Top Law Schools

Currently 116 vacancies in the federal judiciary.. with GOP controlling White House and Senate, I assume there will be a significant number of new judges soon..

Anyone think this could result in a flood of new clerkship positions on OSCAR?

Anonymous User wrote:Currently 116 vacancies in the federal judiciary.. with GOP controlling White House and Senate, I assume there will be a significant number of new judges soon..

Anyone think this could result in a flood of new clerkship positions on OSCAR?

Why do you assume this? I thought there was a freeze and an order to decrease federal employment by attrition?

Npret wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Currently 116 vacancies in the federal judiciary.. with GOP controlling White House and Senate, I assume there will be a significant number of new judges soon..

Anyone think this could result in a flood of new clerkship positions on OSCAR?

Why do you assume this? I thought there was a freeze and an order to decrease federal employment by attrition?

You understand that EOs only apply to the executive branch right?

Anonymous User wrote:

Npret wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Currently 116 vacancies in the federal judiciary.. with GOP controlling White House and Senate, I assume there will be a significant number of new judges soon..

Anyone think this could result in a flood of new clerkship positions on OSCAR?

Why do you assume this? I thought there was a freeze and an order to decrease federal employment by attrition?

You understand that EOs only apply to the executive branch right?

Even if it applied to judiciary employees generally, there's no way it would apply to Art. III judge positions.

Which is why 0Ls should probably refrain from posting in the "Judicial Clerkships" forum

Pretty sure I know who Npret is and he's not a 0L. I'm presuming brain fart.

Plenty of vacancies in Texas, but that means you will clerk for somebody who earned the approval of Ted Cruz...

john_brown wrote:Plenty of vacancies in Texas, but that means you will clerk for somebody who earned the approval of Ted Cruz...

That is also true of some judges whom Obama appointed.

A. Nony Mouse wrote:Pretty sure I know who Npret is and he's not a 0L. I'm presuming brain fart.

Yep. Not thinking. My bad.
My idea was that assuming new judges would be hired was possibly faulty is the idea is to keep the fed workforce down.

Bump. Any idea when the first round of lower court nominations will occur?

Names are being considered for the CA5 vacancies. I assume the CA10 vacancy arising from Gorsuch will start to get consideration at the end of this year maybe.

Anonymous User wrote:Names are being considered for the CA5 vacancies. I assume the CA10 vacancy arising from Gorsuch will start to get consideration at the end of this year maybe.

The judiciary recommended that congress not fill gorsuch's seat, fyi

I hope you're right with the Gorsuch point, but I am inclined to disagree. More generally, there are d.ct. judges around the country who are now sitting in designation because of COA vacancies. The 3d Cir. for example has had a few vacancies for a while now, and I think is about to get another with another retirement coming. Obama didn't fill these vacancies (likely because he couldn't) and Trump is extremely slow to confirm various administrative/bureaucratic positions across the government. So, just because a SCOTUS confirmation leaves an COA position open does not mean anything insofar as when a new COA nomination occurs. But hey, here's to hoping. It'd be great if he forced 115 more people to consider us on Oscar...

wwwcol wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Names are being considered for the CA5 vacancies. I assume the CA10 vacancy arising from Gorsuch will start to get consideration at the end of this year maybe.

The judiciary recommended that congress not fill gorsuch's seat, fyi

What is your source for this? I find this highly unlikely since the judicial conference just recommended 5 additional circuit seats be created (all in the 9th, but clearly all circuits are overworked).

Anonymous User wrote:I hope you're right with the Gorsuch point, but I am inclined to disagree. More generally, there are d.ct. judges around the country who are now sitting in designation because of COA vacancies. The 3d Cir. for example has had a few vacancies for a while now, and I think is about to get another with another retirement coming. Obama didn't fill these vacancies (likely because he couldn't) and Trump is extremely slow to confirm various administrative/bureaucratic positions across the government. So, just because a SCOTUS confirmation leaves an COA position open does not mean anything insofar as when a new COA nomination occurs. But hey, here's to hoping. It'd be great if he forced 115 more people to consider us on Oscar...

