Page 1 of 2
Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:04 pm
by Husker22
The title is provocative clickbait but there is a good case to be made that Supreme Court feeders are disappearing.
On the conservative side, feeders are disappearing due to an embarrassment of riches. Of the Trump appointees, Judges Thapar, Katsas, Larsen, Willett, Stras, Grant, Rao, Oldman, Friederich, and Kovner have already fed while Judges Newsom, Richardson, Park, and Menashi (among others) are reasonably likely to feed at some point soon. Some older judges without long recent feeding records such as Judges Carnes, Gruender, and Jerry Smith have also started to feed some now that so many clerkships are available. All of these judges screen heavily based on ideology. As a result, any competitive conservative clerkship applicant can now be reasonably assured of getting one, or more typically two, clerkships with a judge who sends clerks at least occasionally to the Court. The only peak-age “true” feeders remaining are Judges Katsas, Pryor, and Sutton; Judges O'Scannlain and Wilkinson are active but quite old.
On the liberal side, feeders are disappearing due to age and a paucity of clerkships. First, the old feeders are declining. Every active “true” liberal feeder—Judges Garland, Fletcher, Katzmann, and Tatel—is eligible for senior status. What’s more, Judges Katzmann and Tatel were heavily reliant on their relationships with Justice Ginsburg for their feeding power and Judges Tatel and Fletcher are at this point quite old. Second, contrary to earlier speculation, new feeders are not obviously rising to replace them. Judge Srinivasan is the only Obama appointee who feeds more than occasionally. Judges Pillard, Watford, Wilkins, Barron, and Friedland are currently minor feeders. With only three liberal justices left and an incredible imbalance of liberal justices and liberal clerk applicants, it will be hard for another traditional true feeder to rise.
I think we can see this trend already in the clerks hired this year (minus Justices Ginsburg and Stevens’s clerks). Asterisked judges are either on the Court, retired, or in their late seventies or older.
5: W. Pryor
3: Srinivasan, Wilkinson*
2: Barrett,* Carnes, Garland, Katsas, Katzmann, Kavanaugh,* Sutton
1: Calabresi,* Colloton, Fletcher,* Kozinski,* Lohier, Lynch, P. Kelly,* Kethledge, Livingston, Pillard, Oldham, O’Scannlain,* Owen, Silberman,* Stras, Sykes, Rao, Tatel,* Thapar, Watford, Wilkins
I think that there’s good news and bad news in this trend for aspiring clerks.
The good news is that it seems less likely to matter drastically which particular feeder you get going forward. Outside of the small handful of remaining true feeders, your judge won’t have a huge impact on your chances of SCOTUS. That also means SCOTUS clerkships might become somewhat less arbitrary in a way, depending less on how you did on the market 2L (or 1L) summer.
The bad news is that, for liberal clerks, the underlying reason for this is that you will have very little shot at SCOTUS even with a perfect resume no matter who you clerk for. And for liberal applicants outside of HYS, you’re especially out of luck; the remaining liberal justices are highly school-sensitive even for SCOTUS and Justice Kagan virtually never hires below Harvard. In 2020, the remaining liberals hired only one clerk from CCN and only one clerk from schools ranked below 6.
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2020 2:56 pm
by jackshunger
Husker22 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:04 pm
The title is provocative clickbait but there is a good case to be made that Supreme Court feeders are disappearing.
On the conservative side, feeders are disappearing due to an embarrassment of riches. Of the Trump appointees, Judges Thapar, Katsas, Larsen, Willett, Stras, Grant, Rao, Oldman, Friederich, and Kovner have already fed while Judges Newsom, Richardson, Park, and Menashi (among others) are reasonably likely to feed at some point soon. Some older judges without long recent feeding records such as Judges Carnes, Gruender, and Jerry Smith have also started to feed some now that so many clerkships are available. All of these judges screen heavily based on ideology. As a result, any competitive conservative clerkship applicant can now be reasonably assured of getting one, or more typically two, clerkships with a judge who sends clerks at least occasionally to the Court. The only peak-age “true” feeders remaining are Judges Katsas, Pryor, and Sutton; Judges O'Scannlain and Wilkinson are active but quite old.
