prestige of district of MA clerkship vs mass sjc for govt Forum

[Anonymous User]

I was wondering what people opinions are one the prestige of a federal clerkship in mass vs. mass sjc for practice in MA.

I know that Mass SJC is one of the most prestigious SSC's in the country, but I am guessing that the fed d. of MA is still better. Does the mass SJC hold sufficient independent weight to make it worth doing AFTER a d. ma clerkship (using the D. MA clerkship as a stepping stone to get there), perhaps to have experience in both trial and appellate? Or is that a waste of time?

If relevant, I am more interested in trial level litigation (probably public sector to start out), but would certainly be open to appellate work down the line.

Any thoughts on whether adding a subsequent MA SJC clerkship could increase chances at DOJ honors or MA USAO down the line, beyond the boost that the d. of MA clerkship would provide?

[Shaggier1]

If relevant, I am more interested in trial level litigation (probably public sector to start out)

Preference for state or federal trial work?

[Anonymous User]

If relevant, I am more interested in trial level litigation (probably public sector to start out)

Preference for state or federal trial work?

Let's say starting at state then going federal in my home state as soon as possible (my home state's USAO is not a participating component in the honors program).

[Anonymous User]

I have never worked as a permanent employee of DOJ or a USAO, but I have externed for the USAO and currently clerk for a Judge that came from a USAO. Seems to me that the strong preference is for AUSA's to have federal district court clerkship experience. If AUSA is your end goal, id lean towards the federal clerkship. D. Mass. is a good district.

[Anonymous User]

I have never worked as a permanent employee of DOJ or a USAO, but I have externed for the USAO and currently clerk for a Judge that came from a USAO. Seems to me that the strong preference is for AUSA's to have federal district court clerkship experience. If AUSA is your end goal, id lean towards the federal clerkship. D. Mass. is a good district.

I appreciate your response.

I do have the clerkship for D. Mass for next year.

I am not asking in a mutually exclusive kind of way. I am asking whether it would be worth doing the SJC following the fed d court clerkship, or whether I should just dive into practice and try to get as much trial experience as I can and try to move up the ranks on the state level (which would obviously be delayed by a year if I did SJC).

[mw115]

If you're interested in anything with the DOJ - D. Mass. will be a much bigger boost than SJC of Mass.. The preference for a federal district clerkship over a State Supreme Court doesn't have so much to do with prestige, but with the fact that if you're a federal prosecutor you will be operating almost exclusively in federal district courts.

If your goal is USAO for Mass., D. Mass is actually probably the BEST thing you can do. You'll meet a lot of the office's prosecutors and thus will not be a face in the crowd if your eventual resume makes it to the hiring attorney's desk.

I am not asking in a mutually exclusive kind of way. I am asking whether it would be worth doing the SJC following the fed d court clerkship, or whether I should just dive into practice and try to get as much trial experience as I can and try to move up the ranks on the state level (which would obviously be delayed by a year if I did SJC).

I can't see doing a year clerking for the SJC in addition to the D. Mass. clerkship being of any extra value for a DOJ position.

[Anonymous User]

If you're interested in anything with the DOJ - D. Mass. will be a much bigger boost than SJC of Mass.. The preference for a federal district clerkship over a State Supreme Court doesn't have so much to do with prestige, but with the fact that if you're a federal prosecutor you will be operating almost exclusively in federal district courts.

If your goal is USAO for Mass., D. Mass is actually probably the BEST thing you can do. You'll meet a lot of the office's prosecutors and thus will not be a face in the crowd if your eventual resume makes it to the hiring attorney's desk.

I am not asking in a mutually exclusive kind of way. I am asking whether it would be worth doing the SJC following the fed d court clerkship, or whether I should just dive into practice and try to get as much trial experience as I can and try to move up the ranks on the state level (which would obviously be delayed by a year if I did SJC).

I can't see doing a year clerking for the SJC in addition to the D. Mass. clerkship being of any extra value for a DOJ position.

But what about the climbing the "state" ladder, prior to applying to the D. Mass USAO? Would the SJC help me to do this to make it worth taking another year before practicing?

[Anonymous User]

^ I completely agree with this. SSC won't hurt you, but it won't get you to a USAO more quickly or at all. It's good experience for its own sake or to broaden your options for state practice that will give you experience you need to get to the USAO, if your local USAO likes state prosecutors (getting USAO straight out of a clerkship is quite uncommon if not through honors). But DOJ/USAO won't value it over trial experience. (In my experience.)

Okay, thanks. This is really good to know.

[A. Nony Mouse]

It will certainly help you make connections, depending on what the judge and their former clerks did/do. It may depend on how Mass state prosecutors/AG work - in some states there's a dedicated appellate unit and they tend to love former state appellate clerks. If the prosecutors all do their own appeals, a year of appellate work will help and look good, but I've heard that state line prosecutors may look askance at appellate nerd types. I have no idea what Mass is like, though. Do you know any local prosecutors you can get input from?

[mw115]

Where I am - I don't think it would matter greatly. The OAG in my state, along with most DA's office aren't all that concerned with clerkships. I've spent a lot of time working with AAG's and ADA's and I think most would probably consider clerking for a federal district court more helpful to a candidate than a state supreme court, because you'd at least have a feel for how the trial process works. That said, I'm in one of the weirdest states in the country. Base your decision off what local prosecutors say, I imagine Massachusetts might be a more prestige based than where I am.

[Doorkeeper]

Definitely D Mass over Mass SJC.

The only jump that would be worth it after D Mass would be 1st Circuit if you really care about fed gov work.

[Anonymous User]

Speaking as a term clerk at a SSC, it's a really awesome experience and you'll develop your writing/research skills, as well as an eye towards the big picture of a litigation. Putting on my job hunter hat, though, it's not worth the extra year if you have no plans to do appellate work (I would think the DOJ has a special bureau for that).