Top Law Schools

I'm a 2L at a T50 school (Tulane, Florida State, UNLV). I'm considering applying for COA clerkships.

Stats:
- 4.0/4.0 GPA
- Primary Law Journal (1 publication)

I'm politically left-wing but willing to put Fed Soc on my resume to increase my credibility with certain judges.

Do I have any shot or should I just kill myself? Let me know your thoughts.

You have a shot, especially with judges who traditionally hire the top students from your school. You might improve your chances by doing a district court clerkship first. I wouldn’t lie about your political affiliation though - having to maintain that fiction for judges who care and filter for that affiliation would suck.

Yeah, if you look up on LinkedIn those whom regional judges have hired (think Louisiana, Florida, etc.), you'll see that there is a real preference for graduates of local schools.

New York is probably the only state where the judges don't prefer their own--even California prefers California.

In short, you have a good chance with a 4.0/law review from a TTT.

Anonymous User wrote:I'm a 2L at a T50 school (Tulane, Florida State, UNLV). I'm considering applying for COA clerkships.

Stats:
- 4.0/4.0 GPA
- Primary Law Journal (1 publication)

I'm politically left-wing but willing to put Fed Soc on my resume to increase my credibility with certain judges.

Do I have any shot or should I just kill myself? Let me know your thoughts.

You don’t got to a TTT if you go to a T50; also in my hometown at least the local COA judge loves to hire top students (like literaly top 5 people with a greater preference for 1 or 2) from the local TT. Also, why not apply for D.Ct. Clerkships as well? It can boost your chances at getting a COA significantly if you clerk beforehand

You also have a pretty decent shot at biglaw with those numbers. It's a lot easier to get a clerkship with a couple years of biglaw under your belt. Some judges like practice experience, and many firms have connections with local judges such that a partner can just call up the judge and at least get you a serious look.

Definitely apply to local (to your school and your home turf, if different) COA judges and any that have hired from your school in the past. Note that some judges will wait for the Plan, while others will have already hired for 2021 (particularly Fed Soc-placed judges). I also second the advice to do a year or two of experience---District Ct clerkship, biglaw, or both---before applying, because (1) many judges prefer experienced clerks over straight-out clerks; (2) you will have more lead time to apply to judges who hire further out; and (3) you won't be subject to the Plan.

I'd also say that joining Fed Soc at this point, particularly if you don't buy into the mission, will likely not help much. The judges who prefer hiring Fed Soc like to hire leadership (president/exec) and also tend to hire further out (as indicated above, many are full for 2021).

Perfect GPA? Top of the class, or at least top 1%? That's competitive for COAs, even at a T50. I think I'm even more bullish on your chances than some of the others here. Those credentials aren't just "you have a shot," they're very good.

Yes, it's true that you'll be most competitive for clerkships in the area where judges are more likely to have hired from your school before. I think of the three schools you gave, UNLV is probably the worst off because 9th Circuit positions attract tons of applicants. 5th and 11th Circuit judges hiring top students from regional mediocre-rank schools is something that happens pretty regularly. But judges hiring a top ranked student from a school on the other side of the country is a thing that happens, too.

texanslimjim wrote:Perfect GPA? Top of the class, or at least top 1%? That's competitive for COAs, even at a T50. I think I'm even more bullish on your chances than some of the others here. Those credentials aren't just "you have a shot," they're very good.

Yes, it's true that you'll be most competitive for clerkships in the area where judges are more likely to have hired from your school before. I think of the three schools you gave, UNLV is probably the worst off because 9th Circuit positions attract tons of applicants. 5th and 11th Circuit judges hiring top students from regional mediocre-rank schools is something that happens pretty regularly. But judges hiring a top ranked student from a school on the other side of the country is a thing that happens, too.

Bybee is competitive, but I know he's willing to hire from UNLV. And Rawlinson is somebody who likes to hire from outside the t14 (just sticking to the Vegas judges). But yes, OP definitely has a good shot if he/she has institutional support. A D. Ct. clerkship would make it even more attainable.

OP here. Thanks for all the replies fellas.

nixy wrote:You have a shot, especially with judges who traditionally hire the top students from your school.

Wild Card wrote:Yeah, if you look up on LinkedIn those whom regional judges have hired (think Louisiana, Florida, etc.), you'll see that there is a real preference for graduates of local schools.

Libya wrote:You don’t got to a TTT if you go to a T50; also in my hometown at least the local COA judge loves to hire top students (like literaly top 5 people with a greater preference for 1 or 2) from the local TT.

decimalsanddollars wrote:Definitely apply to local (to your school and your home turf, if different) COA judges and any that have hired from your school in the past.

Sounds like the consensus is to apply broadly and prioritize alumni/local connections.

nixy wrote:You might improve your chances by doing a district court clerkship first.