On the liberal side, feeders are disappearing due to age and a paucity of clerkships. First, the old feeders are declining. Every active “true” liberal feeder—Judges Garland, Fletcher, Katzmann, and Tatel—is eligible for senior status. What’s more, Judges Katzmann and Tatel were heavily reliant on their relationships with Justice Ginsburg for their feeding power and Judges Tatel and Fletcher are at this point quite old. Second, contrary to earlier speculation, new feeders are not obviously rising to replace them. Judge Srinivasan is the only Obama appointee who feeds more than occasionally. Judges Pillard, Watford, Wilkins, Barron, and Friedland are currently minor feeders. With only three liberal justices left and an incredible imbalance of liberal justices and liberal clerk applicants, it will be hard for another traditional true feeder to rise.
I think we can see this trend already in the clerks hired this year (minus Justices Ginsburg and Stevens’s clerks). Asterisked judges are either on the Court, retired, or in their late seventies or older.
5: W. Pryor
3: Srinivasan, Wilkinson*
2: Barrett,* Carnes, Garland, Katsas, Katzmann, Kavanaugh,* Sutton
1: Calabresi,* Colloton, Fletcher,* Kozinski,* Lohier, Lynch, P. Kelly,* Kethledge, Livingston, Pillard, Oldham, O’Scannlain,* Owen, Silberman,* Stras, Sykes, Rao, Tatel,* Thapar, Watford, Wilkins
I think that there’s good news and bad news in this trend for aspiring clerks.
The good news is that it seems less likely to matter drastically which particular feeder you get going forward. Outside of the small handful of remaining true feeders, your judge won’t have a huge impact on your chances of SCOTUS. That also means SCOTUS clerkships might become somewhat less arbitrary in a way, depending less on how you did on the market 2L (or 1L) summer.
The bad news is that, for liberal clerks, the underlying reason for this is that you will have very little shot at SCOTUS even with a perfect resume no matter who you clerk for. And for liberal applicants outside of HYS, you’re especially out of luck; the remaining liberal justices are highly school-sensitive even for SCOTUS and Justice Kagan virtually never hires below Harvard. In 2020, the remaining liberals hired only one clerk from CCN and only one clerk from schools ranked below 6.
The analysis here seems on relatively on point and is probably for the best. Feeder hiring is insane, and some of them of them hire after the first semester of 1L grades, so anything that diminishes that can only be seen as a positive. Roberts hardly ever hires conservative clerks though, so it isn't as bad for liberal students as you've made out as long as they attend a T-6 school, but that has been the case for a long time.
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2020 3:28 pm
by nixy
I think this
As a result, any competitive conservative clerkship applicant can now be reasonably assured of getting one, or more typically two, clerkships with a judge who sends clerks at least occasionally to the Court.
is a little bit hyperbolic. I agree it’s probably easier than it was, but I don’t know about “reasonably assured” (I suppose it depends a little on what “competitive” means to you).
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2020 3:31 pm
by YA_Tittle
I agree with most of this. Another important point: three of the biggest young, conservative feeders which sucked up a lot of the top conservative students are now on the Supreme Court themselves.
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2020 4:03 pm
by LBJ's Hair
I agree that there's splintering for the conservatives, but not seeing much evidence that "feeders" are dead on the liberal + Roberts side, and that's four members of the Court?
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2020 6:27 pm
by Husker22
nixy wrote: ↑Thu Nov 19, 2020 3:28 pm
I think this
As a result, any competitive conservative clerkship applicant can now be reasonably assured of getting one, or more typically two, clerkships with a judge who sends clerks at least occasionally to the Court.
is a little bit hyperbolic. I agree it’s probably easier than it was, but I don’t know about “reasonably assured” (I suppose it depends a little on what “competitive” means to you).
Fair point, by "competitive" I meant plausible SCOTUS candidates, like people in the top 10% at a T14. I believe that every cum laude Fed Soc graduate in my class (upper T14 '20) got at least one federal appellate clerkship, as did many Fed Soc students graduating without honors. All but a couple of the magna Fed Soc students got feeders or semi-feeders, as did a decent number of cum laude students.
