Is Law Review required? Forum

[Anonymous User]

Is not making law review a death knell for federal clerkships, or are secondary journals acceptable? I have median 1L grades from CCN, so it was an uphill battle to begin with.

[exitoptions]

Is not making law review a death knell for federal clerkships, or are secondary journals acceptable? I have median 1L grades from CCN, so it was an uphill battle to begin with.

I know plenty of clerks (in a competitive district) who weren't on law review. They come from from various T14s. Some didn't even do a secondary journal. Some judges seem to care about or require LR / journals, some don't even look for it. Obviously, you should do something to distinguish yourself in other areas, e.g., moot court, board of a journal, clinics. That and getting top grades will keep you competitive without LR.

[Anonymous User]

My judge doesn't care whatsoever about LR. None of us were on LR and neither were the ones before us.

[arkhamhorror]

Depends on the judge (my judge cares). But you'll certainly be able to find a ton of judges out there who don't, though you may have to expand your search.

[Anonymous User]

Depends on the judge (my judge cares). But you'll certainly be able to find a ton of judges out there who don't, though you may have to expand your search.

When you say "cares" do you mean only looks at applicants who are on LR, or uses LR as a tiebreaker between otherwise great candidates?

Is no LR gonna be a huge barrier to stuff like SDNY or appellate clerkships? This is all assuming I pull my grades up.

[arkhamhorror]

Depends on the judge (my judge cares). But you'll certainly be able to find a ton of judges out there who don't, though you may have to expand your search.

When you say "cares" do you mean only looks at applicants who are on LR, or uses LR as a tiebreaker between otherwise great candidates?

Is no LR gonna be a huge barrier to stuff like SDNY or appellate clerkships? This is all assuming I pull my grades up.

The former, but like I said, it just varies. I've interviewed with judges who not only want LR, but also exec board positions. Conversely, I know people who clerked with secondary journal or no journal at all, or no exec. board position. The alchemy that goes into this sort of thing is maddening.

I don't know about huge barrier, but the pool may be more limited. Just focus on the grades and good luck.

[Anonymous User]

No. Some judges care, plenty of great judges don't. At my CCN I know multiple non-LR people who have DC/9/2 Cir. clerkships and great D.Ct. clerkships. Do whatever you can to distinguish yourself otherwise. Be a teaching assistant or research assistant, write a note and get it published, maybe do a term-time judicial internship, and take serious classes and do very well in them. Be prepared to apply a bit more widely in terms of geography. Look for judges you have a connection to (same undergrad school, career interests that are reflected in your resume, random other interests that might pop out).

One thing that might be a problem is that (at my school) the institutional support is weaker for non-LR applicants. The clerkship office is not that interested in you, and some of the most helpful/aggressive recommenders are only interested in LR people. If you're in a position to cultivate relationships with recommenders who have a reputation for being very helpful, then do it. If you're not (i.e. you haven't had classes with them, haven't done well in classes with them, etc.) then get recommendations from professors who know you well and like you. There are some professors who fly under the radar but who can be very helpful. Keep your recommenders informed about how your clerkship search is going--not in an annoying way, but so they'll remember that you're looking and think of you for any openings that they hear about.

Finally, it is 100% possible to get an interview without having some kind of connection to a judge, so don't assume that it is pointless to apply to judges that your recommenders don't know or won't call on your behalf. All but one of the interviews I got were random.

I was incredibly stressed out by my lack of LR and I was certain that it was going to disqualify me from getting any federal clerkship. It didn't. I got a great clerkship, plus several interviews for other clerkships I was excited about. Concentrate on what you can control, and try to avoid worrying about the things you can't.

[rpupkin]

What follows is based on scattered anecdotes, but my sense is that folks generally overvalue LR in relation to clerkship chances. There are definitely judges who require LR or even LR exec board. And you're certainly not going to hurt your chances by doing LR (so long as your grades don't suffer as a result). But when it comes to LR and clerkships, I think it's usually more about correlation than causation. In general, the type of law student who guns for a clerkship is also the type of law student who guns for LR. If you're a law student with top grades and some ambition, chances are that your prestige obsession will lead you towards both law review and a clerkship.

I'll add that I personally know of one feeder COA judge who doesn't care about LR at all. Most (but definitely not all) of his clerks did LR, but the judge doesn't value it as a credential.

[Anonymous User]

Just to further echo the above sentiments. There is an Alito clerk this fall who wasn't on his school's flagship law review.
(Anon because I went to school w/ that clerk)

[objctnyrhnr]

I don't think people care as much as LS's want people to think that people care. Obviously purely anecdotal, but I was on a secondary journal and got a clerkship in a competitive district. I really would not sweat it.

[GertrudePerkins]

Interesting fact: of the five HLS people hired thus far (according to ATL, at least) for SCOTUS OT2016, only two were on HLR. Of course, the other three all had astronomical grades and fantastic credentials in other respects, but just goes to show that law review isn't essential for even the most selective clerkships.

