Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades Forum

(Seek and share information about clerkship applications, clerkship hiring timelines, and post-clerkship employment opportunities)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are sharing sensitive information about clerkship applications and clerkship hiring. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned."
Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Dec 24, 2021 9:27 pm

I know this is going to be very relative because to some extent all feeders want to see great grades, but do any feeders have the rep for being relatively more grade-flexible (i.e., not being allergic to very occasional B's / P's) if that factor is overcome by other positive things (e.g., professor recs, work experience, scholarship, URM status, etc.?). I know a lot of the top libs truly have the pick of the litter with so many applicants applying with perfect grades and all those "extras" but asking across ideology.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Dec 24, 2021 10:02 pm

The answer is all of them if you are extremely well connected.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Dec 24, 2021 10:43 pm

I know some conservative feeders will compromise a bit on grades if you have conservative bonafides, but you'll probably also need a connection. By conservative bonafides, I mean more than just being a FedSoc officer.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Dec 26, 2021 1:52 pm

Interested in this. for those who have clerked for feeders / know of some cutoffs, what is the absolute maximum number of Ps (assuming HYS) that your judge would consider, such that LR / prof recs / work or military experience wouldn't be able to overcome them? This is assuming not-insane connections like being the son of a judge / Justice / important type.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Dec 26, 2021 2:37 pm

I’ve been told that a major feeder on the 9th will automatically reject any application with more than 2 Ps.

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Dec 26, 2021 2:43 pm

I clerked for a semi-feeder on CA2. Of course, the answer to your question depends on which of HYS. In general, my judge was very aware of the differences in the grading systems of the three. As a result, they would be more willing to accept Ps from S than from H and Y. Our cutoff after 1L for H was around one or two Ps; for Y, we would generally expect all Hs and in substantial classes (given that first semester is ungraded); and for S, we would accept up to four Ps or so. This answer becomes more complicated when you consider the impact of DSs and book prizes.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Dec 27, 2021 1:47 am

Most feeders will flex on grades if you have the right connections. It's not uncommon for Rhodes/Marshalls to end up with feeders despite middling grades for example, and a hugely disproportionate share of feeder clerks are relatives of elite appellate practitioners and law profs.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Dec 27, 2021 2:32 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Dec 27, 2021 1:47 am
Most feeders will flex on grades if you have the right connections. It's not uncommon for Rhodes/Marshalls to end up with feeders despite middling grades for example, and a hugely disproportionate share of feeder clerks are relatives of elite appellate practitioners and law profs.
Don't forget relatives (children) of fellow judges ;)

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Dec 30, 2021 11:22 am

My feeder had a general rule of more DSs/book awards than Ps. He/she would compromise on that rule for diverse (i.e. non-white/Asian) candidates.

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Dec 30, 2021 8:56 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Fri Dec 24, 2021 9:27 pm
I know this is going to be very relative because to some extent all feeders want to see great grades, but do any feeders have the rep for being relatively more grade-flexible (i.e., not being allergic to very occasional B's / P's) if that factor is overcome by other positive things (e.g., professor recs, work experience, scholarship, URM status, etc.?). I know a lot of the top libs truly have the pick of the litter with so many applicants applying with perfect grades and all those "extras" but asking across ideology.
At least at my HYS, I didn't see this happen often. Except for Garland and Srinivasan liberal feeders were about as likely to overlook average grades if applicants had the right political and personal connections. Obviously this is bad news for liberals with great grades but mediocre connections.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Jan 02, 2022 5:29 pm

If you're liberal, SCOTUS is increasingly unlikely, period. Rn there are ~23 spots for conservatives and ~14 spots for liberals each year, assuming JR splits evenly. A lot of those will go to people with connections, the HLR/YLJ EICs, URMs, etc. That leaves a very small number of spots for people just picked based on grades and recs from across the T14.

For conservatives, it's much, much easier now and will be for the foreseeable future, especially if you're a woman. A lot of conservative semi-feeders will go for liberals semi-regularly, but they tend to be picky on grades for those spots, and those clerks are unlikely to go to SCOTUS.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Jan 02, 2022 11:07 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jan 02, 2022 5:29 pm
If you're liberal, SCOTUS is increasingly unlikely, period. Rn there are ~23 spots for conservatives and ~14 spots for liberals each year, assuming JR splits evenly. A lot of those will go to people with connections, the HLR/YLJ EICs, URMs, etc. That leaves a very small number of spots for people just picked based on grades and recs from across the T14.