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2020 7:39 pm
by AtSomePointItMatters
Husker22 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:04 pm
The title is provocative clickbait but there is a good case to be made that Supreme Court feeders are disappearing.
On the conservative side, feeders are disappearing due to an embarrassment of riches. Of the Trump appointees, Judges Thapar, Katsas, Larsen, Willett, Stras, Grant, Rao, Oldman, Friederich, and Kovner have already fed while Judges Newsom, Richardson, Park, and Menashi (among others) are reasonably likely to feed at some point soon. Some older judges without long recent feeding records such as Judges Carnes, Gruender, and Jerry Smith have also started to feed some now that so many clerkships are available. All of these judges screen heavily based on ideology. As a result, any competitive conservative clerkship applicant can now be reasonably assured of getting one, or more typically two, clerkships with a judge who sends clerks at least occasionally to the Court. The only peak-age “true” feeders remaining are Judges Katsas, Pryor, and Sutton; Judges O'Scannlain and Wilkinson are active but quite old.
On the liberal side, feeders are disappearing due to age and a paucity of clerkships. First, the old feeders are declining. Every active “true” liberal feeder—Judges Garland, Fletcher, Katzmann, and Tatel—is eligible for senior status. What’s more, Judges Katzmann and Tatel were heavily reliant on their relationships with Justice Ginsburg for their feeding power and Judges Tatel and Fletcher are at this point quite old. Second, contrary to earlier speculation, new feeders are not obviously rising to replace them. Judge Srinivasan is the only Obama appointee who feeds more than occasionally. Judges Pillard, Watford, Wilkins, Barron, and Friedland are currently minor feeders. With only three liberal justices left and an incredible imbalance of liberal justices and liberal clerk applicants, it will be hard for another traditional true feeder to rise.
I think we can see this trend already in the clerks hired this year (minus Justices Ginsburg and Stevens’s clerks). Asterisked judges are either on the Court, retired, or in their late seventies or older.
5: W. Pryor
3: Srinivasan, Wilkinson*
2: Barrett,* Carnes, Garland, Katsas, Katzmann, Kavanaugh,* Sutton
1: Calabresi,* Colloton, Fletcher,* Kozinski,* Lohier, Lynch, P. Kelly,* Kethledge, Livingston, Pillard, Oldham, O’Scannlain,* Owen, Silberman,* Stras, Sykes, Rao, Tatel,* Thapar, Watford, Wilkins
I think that there’s good news and bad news in this trend for aspiring clerks.
The good news is that it seems less likely to matter drastically which particular feeder you get going forward. Outside of the small handful of remaining true feeders, your judge won’t have a huge impact on your chances of SCOTUS. That also means SCOTUS clerkships might become somewhat less arbitrary in a way, depending less on how you did on the market 2L (or 1L) summer.
The bad news is that, for liberal clerks, the underlying reason for this is that you will have very little shot at SCOTUS even with a perfect resume no matter who you clerk for. And for liberal applicants outside of HYS, you’re especially out of luck; the remaining liberal justices are highly school-sensitive even for SCOTUS and Justice Kagan virtually never hires below Harvard. In 2020, the remaining liberals hired only one clerk from CCN and only one clerk from schools ranked below 6.
Not all of the judges you list "screen heavily based on ideology."
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2020 9:03 pm
by Anonymous User
Kovner did not "feed"; her SCOTUS clerk had the SCOTUS clerkship before applying to her, unless she has "fed" someone else I do not know about.
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2020 11:08 pm
by jackshunger
Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Nov 19, 2020 9:03 pm
Kovner did not "feed"; her SCOTUS clerk had the SCOTUS clerkship before applying to her, unless she has "fed" someone else I do not know about.
You know that makes her more prestigious/feeder-caliber, right?
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2020 11:43 pm
by Anonymous User
jackshunger wrote: ↑Thu Nov 19, 2020 11:08 pm
You know that makes her more prestigious/feeder-caliber, right?