[Anonymous User]

Yeah well LR at HLS isn't grade on that's why and ultimately grades trump all. Only some of the pool of candidates with SCOTUS grades are on LR.

[Anonymous User]

Interesting fact: of the five HLS people hired thus far (according to ATL, at least) for SCOTUS OT2016, only two were on HLR. Of course, the other three all had astronomical grades and fantastic credentials in other respects, but just goes to show that law review isn't essential for even the most selective clerkships.

HLS recent graduate here. I noticed that as well. Any guesses as to why only a few of the hires for OT 2015 were on HLR?

[sundance95]

Interesting fact: of the five HLS people hired thus far (according to ATL, at least) for SCOTUS OT2016, only two were on HLR. Of course, the other three all had astronomical grades and fantastic credentials in other respects, but just goes to show that law review isn't essential for even the most selective clerkships.

HLS recent graduate here. I noticed that as well. Any guesses as to why only a few of the hires for OT 2015 were on HLR?

You mean like the poast directly above yours?

Yeah well LR at HLS isn't grade on that's why and ultimately grades trump all. Only some of the pool of candidates with SCOTUS grades are on LR.

[Anonymous User]

Interesting fact: of the five HLS people hired thus far (according to ATL, at least) for SCOTUS OT2016, only two were on HLR. Of course, the other three all had astronomical grades and fantastic credentials in other respects, but just goes to show that law review isn't essential for even the most selective clerkships.

HLS recent graduate here. I noticed that as well. Any guesses as to why only a few of the hires for OT 2015 were on HLR?

You mean like the poast directly above yours?

Yeah well LR at HLS isn't grade on that's why and ultimately grades trump all. Only some of the pool of candidates with SCOTUS grades are on LR.

Asking the person I quoted, specifically, since I remember that he is also an HLS grad and I respect his posts. I have no idea who this anon is or whether s/he is credible or not (though I know that the anon post is partially incorrect and can discount accordingly). But thanks a ton for the super helpful post, sundance! That really added a lot to the discussion.

[jrf12886]

It certainly helps with some judges, but it's by no means a requirement. (There are even several SCOTUS clerks who weren't on law review)

I was on a secondary journal and was asked about it several times in interviews. I don't think it matters very much the type of journal you were on. Not doing a journal at all may raise eyebrows, however.

[Anonymous User]

Interesting fact: of the five HLS people hired thus far (according to ATL, at least) for SCOTUS OT2016, only two were on HLR. Of course, the other three all had astronomical grades and fantastic credentials in other respects, but just goes to show that law review isn't essential for even the most selective clerkships.

HLS recent graduate here. I noticed that as well. Any guesses as to why only a few of the hires for OT 2015 were on HLR?

You mean like the poast directly above yours?

Yeah well LR at HLS isn't grade on that's why and ultimately grades trump all. Only some of the pool of candidates with SCOTUS grades are on LR.

Asking the person I quoted, specifically, since I remember that he is also an HLS grad and I respect his posts. I have no idea who this anon is or whether s/he is credible or not (though I know that the anon post is partially incorrect and can discount accordingly). But thanks a ton for the super helpful post, sundance! That really added a lot to the discussion.

I'm the anon whose post you discounted. How's an HLS student/alum who is/was on LR for a source? You must be referring to the fact that there are 14 spots (2 from each section) that are 50% writing competition score and 50% grades. Well in recent history, there have been multiple 1L Sears Prize winners - at least one from c/o 2013 and c/o 2014 each, and don't forget the c/o 2010 summa cum laude grad - who didn't make LR because there's no pure grade on. Sure there are 14 slots where grades matter 50%, but you could have all the DS's in the land and not make LR.

[Anonymous User]

I'm the anon whose post you discounted. How's an HLS student/alum who is/was on LR for a source? You must be referring to the fact that there are 14 spots (2 from each section) that are 50% writing competition score and 50% grades. Well in recent history, there have been multiple 1L Sears Prize winners - at least one from c/o 2013 and c/o 2014 each, and don't forget the c/o 2010 summa cum laude grad - who didn't make LR because there's no pure grade on. Sure there are 14 slots where grades matter 50%, but you could have all the DS's in the land and not make LR.

Sorry, I didn't mean to attack you. I was more directing that toward sundance. In any event, you are still inaccurate on a couple of points:

• Both of the class of 2013 1L Sears Prize winners made HLR.
• You're correct about multiple class of 2014 1L Sears Prize winners who weren't on HLR (I have no idea if they applied or not).
• There were 2 summa cum laude graduates for the class of 2010, and both made HLR.

In any event, I don't think we need to argue. I agree with your point: grades aren't everything for HLR and there is no sufficiently high GPA to ensure law review. But grades still matter to getting on to HLR, to some degree. And it's still a nice supposedly a nice resume line, regardless of how you make law review, so that's why I was curious as whether anyone had more thoughts on LR and SCOTUS clerk hiring.