Libya wrote:Also, why not apply for D.Ct. Clerkships as well? It can boost your chances at getting a COA significantly if you clerk beforehand

lavarman84 wrote:A D. Ct. clerkship would make it even more attainable.

I guess I'll probably send out all my COA applications first, but if I get no bites, apply to D. Ct. clerkships to increase my chances for a later COA clerkship.

nealric wrote:You also have a pretty decent shot at biglaw with those numbers. It's a lot easier to get a clerkship with a couple years of biglaw under your belt. Some judges like practice experience, and many firms have connections with local judges such that a partner can just call up the judge and at least get you a serious look.

I'll be an SA in BigLaw between 2L and 3L.

nixy wrote:I wouldn’t lie about your political affiliation though - having to maintain that fiction for judges who care and filter for that affiliation would suck.

decimalsanddollars wrote:I'd also say that joining Fed Soc at this point, particularly if you don't buy into the mission, will likely not help much. The judges who prefer hiring Fed Soc like to hire leadership (president/exec) and also tend to hire further out (as indicated above, many are full for 2021).

Sounds like I should leave Fed Soc off the resume then.

Anonymous User wrote:Sounds like I should leave Fed Soc off the resume then.

If you're actually a member, I wouldn't leave it off when applying to conservative judges. But you have to keep in mind that they might ask you about it.

lavarman84 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Sounds like I should leave Fed Soc off the resume then.

If you're actually a member, I wouldn't leave it off when applying to conservative judges. But you have to keep in mind that they might ask you about it.

Putting FedSoc on your resume of you don't mean it is a truly terrible idea.

Anonymous User wrote:

lavarman84 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Sounds like I should leave Fed Soc off the resume then.

If you're actually a member, I wouldn't leave it off when applying to conservative judges. But you have to keep in mind that they might ask you about it.

Putting FedSoc on your resume of you don't mean it is a truly terrible idea.

No one was advocating for that. If the poster is actually a member (i.e. "they mean it"), then they can and should put it on their resume to take advantage of the hiring boost.

If you meant that they "don't mean it" in the sense that they don't subscribe to the traditional values of Fed Soc, last I checked, the organization still maintains that it is not aligned with either political party or some sort of secret signal for conservative clerkship hiring. If that's not true, maybe it's Fed Soc that needs to start saying what it means.

I mean, I think expressing any affiliation on a resume that does not actually align with your political affiliations is a bad idea. Whatever FedSoc says about its purpose/affiliation, listing it on a resume is going to imply a certain political stance.* If that actually is your political stance, that’s fine. If it’s not, you may run into some awkward conversation with someone who thought you were something you’re not.

*Disclaimer: unless the rest of your resume shows broad interest in all politics, like you’re a member of FedSoc, AND the liberal equivalent whose name I always forget, Young Libertarians, AND the local ACLU chapter, etc. FedSoc alone is definitely signalling a political stance.

I omit FedSoc only when applying to "Obama judges."

OP, district court clerkships are extremely selective and worthwhile experiences: ask anyone who's done one.

Having a district court clerkship in the district embracing your school, or in your home district, is certainly better than having nothing at all.

decimalsanddollars, above, is absolutely right with respect to application strategy.

nixy wrote:I mean, I think expressing any affiliation on a resume that does not actually align with your political affiliations is a bad idea. Whatever FedSoc says about its purpose/affiliation, listing it on a resume is going to imply a certain political stance.* If that actually is your political stance, that’s fine. If it’s not, you may run into some awkward conversation with someone who thought you were something you’re not.

*Disclaimer: unless the rest of your resume shows broad interest in all politics, like you’re a member of FedSoc, AND the liberal equivalent whose name I always forget, Young Libertarians, AND the local ACLU chapter, etc. FedSoc alone is definitely signalling a political stance.

Why? Maybe others are different, but I don't have any issue working with/for people who aren't politically aligned with me. Then again, I'm more on the moderate side of things (center-left), but I clerked for an Obama appointee and a Bush appointee. The party and candidates I support have little effect on how I view the law.

I guess if you're overly ideological, yes, it's a bad idea. But I doubt people who are overly ideological would be willing to clerk for a conservative judge or be able to say they're a member of the FedSoc. Even if you disagree with your judge and coclerks politically, most people have the capacity to deal with that for a year. If OP weren't comfortable with that, I doubt he/she would float it as an option.

lavarman84 wrote:

nixy wrote:I mean, I think expressing any affiliation on a resume that does not actually align with your political affiliations is a bad idea. Whatever FedSoc says about its purpose/affiliation, listing it on a resume is going to imply a certain political stance.* If that actually is your political stance, that’s fine. If it’s not, you may run into some awkward conversation with someone who thought you were something you’re not.