Yes. She is an amazing person and a wonderful judge, and I am a huge personal fan. I just wanted to clarify how bomb she actually is and offer a more precise statement than the OP did.
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 2:11 am
by Anonymous User
There are... a lot of mischaracterizations in this thread, especially about the liberal side of things. There's a tiny kernel of truth here: fewer liberal justices to feed to, and many more conservative appellate judges to feed from, than there used to be. Ergo fewer liberal "feeds" and perhaps more diffuse conservative feeds, though I'd hypothesize there are other reasons for the latter phenomenon. Other than that... most of this is bad info.
Husker22 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:04 pm
On the liberal side, feeders are disappearing due to age and a paucity of clerkships. First, the old feeders are declining. Every active “true” liberal feeder—Judges Garland, Fletcher, Katzmann, and Tatel—is eligible for senior status.
I suppose it's strictly true that everyone on that list is eligible for senior status. I have no idea why you'd think that means they're "declining" as feeders, though. Garland and Katzmann are both in their mid-60s, with no evident intention to take senior status or stop feeding. I see no reason they can't or won't continue feeding for another 20 years, a la Reinhardt. I also disagree that these are the only "true" liberal feeders, which brings me to my next point...
Husker22 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:04 pm
Second, contrary to earlier speculation, new feeders are not obviously rising to replace them. Judge Srinivasan is the only Obama appointee who feeds more than occasionally.
"Feeds more than occasionally?" He feeds
significantly more frequently than Judge Fletcher, and in recent years more or less the same, maybe slightly better, than Judges Garland and Katzmann. (Gasp!).
On the liberal side there are three feeders that dominate the hiring: Srinivasan, Katzmann, and Garland. Tatel comes in below that tier, then Fletcher below him. Then a big gap and you get to the infrequent feeders you mentioned (Pillard, Watford, Barron, Friedland, etc). Isn't that exactly what a world where feeders are not dead would look like... a small set of judges who heavily dominate the hiring, with a sprinkling of others in between (who are also usually repeat players, albeit not as heavy hitters)? When the old guard stops feeding, the medium grade feeders will start to fill in.
jackshunger wrote: ↑Thu Nov 19, 2020 2:56 pm
Feeder hiring is insane, and some of them of them hire after the first semester of 1L grades
This is more true on the conservative side than the liberal side. Before the plan, Katzmann actually
required three semesters of grades. He's now on the plan. Garland and Srinivasan are also on the plan. Tatel not only is on the plan but prefers applicants who already have district court clerkships.
jackshunger wrote: ↑Thu Nov 19, 2020 2:56 pm
Roberts hardly ever hires conservative clerks though
What are you talking about? He hires across the political spectrum, but he
certainly hires conservative clerks, and frequently. This is only true if by "hardly ever" you mean "consistently, but not exclusively."
jackshunger wrote: ↑Thu Nov 19, 2020 11:08 pm
You know that makes her more prestigious/feeder-caliber, right?
Sure, but name recognition and prestige are not the only things a feeder judge offers his or her clerks vis-a-vis hiring. True feeders also have the connections and clout to get on the phone with a justice and make a recommendation that has weight. If a judge's "feeds" had their SCOTUS clerkships before the clerk was hired by the judge, that "feed" says nothing about the judge's ability to support a future candidate's app.
Husker22 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:04 pm
The good news is that it seems less likely to matter drastically which particular feeder you get going forward. Outside of the small handful of remaining true feeders, your judge won’t have a huge impact on your chances of SCOTUS.
This may be true on the conservative side. It is not true on the liberal side.
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 11:05 am
by Husker22
I will concede that Srinivasan is now a feeder, brave anon, which is... exactly what I said. The future may end up looking a lot like the present, of course, this post is speculative. If the major liberal feeders won't change much, it'll probably be because of Kagan, who (like RBG) relies much more heavily on "true feeders" than Breyer, Sotomayor, or Roberts.
