from Jan 23-Aug 23? Did he fire one of his clerks?
I have no idea, but given what a spectacular boss Bybee is, I imagine there were personal circumstances, not that he started firing clerks for the first time ever.

Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Dec 19, 2022 1:03 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Sat Dec 17, 2022 2:58 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sat Dec 17, 2022 2:05 pm
Anyone have any idea why Bybee recently posted on OSCAR for a clerkship from Jan 23-Aug 23? Did he fire one of his clerks?
I have no idea, but given what a spectacular boss Bybee is, I imagine there were personal circumstances, not that he started firing clerks for the first time ever.
Bybee alum here. I think you would literally have to lie, steal, or commit willful legal malpractice to get fired by him (both because he's the kindest boss in the world and because my co-clerk would have been fired 10 times by an even marginally less patient judge). Without any personal knowledge, I suspect this is much more likely a personal/family/medical situation.

I recommend anyone who's able to sojourn to Vegas for 8 months apply, he's fantastic.

Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Dec 19, 2022 2:10 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Dec 15, 2022 1:43 am
Has anyone interviewed with Judge Forrest? What was the process like.
Yes, I did. She's great. Clerks did the substantive portion; she checked personality and fit. Nothing abnormal. Happy to answer specifics if you have any.

Register now!

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

It's still FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Dec 20, 2022 10:58 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Dec 19, 2022 2:10 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Dec 15, 2022 1:43 am
Has anyone interviewed with Judge Forrest? What was the process like.
Yes, I did. She's great. Clerks did the substantive portion; she checked personality and fit. Nothing abnormal. Happy to answer specifics if you have any.
So safe to say she's done extending interviewing invites then probably?

Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Dec 20, 2022 2:24 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Dec 20, 2022 10:58 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Dec 19, 2022 2:10 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Dec 15, 2022 1:43 am
Has anyone interviewed with Judge Forrest? What was the process like.
Yes, I did. She's great. Clerks did the substantive portion; she checked personality and fit. Nothing abnormal. Happy to answer specifics if you have any.
So safe to say she's done extending interviewing invites then probably?
No, she interviewed me last year. The interview offer came in early Jan, and the interview was at the end of January. She extends employment offers once she is done interviewing in early Feb. She doesn't make offers on a rolling basis.

Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Jan 09, 2023 3:28 pm

I saw Judge Thomas posted on OSCAR today. The post says it's for 2023-24, but it also says that he'll be following the law clerk hiring plan and not reviewing applications until June. Do we think he meant to post for 2024-25? I don't think the plan would really apply to a 2023 start date since 2Ls wouldn't be eligible in the first place.

Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Jan 09, 2023 7:57 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Jan 09, 2023 3:28 pm
I saw Judge Thomas posted on OSCAR today. The post says it's for 2023-24, but it also says that he'll be following the law clerk hiring plan and not reviewing applications until June. Do we think he meant to post for 2024-25? I don't think the plan would really apply to a 2023 start date since 2Ls wouldn't be eligible in the first place.
He almost certainly means 2024—highly doubt he has yet to hire any clerks for 2023.
Last edited by Anonymous User on Tue Jan 10, 2023 2:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Get unlimited access to all forums and topics

Register now!

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


Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Jan 10, 2023 11:54 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Jan 09, 2023 7:57 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Jan 09, 2023 3:28 pm
I saw Judge Thomas posted on OSCAR today. The post says it's for 2023-24, but it also says that he'll be following the law clerk hiring plan and not reviewing applications until June. Do we think he meant to post for 2024-25? I don't think the plan would really apply to a 2023 start date since 2Ls wouldn't be eligible in the first place.
He almost certainly means 2023—highly doubt he has yet to hire any clerks for 2023.
Is that typical? I mean, if you aren't interviewing until mid-June, you're giving people at most 1.5 months to plan around moving to Montana. That just seems so rushed and needlessly so since the hiring plan shouldn't even be relevant

Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Jan 10, 2023 12:59 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jan 10, 2023 11:54 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Jan 09, 2023 7:57 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Jan 09, 2023 3:28 pm
I saw Judge Thomas posted on OSCAR today. The post says it's for 2023-24, but it also says that he'll be following the law clerk hiring plan and not reviewing applications until June. Do we think he meant to post for 2024-25? I don't think the plan would really apply to a 2023 start date since 2Ls wouldn't be eligible in the first place.
He almost certainly means 2023—highly doubt he has yet to hire any clerks for 2023.
Is that typical? I mean, if you aren't interviewing until mid-June, you're giving people at most 1.5 months to plan around moving to Montana. That just seems so rushed and needlessly so since the hiring plan shouldn't even be relevant
He very likely means 2024-25. If you look at his history, there is a posting from this time last year for 2023-24 that indicates he follows the Plan and will not interview until June 2022. This also fits with Thomas' past, as he has almost always hired about one year in advance of start dates (which is late, by CA9 standards, he and Rawlinson are the traditional last two to fill).

Another reason he can't mean 2023 is that the Plan wouldn't apply to a 2023 position. The only people able to start working in fall 2023 are current 3L's and graduates, and the Plan restrictions only apply to people who haven't finished 2L yet.

Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Jan 10, 2023 2:23 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jan 10, 2023 11:54 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Jan 09, 2023 7:57 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Jan 09, 2023 3:28 pm
I saw Judge Thomas posted on OSCAR today. The post says it's for 2023-24, but it also says that he'll be following the law clerk hiring plan and not reviewing applications until June. Do we think he meant to post for 2024-25? I don't think the plan would really apply to a 2023 start date since 2Ls wouldn't be eligible in the first place.
He almost certainly means 2023—highly doubt he has yet to hire any clerks for 2023.
Is that typical? I mean, if you aren't interviewing until mid-June, you're giving people at most 1.5 months to plan around moving to Montana. That just seems so rushed and needlessly so since the hiring plan shouldn't even be relevant
Anon you're responding too. It appears I have channeled my inner Thomas. I meant 2024. So, what I meant to say is "he almost certainly means 2024—highly doubt he has yet to hire any clerks for 2023."

Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Jan 29, 2023 12:54 pm

Any word (or speculation) on whether the remaining active Clinton appointees (Wardlaw, Gould, Rawlinson) will go senior in the next few years, before the Senate switches hands in 2024?

Even more of a shot in the dark, but any rumored candidates for who might replace them if they do? Same question for who might replace Watford as well, when he steps down in June.

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: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Jan 29, 2023 4:32 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jan 29, 2023 12:54 pm
Any word (or speculation) on whether the remaining active Clinton appointees (Wardlaw, Gould, Rawlinson) will go senior in the next few years, before the Senate switches hands in 2024?

Even more of a shot in the dark, but any rumored candidates for who might replace them if they do? Same question for who might replace Watford as well, when he steps down in June.
Rawlinson seems unlikely - she publicly stated that she would go senior if Biden nominated one of her clerks and it doesn't seem like the administration wants to set a precedent of letting judges pick their successors.

I think folks were discussing Gould on another thread and think it's also not very likely. Something about Gould not wanting to be seen as retiring because of his disability? Going senior isn't really retiring so sounds like no one really knows. Any of the Biden judges confirmed to WDWA could be candidates for his successor - I could see either Tiffany Cartwright (young, civil rights litigator, former B. Fletcher clerk), Lauren King (young, first Native COA judge), or Jamal Whitehead (worked at EEOC, mostly seems to represent plaintiffs in employment cases, black man when CA9 will have no black male judges post-Watford, has a disability). The Biden nominees to WDWA have been great, so I really hope Gould goes senior soon so one of them can join CA9.

Wardlaw is the one that I thought would go senior already (and don't know why she hasn't). She's reliably liberal and is the most senior active judge at this point, and she doesn't seem like the type of judge who thinks they're a gift to humanity and won't go senior because of pride/vanity. She seems like somebody the administration should be calling/lobbying to go senior.

Lots of options for the Wardlaw seat (if it opens) or the Watford seat - my guess is that one of the Biden nominees to CDCA would be elevated since both are SoCal-based seats. Frimpong and Sunshine Sykes seem the most likely for Watford's seat (especially since Sykes would also be the first Native COA judge if King in WDWA isn't elevated before then), but Vera or Almadani could also be likely once they are confirmed to the district court. Also totally possible that the administration doesn't elevate a district judge at all and goes with someone else just because there's so many possibilities.

Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Jan 29, 2023 4:38 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jan 29, 2023 4:32 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jan 29, 2023 12:54 pm
Any word (or speculation) on whether the remaining active Clinton appointees (Wardlaw, Gould, Rawlinson) will go senior in the next few years, before the Senate switches hands in 2024?

Even more of a shot in the dark, but any rumored candidates for who might replace them if they do? Same question for who might replace Watford as well, when he steps down in June.
Rawlinson seems unlikely - she publicly stated that she would go senior if Biden nominated one of her clerks and it doesn't seem like the administration wants to set a precedent of letting judges pick their successors.

I think folks were discussing Gould on another thread and think it's also not very likely. Something about Gould not wanting to be seen as retiring because of his disability? Going senior isn't really retiring so sounds like no one really knows. Any of the Biden judges confirmed to WDWA could be candidates for his successor - I could see either Tiffany Cartwright (young, civil rights litigator, former B. Fletcher clerk), Lauren King (young, first Native COA judge), or Jamal Whitehead (worked at EEOC, mostly seems to represent plaintiffs in employment cases, black man when CA9 will have no black male judges post-Watford, has a disability). The Biden nominees to WDWA have been great, so I really hope Gould goes senior soon so one of them can join CA9.

Wardlaw is the one that I thought would go senior already (and don't know why she hasn't). She's reliably liberal and is the most senior active judge at this point, and she doesn't seem like the type of judge who thinks they're a gift to humanity and won't go senior because of pride/vanity. She seems like somebody the administration should be calling/lobbying to go senior.