*Disclaimer: unless the rest of your resume shows broad interest in all politics, like you’re a member of FedSoc, AND the liberal equivalent whose name I always forget, Young Libertarians, AND the local ACLU chapter, etc. FedSoc alone is definitely signalling a political stance.

Why? Maybe others are different, but I don't have any issue working with/for people who aren't politically aligned with me. Then again, I'm more on the moderate side of things (center-left), but I clerked for an Obama appointee and a Bush appointee. The party and candidates I support have little effect on how I view the law.

I guess if you're overly ideological, yes, it's a bad idea. But I doubt people who are overly ideological would be willing to clerk for a conservative judge or be able to say they're a member of the FedSoc. Even if you disagree with your judge and coclerks politically, most people have the capacity to deal with that for a year. If OP weren't comfortable with that, I doubt he/she would float it as an option.

My point wasn’t that you can’t clerk for someone you disagree with (I did), my point is, don’t misrepresent your politics on your resume. Because if the judge cares about what your politics are, maintaining a fiction for a year is going to be a drag. So I’m not saying don’t clerk for a FedSoc judge if you disagree with FedSoc politics, I’m saying don’t claim you have FedSoc politics if you don’t. (Because the only judges it will make a difference with are judges who actively want a FedSoc perspective.) I think being able to deal with judges and clerks you disagree with politically is very different from maintaining an affirmative representation that you do agree with them. Just don’t go into politics on your resume.

(But then I also think it’s fairly bogus to misrepresent something about yourself to get a job, frankly.)

nixy wrote:

lavarman84 wrote:

nixy wrote:I mean, I think expressing any affiliation on a resume that does not actually align with your political affiliations is a bad idea. Whatever FedSoc says about its purpose/affiliation, listing it on a resume is going to imply a certain political stance.* If that actually is your political stance, that’s fine. If it’s not, you may run into some awkward conversation with someone who thought you were something you’re not.

*Disclaimer: unless the rest of your resume shows broad interest in all politics, like you’re a member of FedSoc, AND the liberal equivalent whose name I always forget, Young Libertarians, AND the local ACLU chapter, etc. FedSoc alone is definitely signalling a political stance.

Why? Maybe others are different, but I don't have any issue working with/for people who aren't politically aligned with me. Then again, I'm more on the moderate side of things (center-left), but I clerked for an Obama appointee and a Bush appointee. The party and candidates I support have little effect on how I view the law.

I guess if you're overly ideological, yes, it's a bad idea. But I doubt people who are overly ideological would be willing to clerk for a conservative judge or be able to say they're a member of the FedSoc. Even if you disagree with your judge and coclerks politically, most people have the capacity to deal with that for a year. If OP weren't comfortable with that, I doubt he/she would float it as an option.

My point wasn’t that you can’t clerk for someone you disagree with (I did), my point is, don’t misrepresent your politics on your resume. Because if the judge cares about what your politics are, maintaining a fiction for a year is going to be a drag. So I’m not saying don’t clerk for a FedSoc judge if you disagree with FedSoc politics, I’m saying don’t claim you have FedSoc politics if you don’t. (Because the only judges it will make a difference with are judges who actively want a FedSoc perspective.) I think being able to deal with judges and clerks you disagree with politically is very different from maintaining an affirmative representation that you do agree with them. Just don’t go into politics on your resume.

(But then I also think it’s fairly bogus to misrepresent something about yourself to get a job, frankly.)

Well, as I understood it, OP was/is a member of FedSoc. Obviously, I wasn't telling OP to pretend to be a member if he/she wasn't. But yeah, if OP is a member and it'll give him/her a boost, I'd put it on. The clerkship game is tough. Gotta use what you can.

Sure, except in the OP, the OP said:

Anonymous User wrote:I'm politically left-wing but willing to put Fed Soc on my resume to increase my credibility with certain judges.

which was the entire reason why I said "don't misrepresent your political alignment" (and I also said that if they were fine with the FedSoc political alignment, that's fine too).

I wouldn't put FedSoc down unless (a) you are actually a member, and (b) you're comfortable talking about originalism, textualism, what the org means to you, etc.

It's not really about the politics -- plenty of dedicated members are say, pro-gay marriage as a matter of policy -- but your methodological priors in constitutional/statutory interpretation. And if you don't have any, like, it's just ... very obvious, very quickly, that you just listed the org to get an interview.

It'd be like say, claiming you love the Lakers when you've only watched a handful of games over the years. It'll take an actual fan maybe 5 minutes to find out you're full of shit -- you can't talk about Shaq vs Kobe, Derek Fisher, Jeanie Buss, the Mike Brown era, "was Pau actually soft", etc.

