Top Law Schools

I'm just wondering would the marketability of COA diminish because it's located in a "flyover" city as opposed to a major one, even if it's in a desirable circuit. Sorry if it's a stupid question.. I'm new to the clerkship game!

My impression is not substantially, because you're still on panels doing the same types of cases that judges in major cities in the same circuit are doing. It's true that positions in flyover locations can be a little less competitive simply because fewer people want to live there for a year, but this varies a lot from judge to judge (and circuit positions are pretty competitive overall).

Anonymous User wrote:I'm just wondering would the marketability of COA diminish because it's located in a "flyover" city as opposed to a major one, even if it's in a desirable circuit. Sorry if it's a stupid question.. I'm new to the clerkship game!

Does not negate the marketability.

Relatedly, is there a perceived difference in clerking for the chief judge?

Anonymous User wrote:Relatedly, is there a perceived difference in clerking for the chief judge?

If you are clerking for Judge Thomas, he is awesome. Living in Billings won't in any way negatively affect your marketability. But I don't think it'll give you any special benefit in post-clerkship hiring.

Anonymous User wrote:Relatedly, is there a perceived difference in clerking for the chief judge?

I don't think so, unless the judge is independently a feeder, e.g. Chief Judge Katzmann. There's a lot of administrative work involved, but, at my court, the Chief Judge did that work mostly by himself and insulated the law clerks from it.

And Chief Judge Thomas was my first thought as well.

Emma. wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Relatedly, is there a perceived difference in clerking for the chief judge?

If you are clerking for Judge Thomas, he is awesome. Living in Billings won't in any way negatively affect your marketability. But I don't think it'll give you any special benefit in post-clerkship hiring.

Another question, also similar. Do you think there is any difference in marketability between a flyover non-DC/2/9 clerkship and a non-flyover non-DC/2/9 clerkship? This sounds silly, I know, but I'm srsly curious.

E.g., clerking on the 10th in OKC or on the 8th in Des Moines (both flyovers), vs. clerking on the 3rd in Pittsburgh (non-flyover).

What makes Pittsburgh non-flyover? (Also flyover COA is a way to describe location, not value.)

I also thought "fly-over" meant any city that is non-LA/SF/NY/Washington/Chicago/Boston

esther0123 wrote:I also thought "fly-over" meant any city that is non-LA/SF/NY/Washington/Chicago/Boston

It does

I chuckled when I saw Pittsburgh referred to as non-flyover

Anonymous User wrote:

Emma. wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Relatedly, is there a perceived difference in clerking for the chief judge?

If you are clerking for Judge Thomas, he is awesome. Living in Billings won't in any way negatively affect your marketability. But I don't think it'll give you any special benefit in post-clerkship hiring.

Another question, also similar. Do you think there is any difference in marketability between a flyover non-DC/2/9 clerkship and a non-flyover non-DC/2/9 clerkship? This sounds silly, I know, but I'm srsly curious.

E.g., clerking on the 10th in OKC or on the 8th in Des Moines (both flyovers), vs. clerking on the 3rd in Pittsburgh (non-flyover).

I think your time might be better spent investigating outcomes for individual judges that you're interested in applying to or invited to interview with. Even assuming that people are sensitive to the types of distinctions you're asking about, an individual judge's actual outcomes are going to tell you much more about exit options from that clerkship than general TLS advice about a hypothetical scenario that might include that judge, and the universe of COA judges isn't particularly large.

mjb447 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Emma. wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Relatedly, is there a perceived difference in clerking for the chief judge?

If you are clerking for Judge Thomas, he is awesome. Living in Billings won't in any way negatively affect your marketability. But I don't think it'll give you any special benefit in post-clerkship hiring.

Another question, also similar. Do you think there is any difference in marketability between a flyover non-DC/2/9 clerkship and a non-flyover non-DC/2/9 clerkship? This sounds silly, I know, but I'm srsly curious.

E.g., clerking on the 10th in OKC or on the 8th in Des Moines (both flyovers), vs. clerking on the 3rd in Pittsburgh (non-flyover).

I think your time might be better spent investigating outcomes for individual judges that you're interested in applying to or invited to interview with. Even assuming that people are sensitive to the types of distinctions you're asking about, an individual judge's actual outcomes are going to tell you much more about exit options from that clerkship than general TLS advice about a hypothetical scenario that might include that judge, and the universe of COA judges isn't particularly large.

just do a linkedin search for "clerk" "(judge name)" or "clerk" (CoA name + city) and see what comes up.

To the extent COA "prestige" exists, it's tied to the judge, not the city you're clerking in. A feeder judge in a "flyover" location will do more for you than a non-feeder in the 2nd or 9th circuit.

And, no, clerking for a chief judge does not carry any extra prestige. Becoming a chief judge is purely a function of seniority.

rpupkin wrote:To the extent COA "prestige" exists, it's tied to the judge, not the city you're clerking in. A feeder judge in a "flyover" location will do more for you than a non-feeder in the 2nd or 9th circuit.

And, no, clerking for a chief judge does not carry any extra prestige. Becoming a chief judge is purely a function of seniority.

Excluding the real feeders among all the circuits, there is a general 'prestige' boost for 2/9/DC, at least in big firms on the coasts and federal gov't agencies. But that's not city driven exactly.

Anonymous User wrote:

rpupkin wrote:To the extent COA "prestige" exists, it's tied to the judge, not the city you're clerking in. A feeder judge in a "flyover" location will do more for you than a non-feeder in the 2nd or 9th circuit.

