Magistrate clerkship Forum

[Anonymous User]

Hi all,

considering a fed MJ clerkship in Indiana/Ohio. What are prospects like for big law in Indiana/Ohio afterwards?

How does a fed MJ clerkship compare to state appellate court?

Thanks.

[j01]

Can't answer about Indiana/Ohio, but

In supreme court's state: SSC>FMJ
Outside supreme court's state: FMJ>/=SSC

[username5101520]

Can't answer about Indiana/Ohio, but

In supreme court's state: SSC>FMJ
Outside supreme court's state: FMJ>/=SSC

I disagree with this. I think
In SSC's state: FMJ>/=SSC
Outside: FMJ > SSC.

[Anonymous User]

Can't answer about Indiana/Ohio, but

In supreme court's state: SSC>FMJ
Outside supreme court's state: FMJ>/=SSC

I disagree with this. I think
In SSC's state: FMJ>/=SSC
Outside: FMJ > SSC.

Probably depends on the specific judges and markets, but the second take here really isn’t consistent with my experience. I think in general SSC > FMJ either in state or out, unless the SSC is out of state and the FMJ is in.

[username5101520]

Can't answer about Indiana/Ohio, but

In supreme court's state: SSC>FMJ
Outside supreme court's state: FMJ>/=SSC

I disagree with this. I think
In SSC's state: FMJ>/=SSC
Outside: FMJ > SSC.

Probably depends on the specific judges and markets, but the second take here really isn’t consistent with my experience. I think in general SSC > FMJ either in state or out, unless the SSC is out of state and the FMJ is in.

Well, what’s your experience? Because mine is having had both an SSC and FMJ clerkship, and I can tell you night and day in terms of resume value. Biglaw and ausa/fpd offices didn’t give a **** about SSC, but they loved the fmj.

[Anonymous User]

Can't answer about Indiana/Ohio, but

In supreme court's state: SSC>FMJ
Outside supreme court's state: FMJ>/=SSC

I disagree with this. I think
In SSC's state: FMJ>/=SSC
Outside: FMJ > SSC.

Probably depends on the specific judges and markets, but the second take here really isn’t consistent with my experience. I think in general SSC > FMJ either in state or out, unless the SSC is out of state and the FMJ is in.

Well, what’s your experience? Because mine is having had both an SSC and FMJ clerkship, and I can tell you night and day in terms of resume value. Biglaw and ausa/fpd offices didn’t give a **** about SSC, but they loved the fmj.

USAOs like SSC fine as evidence that you can write/research, but they like FMJ better because it's federal and they only practice in federal court. That's probably similarly the case for most biglaw firms, which I'm presuming appear in federal court way more than state court, if at all. But as the person you're responding to notes, that's complicated by specific facts/markets. Who your SSC justice was matters, who your FMJ was (and what you did with them, because that varies) matters, what job you're applying for matters. Giving any kind of absolute ranking is pretty much impossible.

[Anonymous User]

Can't answer about Indiana/Ohio, but

In supreme court's state: SSC>FMJ
Outside supreme court's state: FMJ>/=SSC

I disagree with this. I think
In SSC's state: FMJ>/=SSC
Outside: FMJ > SSC.

Probably depends on the specific judges and markets, but the second take here really isn’t consistent with my experience. I think in general SSC > FMJ either in state or out, unless the SSC is out of state and the FMJ is in.

My firm (a selective litigation boutique) hires SSC but not FMJ clerks, which is consistent with the typical practice of the other selective firms in my market. But my state has a highly-regarded SSC (it’s not CA or TX but the justices are all federal quality). I think the barrier to hiring FMJ clerks for us is that discovery dispute, pro se, and Social Security experience is not as helpful to our practice as a writing-intensive state court of last resort, and we also have a not-insignificant state appellate practice.

SSCs also seemed to be the preferred non-A3 option at my T6 law school. But your mileage may vary obviously.

[Anonymous User]

Can't answer about Indiana/Ohio, but

In supreme court's state: SSC>FMJ
Outside supreme court's state: FMJ>/=SSC

I disagree with this. I think
In SSC's state: FMJ>/=SSC
Outside: FMJ > SSC.

Probably depends on the specific judges and markets, but the second take here really isn’t consistent with my experience. I think in general SSC > FMJ either in state or out, unless the SSC is out of state and the FMJ is in.

My firm (a selective litigation boutique) hires SSC but not FMJ clerks, which is consistent with the typical practice of the other selective firms in my market. But my state has a highly-regarded SSC (it’s not CA or TX but the justices are all federal quality). I think the barrier to hiring FMJ clerks for us is that discovery dispute, pro se, and Social Security experience is not as helpful to our practice as a writing-intensive state court of last resort, and we also have a not-insignificant state appellate practice.

SSCs also seemed to be the preferred non-A3 option at my T6 law school. But your mileage may vary obviously.

Agreed. Depends on SSC. Well-regarded ones especially like CA or TX are, imo, better than some federal (non-comeptitive) district courts. In my allbeit short career, I've also noticed that it feels like state SSCs in states like CA or TX are becoming way more desirable and popular—maybe it is because of SCOTUS withdrawing on a lot of things and leaving state courts to pick up the slack. Wonder if anyone has noticed anything similar.