^this is a better articulation of what I was trying to say.

LBJ's Hair wrote:It'd be like say, claiming you love the Lakers when you've only watched a handful of games over the years. It'll take an actual fan maybe 5 minutes to find out you're full of shit -- you can't talk about Shaq vs Kobe, Derek Fisher, Jeanie Buss, the Mike Brown era, "was Pau actually soft", etc.

Are there...are there any judges looking for this? Swear to God, that judge would jump to the top of my list.

Pennoyer v. Meh wrote:

LBJ's Hair wrote:It'd be like say, claiming you love the Lakers when you've only watched a handful of games over the years. It'll take an actual fan maybe 5 minutes to find out you're full of shit -- you can't talk about Shaq vs Kobe, Derek Fisher, Jeanie Buss, the Mike Brown era, "was Pau actually soft", etc.

Are there...are there any judges looking for this? Swear to God, that judge would jump to the top of my list.

My judge would love to talk basketball with his clerks, although he prefers the local team. One time, after unsuccessfully trying to talk about the previous night's game with me, he jokingly complained, "You can't talk basketball. You won't talk politics. I don't know why I let you stick around." So there's at least one judge who would look favorably on someone who listed basketball as one of their interests at the bottom of their resume.

LBJ's Hair wrote:. . .
It'd be like say, claiming you love the Lakers when you've only watched a handful of games over the years. It'll take an actual fan maybe 5 minutes to find out you're full of shit -- you can't talk about Shaq vs Kobe, Derek Fisher, Jeanie Buss, the Mike Brown era, "was Pau actually soft", etc.

I remember reading that Ted Cruz put on his resume that he was an avid tennis player, and when Rehnquist asked him to join him for doubles, well...

I think it's everyone's nightmare to be exposed as a fraud, but how often it happens--well, it's scandalous when it does happen.

I said above that I omitted FedSoc for "Obama judges." Before I did so, I interviewed with a card-carrying ACS member whose clerks asked me outright whether I would be able to work for a judge with whom I had ideological differences. That's the extent of the grilling I've received.

Not the OP, but I have a similar inquiry

I go to a TTT school around T70-80. I am top 3%. I am potentially either top 2 or top 3 student in my entire class, but I will not know the official result until June. (My school frustrating does not release the actual order until graduation) How do you find the judges that are interested in top students?

As of now, after my many applications for the 2020 term, I feel like I am being docked for not coming from a T14 school. My resume and cover letter have been reviewed, and I have good letters of recs. I don't know how to get myself out of the pile and into an interview. I have a legal job lined up for after law school (DOJ Honors), but I still hope to clerk someday in either the 2022 or 2023 term.

Any tips for finding judges interested in students outside the T14 range? Thank you so much!

Anonymous User wrote:Not the OP, but I have a similar inquiry

I go to a TTT school around T70-80. I am top 3%. I am potentially either top 2 or top 3 student in my entire class, but I will not know the official result until June. (My school frustrating does not release the actual order until graduation) How do you find the judges that are interested in top students?

As of now, after my many applications for the 2020 term, I feel like I am being docked for not coming from a T14 school. My resume and cover letter have been reviewed, and I have good letters of recs. I don't know how to get myself out of the pile and into an interview. I have a legal job lined up for after law school (DOJ Honors), but I still hope to clerk someday in either the 2022 or 2023 term.

Any tips for finding judges interested in students outside the T14 range? Thank you so much!

If you already landed DOJ Honors, there are some scenarios where it wouldn't make sense to clerk because of the way litigating components do mentorship, assign cases, and require some minimum number of years of practice with them. The only one where it definitely WOULD make sense to clerk is if you're doing a temporary position like EOIR-OCIJ, in which case you should apply for the term immediately after your program finishes.

As for how to find the judges, it depends where you are, but most judges not located in NYC, DC, SF, LA, Chicago, and maybe Boston (as well as many judges in those places) have some sort of preference for clerks with ties to the area. Where do you have ties? Did you grow up/work before law school in the same city that your law school is in? Where is your DOJ Honors spot placing you? Any of these locations would render you a "local" pick for a judge in that area, and your grades are good enough to qualify you for the "local clerk spot" to the extent any given judge saves one. Also, it is likely that at least one federal judge went to your law school; you should apply to every federal judge that went to your law school (assuming they're in a location you could stand). Do you have any personal connections that could yield an "in" with any judges? Those are worth exploring if you do. Finally, I imagine your law school's career office would enthusiastically help you strategize your clerkship search, seeing as you're one of their few students most likely to land one. Those resources definitely vary, but it is worth a meeting to see what those people can do for you. As someone who had to grind for my clerkship, I'm happy to talk more by pm.