Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=34&t=306600
I think the common wisdom is to apply for one a farther term out - it's fairer to chambers and to you to know immediately which term you're trying to fill. The only tandem hiring I've heard of was Rakoff/Katzmann.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 1:49 pmTo those who get / seek two clerkships, whether 2 CoA or one of each, do they usually apply at the same time (end of 2L if on-plan) and then "defer" one? Or do they explicitly apply for one for a term farther out? How common is tandem hiring?
Double COA is now the norm in high-flying Fed Soc circles. It’s also often done if you’re aiming for SCOTUS, especially if the second has some feeding power. Very few students are hired for SCOTUS with only one clerkship nowadays.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 2:45 pmI got my first clerkship, for immediately post-graduation, the summer before 3L, and started applying for the second (which started a year after the first) during the spring/early summer of 3L. I don’t think applying tandem makes a lot of sense unless you have two judges yoked together. You may find that someone you apply to the first go round will hire someone else but ask you about the following year, or if you get an offer from someone else another judge may ask if you’re still interested for the following year, but you can’t really predict that.
I can’t guarantee that things haven’t changed with the new plan, but I think you need to make clear which terms you’re applying for in your app (you could in theory list two terms) but be ready to take whichever term the judge offers you. I don’t think choosing to “defer” is a thing, though as noted, if you tell a judge you interviewed with that you’ve accepted an offer for term X, and they like you, they may offer you for term X+1. If your app says “term X or term X+1” you’ll need to be willing to do either of those terms. If you just apply for term X+1, they may just not bother considering you until they normally hire for that term.
(Why would you do two COA?)
I am in those circles and I am not exactly sure why people do two clerkships so often. I plan on trying for the D.C. circuit after my clerkship because I am quite interested in AdLaw. I suppose some people may want to "climb" from a non-feeder or semi-feeder to a major feeder, but I also see a lot of people taking second COA clerkships with non-feeders.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jul 23, 2020 1:00 pmOf course you need two clerkships, but most that I’ve seen are DCt and COA (with the occasional random Liu/Cuellar thrown in). I’ll admit to not being up on high-flying Fed Soc circles, though.
I am pretty plugged into “high-flying Fed Soc circles” and this is dumb. It is in no way an expectation. It’s the result of lots of judges being confirmed very quickly and trying to staff up, which has led to an arms race for T14 candidates among new judges trying to establish prominence. And when you’re a law student with multiple judges wanting to hire you, it’s a lot easier to say “sure thing” because the financial downside isn’t immediately obvious.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jul 23, 2020 11:47 amDouble COA is now the norm in high-flying Fed Soc circles. It’s also often done if you’re aiming for SCOTUS, especially if the second has some feeding power. Very few students are hired for SCOTUS with only one clerkship nowadays.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 2:45 pmI got my first clerkship, for immediately post-graduation, the summer before 3L, and started applying for the second (which started a year after the first) during the spring/early summer of 3L. I don’t think applying tandem makes a lot of sense unless you have two judges yoked together. You may find that someone you apply to the first go round will hire someone else but ask you about the following year, or if you get an offer from someone else another judge may ask if you’re still interested for the following year, but you can’t really predict that.
I can’t guarantee that things haven’t changed with the new plan, but I think you need to make clear which terms you’re applying for in your app (you could in theory list two terms) but be ready to take whichever term the judge offers you. I don’t think choosing to “defer” is a thing, though as noted, if you tell a judge you interviewed with that you’ve accepted an offer for term X, and they like you, they may offer you for term X+1. If your app says “term X or term X+1” you’ll need to be willing to do either of those terms. If you just apply for term X+1, they may just not bother considering you until they normally hire for that term.
(Why would you do two COA?)