For conservatives, it's much, much easier now and will be for the foreseeable future, especially if you're a woman. A lot of conservative semi-feeders will go for liberals semi-regularly, but they tend to be picky on grades for those spots, and those clerks are unlikely to go to SCOTUS.
This is for the best. One of the stupidest parts of the legal profession is the insane prestige and almost hero-worship of people who primarily knew the right professors in law school.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Jan 04, 2022 7:33 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jan 02, 2022 5:29 pm
If you're liberal, SCOTUS is increasingly unlikely, period. Rn there are ~23 spots for conservatives and ~14 spots for liberals each year, assuming JR splits evenly. A lot of those will go to people with connections, the HLR/YLJ EICs, URMs, etc. That leaves a very small number of spots for people just picked based on grades and recs from across the T14.

For conservatives, it's much, much easier now and will be for the foreseeable future, especially if you're a woman. A lot of conservative semi-feeders will go for liberals semi-regularly, but they tend to be picky on grades for those spots, and those clerks are unlikely to go to SCOTUS.
Curious about the bolded--I've never read anything backed up with proof demonstrating that URMs have an easier time getting SCOTUS clerkships; in fact, everything I've read points to the contrary. Just wondering what you're basing your projection on, because I see this refrain (assuming URMs have a super easy time obtaining unicorn positions) a lot on TLS casually tossed around.

Not trying to be argumentative but am genuinely curious.

Anon bc clerk.

Register now!

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

It's still FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Jan 04, 2022 8:21 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jan 04, 2022 7:33 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jan 02, 2022 5:29 pm
If you're liberal, SCOTUS is increasingly unlikely, period. Rn there are ~23 spots for conservatives and ~14 spots for liberals each year, assuming JR splits evenly. A lot of those will go to people with connections, the HLR/YLJ EICs, URMs, etc. That leaves a very small number of spots for people just picked based on grades and recs from across the T14.

For conservatives, it's much, much easier now and will be for the foreseeable future, especially if you're a woman. A lot of conservative semi-feeders will go for liberals semi-regularly, but they tend to be picky on grades for those spots, and those clerks are unlikely to go to SCOTUS.
Curious about the bolded--I've never read anything backed up with proof demonstrating that URMs have an easier time getting SCOTUS clerkships; in fact, everything I've read points to the contrary. Just wondering what you're basing your projection on, because I see this refrain (assuming URMs have a super easy time obtaining unicorn positions) a lot on TLS casually tossed around.

Not trying to be argumentative but am genuinely curious.

Anon bc clerk.
Much of the information in the post you've quoted is wrong. Anyone competitive for SCOTUS should talk to professors and/or judges close to the process.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Jan 04, 2022 9:29 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jan 04, 2022 7:33 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jan 02, 2022 5:29 pm
If you're liberal, SCOTUS is increasingly unlikely, period. Rn there are ~23 spots for conservatives and ~14 spots for liberals each year, assuming JR splits evenly. A lot of those will go to people with connections, the HLR/YLJ EICs, URMs, etc. That leaves a very small number of spots for people just picked based on grades and recs from across the T14.

For conservatives, it's much, much easier now and will be for the foreseeable future, especially if you're a woman. A lot of conservative semi-feeders will go for liberals semi-regularly, but they tend to be picky on grades for those spots, and those clerks are unlikely to go to SCOTUS.
Curious about the bolded--I've never read anything backed up with proof demonstrating that URMs have an easier time getting SCOTUS clerkships; in fact, everything I've read points to the contrary. Just wondering what you're basing your projection on, because I see this refrain (assuming URMs have a super easy time obtaining unicorn positions) a lot on TLS casually tossed around.

Not trying to be argumentative but am genuinely curious.

Anon bc clerk.
Not OP. Former clerk. It can't be true that URMs are overrepresented--just count the number of URM clerks every year. There aren't that many. It is true, however, that qualified URMs have an easier path to getting SCOTUS clerkships. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why. The Justices are very aware of the criticism re diversity. Believe me, most actively look for URMs with the minimum qualifications. So do feeder judges. Unfortunately there just aren't that many. There are a million reasons why that is so; not trying to get into a debate about them. But the lack of qualified URMs means that any URM that meets even the minimum qualifications are almost certain to get interviews.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Jan 04, 2022 9:46 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jan 04, 2022 7:33 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jan 02, 2022 5:29 pm
If you're liberal, SCOTUS is increasingly unlikely, period. Rn there are ~23 spots for conservatives and ~14 spots for liberals each year, assuming JR splits evenly. A lot of those will go to people with connections, the HLR/YLJ EICs, URMs, etc. That leaves a very small number of spots for people just picked based on grades and recs from across the T14.