Haha I don't have skin in this game anymore (except maybe one of my judges might be a strong contender for a CA10 seat) but I know how painful the process is so I feel sympathy for anyone still in the hunt.

FascinatedWanderer wrote:

wwwcol wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Names are being considered for the CA5 vacancies. I assume the CA10 vacancy arising from Gorsuch will start to get consideration at the end of this year maybe.

The judiciary recommended that congress not fill gorsuch's seat, fyi

What is your source for this? I find this highly unlikely since the judicial conference just recommended 5 additional circuit seats be created (all in the 9th, but clearly all circuits are overworked).

I don't think that's clear at all.

Data from hereand here

Circuit # of Cases filed (2013) # of Judgeships (2016) Cases/Judgeship
1 1555 6 259
2 5200 13 400
3 3694 14 264
4 5076 15 338
5 7534 17 443
6 5019 16 314
7 2943 11 268
8 3029 11 275
9 12593 29 434
10 2123 12 177
11 6546 12 546
DC 1141 11 104

The 10th Circuit has the same number of judgeships as the 11th. Yet it has less than 1/3 the number of cases. The only circuit moving fewer cases per judge than the 10th is the DC Circuit, but I think there's a strong argument that their cases are more complex and take a longer period of time. There's no need for the 10th to have so many. Send some of those judgeships to the 11th and maybe the 5th or 9th.

FascinatedWanderer wrote:

wwwcol wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Names are being considered for the CA5 vacancies. I assume the CA10 vacancy arising from Gorsuch will start to get consideration at the end of this year maybe.

The judiciary recommended that congress not fill gorsuch's seat, fyi

What is your source for this? I find this highly unlikely since the judicial conference just recommended 5 additional circuit seats be created (all in the 9th, but clearly all circuits are overworked).

http://www.uscourts.gov/news/2017/03/14 ... judgeships

" In addition, the Judicial Conference also agreed to recommend to Congress and the President that they not fill the next judgeship vacancy on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit...based on consistently low filings"

Very interesting. Thanks.

Interesting. I wonder if that'll change as senior judges go inactive.

Hale87 wrote:Bump. Any idea when the first round of lower court nominations will occur?

No lower court judicial nomination will be considered until SCOTUS vacancy has been filled - so you've got a little while to wait. After Gorsuch is confirmed, I imagine there will be a flood of nominations and confirmations.

just dreaming here, but is it possible for my DC judge to become a COA judge prior to my term ending? I assume that means he/she will take me with him/her right?

Anonymous User wrote:just dreaming here, but is it possible for my DC judge to become a COA judge prior to my term ending? I assume that means he/she will take me with him/her right?

What we need to answer this question:
1) knowledge about what term you're clerking
2) knowledge about who you're clerking for
3) knowledge about the likelihood your judge will be nominated (unless your judge is Thapar)
4) knowledge about whether and when the senate will confirm the judge

This isn't a complete list. There's probably more we need to know to answer your question intelligently

wwwcol wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:just dreaming here, but is it possible for my DC judge to become a COA judge prior to my term ending? I assume that means he/she will take me with him/her right?

What we need to answer this question:
1) knowledge about what term you're clerking
2) knowledge about who you're clerking for
3) knowledge about the likelihood your judge will be nominated (unless your judge is Thapar)
4) knowledge about whether and when the senate will confirm the judge

This isn't a complete list. There's probably more we need to know to answer your question intelligently

Thapar nomination (or forthcoming nomination) might have messed up some scotus clerk unicorns. COA --> COA --> SC seems less likely than COA --> D.ct (Thapar) (or vice versa) --> SC.

EDIT: will only screw up those folks who have both clerkships set.

.

Faster than I expected.

I wouldn't be surprised if Heritage and FedSoc make trump ignore the conference and nominate someone to CA10 anyway. Probably Eid, maybe Lee.