I didn’t say it’s a good idea for candidates, just that it’s become very common, as any skim of a top school’s clerkship manual or the recent classes of SCOTUS clerks shows. I think part of it might also be that since Thapar’s elevation there isn’t an established feeder conservative district judge, though Friedrich may fill that gap and there are probably some other candidates (maybe Kovner, Manasco, Nichols, Pacold, etc.).Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jul 23, 2020 1:18 pmI am pretty plugged into “high-flying Fed Soc circles” and this is dumb. It is in no way an expectation. It’s the result of lots of judges being confirmed very quickly and trying to staff up, which has led to an arms race for T14 candidates among new judges trying to establish prominence. And when you’re a law student with multiple judges wanting to hire you, it’s a lot easier to say “sure thing” because the financial downside isn’t immediately obvious.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jul 23, 2020 11:47 amDouble COA is now the norm in high-flying Fed Soc circles. It’s also often done if you’re aiming for SCOTUS, especially if the second has some feeding power. Very few students are hired for SCOTUS with only one clerkship nowadays.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 2:45 pmI got my first clerkship, for immediately post-graduation, the summer before 3L, and started applying for the second (which started a year after the first) during the spring/early summer of 3L. I don’t think applying tandem makes a lot of sense unless you have two judges yoked together. You may find that someone you apply to the first go round will hire someone else but ask you about the following year, or if you get an offer from someone else another judge may ask if you’re still interested for the following year, but you can’t really predict that.
I can’t guarantee that things haven’t changed with the new plan, but I think you need to make clear which terms you’re applying for in your app (you could in theory list two terms) but be ready to take whichever term the judge offers you. I don’t think choosing to “defer” is a thing, though as noted, if you tell a judge you interviewed with that you’ve accepted an offer for term X, and they like you, they may offer you for term X+1. If your app says “term X or term X+1” you’ll need to be willing to do either of those terms. If you just apply for term X+1, they may just not bother considering you until they normally hire for that term.
(Why would you do two COA?)
source: I clerked for two COA judges, including a recent appointee, and this is the name of the game.
Boasberg had a TON of hires in the recent announcementAnonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jul 23, 2020 2:10 pmI didn’t say it’s a good idea for candidates, just that it’s become very common, as any skim of a top school’s clerkship manual or the recent classes of SCOTUS clerks shows. I think part of it might also be that since Thapar’s elevation there isn’t an established feeder conservative district judge, though Friedrich may fill that gap and there are probably some other candidates (maybe Kovner, Manasco, Nichols, Pacold, etc.).Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jul 23, 2020 1:18 pmI am pretty plugged into “high-flying Fed Soc circles” and this is dumb. It is in no way an expectation. It’s the result of lots of judges being confirmed very quickly and trying to staff up, which has led to an arms race for T14 candidates among new judges trying to establish prominence. And when you’re a law student with multiple judges wanting to hire you, it’s a lot easier to say “sure thing” because the financial downside isn’t immediately obvious.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jul 23, 2020 11:47 amDouble COA is now the norm in high-flying Fed Soc circles. It’s also often done if you’re aiming for SCOTUS, especially if the second has some feeding power. Very few students are hired for SCOTUS with only one clerkship nowadays.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 2:45 pmI got my first clerkship, for immediately post-graduation, the summer before 3L, and started applying for the second (which started a year after the first) during the spring/early summer of 3L. I don’t think applying tandem makes a lot of sense unless you have two judges yoked together. You may find that someone you apply to the first go round will hire someone else but ask you about the following year, or if you get an offer from someone else another judge may ask if you’re still interested for the following year, but you can’t really predict that.
I can’t guarantee that things haven’t changed with the new plan, but I think you need to make clear which terms you’re applying for in your app (you could in theory list two terms) but be ready to take whichever term the judge offers you. I don’t think choosing to “defer” is a thing, though as noted, if you tell a judge you interviewed with that you’ve accepted an offer for term X, and they like you, they may offer you for term X+1. If your app says “term X or term X+1” you’ll need to be willing to do either of those terms. If you just apply for term X+1, they may just not bother considering you until they normally hire for that term.
(Why would you do two COA?)
source: I clerked for two COA judges, including a recent appointee, and this is the name of the game.
The second associate was actually hired by Thomas lol.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Jul 23, 2020 1:15 pmFor example, Consovoy has a dude who went Pryor (11th) -> Henderson (DC Circ) -> Thomas. DC Circuit is different than the regular circuits I guess, but Pryor was already a feeder.
A more pertinent example: Another associate went Gruender (8th) -> Coney Barrett (7th); I assume this person thought two "rumored SCOTUS candidates" was better than one for their inevitable Thomas application.