For conservatives, it's much, much easier now and will be for the foreseeable future, especially if you're a woman. A lot of conservative semi-feeders will go for liberals semi-regularly, but they tend to be picky on grades for those spots, and those clerks are unlikely to go to SCOTUS.
Curious about the bolded--I've never read anything backed up with proof demonstrating that URMs have an easier time getting SCOTUS clerkships; in fact, everything I've read points to the contrary. Just wondering what you're basing your projection on, because I see this refrain (assuming URMs have a super easy time obtaining unicorn positions) a lot on TLS casually tossed around.

Not trying to be argumentative but am genuinely curious.

Anon bc clerk.
Former clerk for (conservative) COA whose name people recognize. can only speak for our chambers, but we flexed on grades for URM and women

a straight white man with a sub-3.8 at CLS (for example) would not have his app read. the app would go straight to the trash. b/c of grades. there was a cutoff, he didn't meet it, we had plenty of other men we could interview and hire.

we interviewed and hired a sub-3.8 woman my year. she has SCOTUS potential, in my judge's eyes.

was getting that clerkship "easy" for her, no. am I saying this to discredit her accomplishments, no. did it make a difference that she was a she, 100000%

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Jan 04, 2022 11:41 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jan 04, 2022 9:29 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jan 04, 2022 7:33 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jan 02, 2022 5:29 pm
If you're liberal, SCOTUS is increasingly unlikely, period. Rn there are ~23 spots for conservatives and ~14 spots for liberals each year, assuming JR splits evenly. A lot of those will go to people with connections, the HLR/YLJ EICs, URMs, etc. That leaves a very small number of spots for people just picked based on grades and recs from across the T14.

For conservatives, it's much, much easier now and will be for the foreseeable future, especially if you're a woman. A lot of conservative semi-feeders will go for liberals semi-regularly, but they tend to be picky on grades for those spots, and those clerks are unlikely to go to SCOTUS.
Curious about the bolded--I've never read anything backed up with proof demonstrating that URMs have an easier time getting SCOTUS clerkships; in fact, everything I've read points to the contrary. Just wondering what you're basing your projection on, because I see this refrain (assuming URMs have a super easy time obtaining unicorn positions) a lot on TLS casually tossed around.

Not trying to be argumentative but am genuinely curious.

Anon bc clerk.
Not OP. Former clerk. It can't be true that URMs are overrepresented--just count the number of URM clerks every year. There aren't that many. It is true, however, that qualified URMs have an easier path to getting SCOTUS clerkships. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why. The Justices are very aware of the criticism re diversity. Believe me, most actively look for URMs with the minimum qualifications. So do feeder judges. Unfortunately there just aren't that many. There are a million reasons why that is so; not trying to get into a debate about them. But the lack of qualified URMs means that any URM that meets even the minimum qualifications are almost certain to get interviews.
Am quoted OP, this is what I meant. URMs are definitely underrepresented, but your odds of a SCOTUS clerkship as a URM magna HLS grad are very good in a way that they aren't for other liberal applicants atm. Note that I'm not saying they're not qualified--it's that contingent on meeting the qualification threshold, their odds are very good--and I personally think it's a good thing that the justices value diversity.

Also agreed with the above re: conservative women on similar lines. There just aren't that many women in Fed Soc--just look at the crazy gender ratio of Trump appointees--and the ones who do well academically get a lot of interest from SCOTUS, which drives ambitious conservative judges to try to hire them. Plus I'm sure a lot of conservative judges just don't want all-male chambers regardless of the SCOTUS bump.

Get unlimited access to all forums and topics

Register now!

I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...


Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Sat Jan 08, 2022 7:52 pm

Also curious how much flex “flex” means. I’ve seen elsewhere in the HLS / YLS context that feeders really want 0-3 P’s; does strong recs / calls from profs mean 3-5 P nURM’s aren’t dead in the water?