Lots of options for the Wardlaw seat (if it opens) or the Watford seat - my guess is that one of the Biden nominees to CDCA would be elevated since both are SoCal-based seats. Frimpong and Sunshine Sykes seem the most likely for Watford's seat (especially since Sykes would also be the first Native COA judge if King in WDWA isn't elevated before then), but Vera or Almadani could also be likely once they are confirmed to the district court. Also totally possible that the administration doesn't elevate a district judge at all and goes with someone else just because there's so many possibilities.
Bolded is such an insane recent trend in demands from some of these judges

Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Jan 29, 2023 5:06 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jan 29, 2023 4:38 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jan 29, 2023 4:32 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jan 29, 2023 12:54 pm
Any word (or speculation) on whether the remaining active Clinton appointees (Wardlaw, Gould, Rawlinson) will go senior in the next few years, before the Senate switches hands in 2024?

Even more of a shot in the dark, but any rumored candidates for who might replace them if they do? Same question for who might replace Watford as well, when he steps down in June.
Rawlinson seems unlikely - she publicly stated that she would go senior if Biden nominated one of her clerks and it doesn't seem like the administration wants to set a precedent of letting judges pick their successors.

I think folks were discussing Gould on another thread and think it's also not very likely. Something about Gould not wanting to be seen as retiring because of his disability? Going senior isn't really retiring so sounds like no one really knows. Any of the Biden judges confirmed to WDWA could be candidates for his successor - I could see either Tiffany Cartwright (young, civil rights litigator, former B. Fletcher clerk), Lauren King (young, first Native COA judge), or Jamal Whitehead (worked at EEOC, mostly seems to represent plaintiffs in employment cases, black man when CA9 will have no black male judges post-Watford, has a disability). The Biden nominees to WDWA have been great, so I really hope Gould goes senior soon so one of them can join CA9.

Wardlaw is the one that I thought would go senior already (and don't know why she hasn't). She's reliably liberal and is the most senior active judge at this point, and she doesn't seem like the type of judge who thinks they're a gift to humanity and won't go senior because of pride/vanity. She seems like somebody the administration should be calling/lobbying to go senior.

Lots of options for the Wardlaw seat (if it opens) or the Watford seat - my guess is that one of the Biden nominees to CDCA would be elevated since both are SoCal-based seats. Frimpong and Sunshine Sykes seem the most likely for Watford's seat (especially since Sykes would also be the first Native COA judge if King in WDWA isn't elevated before then), but Vera or Almadani could also be likely once they are confirmed to the district court. Also totally possible that the administration doesn't elevate a district judge at all and goes with someone else just because there's so many possibilities.
Bolded is such an insane recent trend in demands from some of these judges
Yeah when did this become a thing? Didn't a conservative judge try this too under Trump?

Anonymous User
Posts: 427956
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Let's Talk 9th Circuit!

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Jan 29, 2023 5:25 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jan 29, 2023 5:06 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jan 29, 2023 4:38 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jan 29, 2023 4:32 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jan 29, 2023 12:54 pm
Any word (or speculation) on whether the remaining active Clinton appointees (Wardlaw, Gould, Rawlinson) will go senior in the next few years, before the Senate switches hands in 2024?

Even more of a shot in the dark, but any rumored candidates for who might replace them if they do? Same question for who might replace Watford as well, when he steps down in June.
Rawlinson seems unlikely - she publicly stated that she would go senior if Biden nominated one of her clerks and it doesn't seem like the administration wants to set a precedent of letting judges pick their successors.

I think folks were discussing Gould on another thread and think it's also not very likely. Something about Gould not wanting to be seen as retiring because of his disability? Going senior isn't really retiring so sounds like no one really knows. Any of the Biden judges confirmed to WDWA could be candidates for his successor - I could see either Tiffany Cartwright (young, civil rights litigator, former B. Fletcher clerk), Lauren King (young, first Native COA judge), or Jamal Whitehead (worked at EEOC, mostly seems to represent plaintiffs in employment cases, black man when CA9 will have no black male judges post-Watford, has a disability). The Biden nominees to WDWA have been great, so I really hope Gould goes senior soon so one of them can join CA9.

Wardlaw is the one that I thought would go senior already (and don't know why she hasn't). She's reliably liberal and is the most senior active judge at this point, and she doesn't seem like the type of judge who thinks they're a gift to humanity and won't go senior because of pride/vanity. She seems like somebody the administration should be calling/lobbying to go senior.

Lots of options for the Wardlaw seat (if it opens) or the Watford seat - my guess is that one of the Biden nominees to CDCA would be elevated since both are SoCal-based seats. Frimpong and Sunshine Sykes seem the most likely for Watford's seat (especially since Sykes would also be the first Native COA judge if King in WDWA isn't elevated before then), but Vera or Almadani could also be likely once they are confirmed to the district court. Also totally possible that the administration doesn't elevate a district judge at all and goes with someone else just because there's so many possibilities.
Bolded is such an insane recent trend in demands from some of these judges
Yeah when did this become a thing? Didn't a conservative judge try this too under Trump?
Kennedy probably. I think it was reported that part of the reason why he was willing to retire under Trump is because Trump promised to appoint one of his clerks.

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”