And, no, clerking for a chief judge does not carry any extra prestige. Becoming a chief judge is purely a function of seniority.

Excluding the real feeders among all the circuits, there is a general 'prestige' boost for 2/9/DC, at least in big firms on the coasts and federal gov't agencies. But that's not city driven exactly.

Eh. That's the general perception among TLS'ers, but I don't think it matches objective reality. There may be a "general prestige" boost for the DC Circuit (particularly if you want to work in DC), but I don't agree that, say, a non-feeder in the Ninth Circuit gives you a meaningful boost over a non-feeder in the First or Seventh Circuits.

rpupkin wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

rpupkin wrote:To the extent COA "prestige" exists, it's tied to the judge, not the city you're clerking in. A feeder judge in a "flyover" location will do more for you than a non-feeder in the 2nd or 9th circuit.

And, no, clerking for a chief judge does not carry any extra prestige. Becoming a chief judge is purely a function of seniority.

Excluding the real feeders among all the circuits, there is a general 'prestige' boost for 2/9/DC, at least in big firms on the coasts and federal gov't agencies. But that's not city driven exactly.

Eh. That's the general perception among TLS'ers, but I don't think it matches objective reality. There may be a "general prestige" boost for the DC Circuit (particularly if you want to work in DC), but I don't agree that, say, a non-feeder in the Ninth Circuit gives you a meaningful boost over a non-feeder in the First or Seventh Circuits.

Anon because I split-summered at one of the firms I'm about to list, but rpupkin, I don't know how you can square this statement with a conversation we had less than two months ago:

rpupkin wrote: Is a "prestigious" clerkship a necessary condition for being hired at W&C or Kellogg? No. But that's not what you said. You said the firms "don't care" where you clerk. I think that's wrong. At W&C, for example, an applicant who clerked in SDNY or DDC is in a stronger position than an applicant who clerked in the middle of the country. Can the latter still get hired? Sure. But those in the former category will have a better shot.

I agree with your latter statement, but it is markedly different than your former one. You are definitely more experienced with clerkship hiring/legal hiring than I am, so I am curious on understanding your thoughts.

Anonymous User wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

rpupkin wrote:To the extent COA "prestige" exists, it's tied to the judge, not the city you're clerking in. A feeder judge in a "flyover" location will do more for you than a non-feeder in the 2nd or 9th circuit.

And, no, clerking for a chief judge does not carry any extra prestige. Becoming a chief judge is purely a function of seniority.

Excluding the real feeders among all the circuits, there is a general 'prestige' boost for 2/9/DC, at least in big firms on the coasts and federal gov't agencies. But that's not city driven exactly.

Eh. That's the general perception among TLS'ers, but I don't think it matches objective reality. There may be a "general prestige" boost for the DC Circuit (particularly if you want to work in DC), but I don't agree that, say, a non-feeder in the Ninth Circuit gives you a meaningful boost over a non-feeder in the First or Seventh Circuits.

Anon because I split-summered at one of the firms I'm about to list, but rpupkin, I don't know how you can square this statement with a conversation we had less than two months ago:

rpupkin wrote: Is a "prestigious" clerkship a necessary condition for being hired at W&C or Kellogg? No. But that's not what you said. You said the firms "don't care" where you clerk. I think that's wrong. At W&C, for example, an applicant who clerked in SDNY or DDC is in a stronger position than an applicant who clerked in the middle of the country. Can the latter still get hired? Sure. But those in the former category will have a better shot.

I agree with your latter statement, but it is markedly different than your former one. You are definitely more experienced with clerkship hiring/legal hiring than I am, so I am curious on understanding your thoughts.

Those aren't circuits. Those are district courts. It's different.

Anonymous User wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

rpupkin wrote:To the extent COA "prestige" exists, it's tied to the judge, not the city you're clerking in. A feeder judge in a "flyover" location will do more for you than a non-feeder in the 2nd or 9th circuit.

And, no, clerking for a chief judge does not carry any extra prestige. Becoming a chief judge is purely a function of seniority.

Excluding the real feeders among all the circuits, there is a general 'prestige' boost for 2/9/DC, at least in big firms on the coasts and federal gov't agencies. But that's not city driven exactly.

Eh. That's the general perception among TLS'ers, but I don't think it matches objective reality. There may be a "general prestige" boost for the DC Circuit (particularly if you want to work in DC), but I don't agree that, say, a non-feeder in the Ninth Circuit gives you a meaningful boost over a non-feeder in the First or Seventh Circuits.

Anon because I split-summered at one of the firms I'm about to list, but rpupkin, I don't know how you can square this statement with a conversation we had less than two months ago:

rpupkin wrote: Is a "prestigious" clerkship a necessary condition for being hired at W&C or Kellogg? No. But that's not what you said. You said the firms "don't care" where you clerk. I think that's wrong. At W&C, for example, an applicant who clerked in SDNY or DDC is in a stronger position than an applicant who clerked in the middle of the country. Can the latter still get hired? Sure. But those in the former category will have a better shot.

I agree with your latter statement, but it is markedly different than your former one. You are definitely more experienced with clerkship hiring/legal hiring than I am, so I am curious on understanding your thoughts.

Here's the difference: With district court clerkships, prestige is generally driven by the district in which you clerk; with COA clerkships, prestige is generally driven by the judge. There are exceptions at both levels, but that's the general rule.