On specific judges, I think you're a fool if you think Katzmann and Tatel losing the justice who they send almost half of their feeds to won't have an effect on their status as an A-list feeders, though. Garland will continue to be a force, more resilient than the others due to Justice Kagan's love for his clerks, but will be down to two justices he regularly feeds to, one whom might retire soon. I also think it's much more likely that Tatel and Fletcher will begin declining than become Reinhardt-esque 90-year-old feeding gods. There are far more counterexamples to Reinhardt who declined significantly in feeding power as they aged than there are examples (Calabresi, Higginbotham, Jerry Smith, Silberman, Sentelle to various extents).
+1 to your Roberts comment, which is on point despite your overall tone of hostility (and a reason to suspect that we won't see a rise of new feeders; Roberts hires very broadly).
I don't think you give a good reason to think the overall picture for liberals will be much different from how it looks for conservatives. Conservatives do have a few true, A-list feeders and will for the foreseeable future--Pryor and Sutton, for example--but (as you note) the big picture of hiring for them is rapidly dispersing.
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 11:20 am
by jackshunger
I was referring to the conservatively minded feeder with my comment about hiring early, but they don't hire exclusively conservative students anyway.
Roberts doesn't hire that many conservative clerks any more, and I am not the first person to acknowledge this. He hires about 1 per class, and they are nowhere near as conservative as the clerks he used to hire. You can see that his number of Wilkinson clerks has fallen dramatically. Partly that is self-selection; the very conservative clerks would rather clerk elsewhere.
https://twitter.com/fedjudges/status/13 ... 4396390400
I admit I have no inside knowledge about Kovner hiring a SCOTUS clerk, but I would assume Justice Kavanaugh was consulted at some point, given the unusual circumstances. I think it is safe to assume Kovner is considered a top clerkship at this point.
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:07 pm
by Husker22
In other news on the "future of feeders" beat, I doubt this will happen but...:
https://www.npr.org/sections/biden-tran ... rm=nprnews
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 8:33 pm
by polareagle
jackshunger wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 11:20 am
I admit I have no inside knowledge about Kovner hiring a SCOTUS clerk, but I would assume Justice Kavanaugh was consulted at some point, given the unusual circumstances. I think it is safe to assume Kovner is considered a top clerkship at this point.
I mean, she definitely has an impressive resume. But there's a lot of new conservative judges with impressive resumes--don't really know why she's getting singled out. District judge "feeding" is hard to puzzle out. I'd have to check to be sure, but I believe both Friedrich and Leon on D.D.C. (two very different judges in a number of ways) have had one or two clerks go to the Supreme Court each of the last few terms. They're both certainly bigger conservative feeders than Kovner at this point.
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 11:47 pm
by TheLorax
Liberals + roberts also hire clerks from a narrow band of district judges. IMO a lot of these judges would be on the circuit court but for politics these days, and we would consider them as more traditional feeders.
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 3:37 am
by Anonymous User
polareagle wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 8:33 pm
I mean, she definitely has an impressive resume. But there's a lot of new conservative judges with impressive resumes--don't really know why she's getting singled out.
Have you worked with her or in her chambers? I assume no, because if you had, your indirect question is extraordinarily easy to answer.
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 6:12 pm
by Iowahawk
Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sat Nov 21, 2020 3:37 am
polareagle wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 8:33 pm
I mean, she definitely has an impressive resume. But there's a lot of new conservative judges with impressive resumes--don't really know why she's getting singled out.
Have you worked with her or in her chambers? I assume no, because if you had, your indirect question is extraordinarily easy to answer.
I'm not even positive what this means, but some anon on this forum really loves Kovner; every time she's been brought up on every thread an anon starts talking about how wonderful she is, her SCOTUS connections, etc. Obviously she has a killer resume, but to us poor outsiders there's not a ton distinguishing her from other well-liked young Trump DJs with killer resumes like Pacold and Cronan, let alone established feederish district judges.
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 6:18 pm
by nixy
Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sat Nov 21, 2020 3:37 am
polareagle wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 8:33 pm
I mean, she definitely has an impressive resume. But there's a lot of new conservative judges with impressive resumes--don't really know why she's getting singled out.