[Anonymous User]

I'm the anon whose post you discounted. How's an HLS student/alum who is/was on LR for a source? You must be referring to the fact that there are 14 spots (2 from each section) that are 50% writing competition score and 50% grades. Well in recent history, there have been multiple 1L Sears Prize winners - at least one from c/o 2013 and c/o 2014 each, and don't forget the c/o 2010 summa cum laude grad - who didn't make LR because there's no pure grade on. Sure there are 14 slots where grades matter 50%, but you could have all the DS's in the land and not make LR.

Sorry, I didn't mean to attack you. I was more directing that toward sundance. In any event, you are still inaccurate on a couple of points:

• Both of the class of 2013 1L Sears Prize winners made HLR.
• You're correct about multiple class of 2014 1L Sears Prize winners who weren't on HLR (I have no idea if they applied or not).
• There were 2 summa cum laude graduates for the class of 2010, and both made HLR.

In any event, I don't think we need to argue. I agree with your point: grades aren't everything for HLR and there is no sufficiently high GPA to ensure law review. But grades still matter to getting on to HLR, to some degree. And it's still a nice supposedly a nice resume line, regardless of how you make law review, so that's why I was curious as whether anyone had more thoughts on LR and SCOTUS clerk hiring.

Also not trying to argue. But since my credibility is at stake, I will point out I don't think I'm incorrect on either of those points:
There were three 1L Sears Prize winners in the c/o 2013, and one of them didn't make HLR.
I wasn't aware that there were 2 summa grads in the c/o 2010, but if so, one of them didn't make HLR. And went on to SCOTUS clerk.

[Anonymous User]

I'm the anon whose post you discounted. How's an HLS student/alum who is/was on LR for a source? You must be referring to the fact that there are 14 spots (2 from each section) that are 50% writing competition score and 50% grades. Well in recent history, there have been multiple 1L Sears Prize winners - at least one from c/o 2013 and c/o 2014 each, and don't forget the c/o 2010 summa cum laude grad - who didn't make LR because there's no pure grade on. Sure there are 14 slots where grades matter 50%, but you could have all the DS's in the land and not make LR.

Sorry, I didn't mean to attack you. I was more directing that toward sundance. In any event, you are still inaccurate on a couple of points:

• Both of the class of 2013 1L Sears Prize winners made HLR.
• You're correct about multiple class of 2014 1L Sears Prize winners who weren't on HLR (I have no idea if they applied or not).
• There were 2 summa cum laude graduates for the class of 2010, and both made HLR.

In any event, I don't think we need to argue. I agree with your point: grades aren't everything for HLR and there is no sufficiently high GPA to ensure law review. But grades still matter to getting on to HLR, to some degree. And it's still a nice supposedly a nice resume line, regardless of how you make law review, so that's why I was curious as whether anyone had more thoughts on LR and SCOTUS clerk hiring.

Also not trying to argue. But since my credibility is at stake, I will point out I don't think I'm incorrect on either of those points:
There were three 1L Sears Prize winners in the c/o 2013, and one of them didn't make HLR.
I wasn't aware that there were 2 summa grads in the c/o 2010, but if so, one of them didn't make HLR. And went on to SCOTUS clerk.

Oops, you're absolutely correct I forgot there were 3 Sears winner for c/o 2013 and the 3rd one wasn't on HLR. I apologize for that. I am sure though that both of the c/o 2010 summa grads were on HLR. If you post non-anonymously, I'll pm you their names and a link to the masthead.

[Anonymous User]

Oops, you're absolutely correct I forgot there were 3 Sears winner for c/o 2013 and the 3rd one wasn't on HLR. I apologize for that. I am sure though that both of the c/o 2010 summa grads were on HLR. If you post non-anonymously, I'll pm you their names and a link to the masthead.

Huh. Then there was a third summa grad in the c/o 2010, one who didn't make HLR. He should be wrapping up his clerkship for the Big Court this summer. A little Googling should get you there.

[Anonymous User]

Oops, you're absolutely correct I forgot there were 3 Sears winner for c/o 2013 and the 3rd one wasn't on HLR. I apologize for that. I am sure though that both of the c/o 2010 summa grads were on HLR. If you post non-anonymously, I'll pm you their names and a link to the masthead.

Huh. Then there was a third summa grad in the c/o 2010, one who didn't make HLR. He should be wrapping up his clerkship for the Big Court this summer. A little Googling should get you there.

Wow, it looks like you're correct. There were 3 summa grads in the c/o 2010! Any idea how that happened? A 3-way tie? Or they all hit the crazy high threshold? That's pretty nuts.

I should formally apologize then. I'm really sorry to have doubted you, you really know what you're talking about. Sorry again for attacking you.

[jd20132013]

Oh Harvard...

[Anonymous User]

There were six summas in 2010. That year, and only that year, summa was given to the top 1%. It was around when they were figuring out how to do the new grading system.

[Anonymous User]

There were six summas in 2010. That year, and only that year, summa was given to the top 1%. It was around when they were figuring out how to do the new grading system.

That's crazy. I guess the 5 people not #1 who got summa really lucked out, since they probably wouldn't have gotten summa in any other year. Did all 6 get a SCOTUS clerkship? Is that the only year with multiple summas?