Have you worked with her or in her chambers? I assume no, because if you had, your indirect question is extraordinarily easy to answer.
I mean, if you’ve worked with any of these judges you don’t need to ask any of these questions. Plus she’s only been on the bench for about a year. I think it’s fair to assume most people haven’t worked with her, so not sure why you’re responding in this way.
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 11:29 pm
by polareagle
Iowahawk wrote: ↑Sat Nov 21, 2020 6:12 pm
Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sat Nov 21, 2020 3:37 am
polareagle wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 8:33 pm
I mean, she definitely has an impressive resume. But there's a lot of new conservative judges with impressive resumes--don't really know why she's getting singled out.
Have you worked with her or in her chambers? I assume no, because if you had, your indirect question is extraordinarily easy to answer.
I'm not even positive what this means, but some anon on this forum really loves Kovner; every time she's been brought up on every thread an anon starts talking about how wonderful she is, her SCOTUS connections, etc. Obviously she has a killer resume, but to us poor outsiders there's not a ton distinguishing her from other well-liked young Trump DJs with killer resumes like Pacold and Cronan, let alone established feederish district judges.
Yeah, 100% this. My "indirect question" must have been very indirect because I don't even know what it was!
And no, anon, obviously I have not worked in her chambers. If I had, I wouldn't be talking about her on TLS, at least not under my username. Have you? If so, can you explain what Iowahawk and I are missing?
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Sun Nov 22, 2020 1:40 am
by Anonymous User
Same anon. First, she is incredibly well connected and goes to bat for her people. Second, her hiring standards are insane, even by prestigious judge standards. Third, the expectations in both research and writing in chambers are stratospheric and she attracts people motivated by such standards. Clerks work longer than BL hours. Some of those things directly contribute to stronger SCOTUS applications (e.g. being well connected and well regarded and actively supporting her clerks' job efforts), while others contribute indirectly (e.g. requiring almost superhuman work ethic and unbelievably thorough legal research and analysis). This is obviously a prediction, but I would not be surprised to see her emerge as a district-level feeder. That being said, she also has been attracting people looking to move into prosecution after a D. Ct. clerkship. This information comes from personal experience.
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2020 3:08 am
by Iowahawk
You realize you basically just described Alex Kozinski minus the sexual harassment, right. I think it’s important to maintain some critical distance with your boss, and above biglaw hours has to be well above the point of diminishing marginal utility in EDNY, but as long as you and your coclerks are happy with the arrangement I’m glad you’re having a good experience.
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2020 12:58 pm
by Letmein7
Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sun Nov 22, 2020 1:40 am
Same anon. First, she is incredibly well connected and goes to bat for her people. Second, her hiring standards are insane, even by prestigious judge standards. Third, the expectations in both research and writing in chambers are stratospheric and she attracts people motivated by such standards. Clerks work longer than BL hours. Some of those things directly contribute to stronger SCOTUS applications (e.g. being well connected and well regarded and actively supporting her clerks' job efforts), while others contribute indirectly (e.g. requiring almost superhuman work ethic and unbelievably thorough legal research and analysis). This is obviously a prediction, but I would not be surprised to see her emerge as a district-level feeder. That being said, she also has been attracting people looking to move into prosecution after a D. Ct. clerkship. This information comes from personal experience.
I think most people would agree that Kovner has an amazing background, and I’m sure clerking for her would be a wonderful experience. But this post comes off as cringey; the first and second point apply to a lot of judges, including many trump appointees. On the third point, I’d be curious to know if any Art. III judges have low standards for research and writing. Also, working longer than BL hours is a borderline minus instead of a plus when you consider that there are plenty of feeder/semi-feeder judges who don’t work their clerks as hard (and still produce plenty of excellent opinions).
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2020 2:15 pm
by Anonymous User
Yes, it is also just wrong. I personally know a clerk of hers who has pretty standard credentials for SDNY/EDNY.
Re: Are Feeders Dead?
Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2020 4:40 pm
by Anonymous User
Kovner must not work her clerks that hard if they have time to perform desperate and transparent vouching like the above on here.