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Sat Jan 08, 2022 8:30 pm

For FWIW, last year, I had 0 Ps and had multiple high-profile professors calling on my behalf from YLS, and totally struck out with all feeders/semi-feeders. Either it was a rough year or really all semi-feeders on the liberal side flex on grades.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Jan 09, 2022 10:25 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Sat Jan 08, 2022 8:30 pm
For FWIW, last year, I had 0 Ps and had multiple high-profile professors calling on my behalf from YLS, and totally struck out with all feeders/semi-feeders. Either it was a rough year or really all semi-feeders on the liberal side flex on grades.
Did other YLS people perform well? Coming from YLS last year you would’ve had, what, effectively one semester, maybe two semesters of grades from YLS? I am sure there were lots of people at YLS with the same transcript. Not so for people at, for example, SLS, where there’s a forced curve and thus easier to discern who the top students are and multiple quarters of grades.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Jan 09, 2022 10:47 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Sat Jan 08, 2022 8:30 pm
For FWIW, last year, I had 0 Ps and had multiple high-profile professors calling on my behalf from YLS, and totally struck out with all feeders/semi-feeders. Either it was a rough year or really all semi-feeders on the liberal side flex on grades.
0 Ps is good but not gonna set you apart for feeder/semi-feeder. you probably weren't top of the list for your profs. sorry

Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.

Register now, it's still FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Jan 09, 2022 11:28 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jan 09, 2022 10:47 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sat Jan 08, 2022 8:30 pm
For FWIW, last year, I had 0 Ps and had multiple high-profile professors calling on my behalf from YLS, and totally struck out with all feeders/semi-feeders. Either it was a rough year or really all semi-feeders on the liberal side flex on grades.
0 Ps is good but not gonna set you apart for feeder/semi-feeder. you probably weren't top of the list for your profs. sorry
Just curious when people say 0P or 3P, are we talking about for all three years? Or for first year and a half only? Also the “as many DS’s as P’s” seems like just another way of saying “magna” (for H), given it means GPA >4.0 which is basically magna historical cutoff? Seems kinda low for feeders but I might very well be wrong.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Jan 10, 2022 2:19 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jan 09, 2022 10:47 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sat Jan 08, 2022 8:30 pm
For FWIW, last year, I had 0 Ps and had multiple high-profile professors calling on my behalf from YLS, and totally struck out with all feeders/semi-feeders. Either it was a rough year or really all semi-feeders on the liberal side flex on grades.
0 Ps is good but not gonna set you apart for feeder/semi-feeder. you probably weren't top of the list for your profs. sorry
Easy to talk smack behind the anonymous mark. I would bet you're clerking for neither. It's a tough market with Garland/Katzmann out.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Jan 10, 2022 1:06 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jan 09, 2022 11:28 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jan 09, 2022 10:47 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sat Jan 08, 2022 8:30 pm
For FWIW, last year, I had 0 Ps and had multiple high-profile professors calling on my behalf from YLS, and totally struck out with all feeders/semi-feeders. Either it was a rough year or really all semi-feeders on the liberal side flex on grades.
0 Ps is good but not gonna set you apart for feeder/semi-feeder. you probably weren't top of the list for your profs. sorry
Just curious when people say 0P or 3P, are we talking about for all three years? Or for first year and a half only? Also the “as many DS’s as P’s” seems like just another way of saying “magna” (for H), given it means GPA >4.0 which is basically magna historical cutoff? Seems kinda low for feeders but I might very well be wrong.
Former feeder clerk. If you're in magna territory at HLS/SLS (more DSs/book awards than Ps) then you have a realistic shot at a feeder, particularly if you have other things going for you--fed soc, URM, big time professor going to bat, etc. There might be a few feeders out there that will still ding you for grades, but that's mostly because they have the luxury of picking the Sears Prize winners and Kirkland & Ellis Scholars and Amy Chua's best student and the URMs w/ magna grades. When I was applying, those tippy top students used to go to Kav/Garland/Srinivasan and sometimes Wilkinson/Sutton. There aren't that many of thoes to go around though, so even if you don't have the tippy top grades but are still in magna territory, you'll still have a good shot at the next tier of feeders. You'll just have to hustle a bit more and play up your other advantages, like professor connections or fed soc or a geographical connection. If Goldsmith or McConnell call on your behalf, no judge is going to ding you b/c you're just magna. Likewise, no feeder will ding you for just magna if you're a URM/female in fed soc.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Jan 10, 2022 1:14 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jan 04, 2022 11:41 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jan 04, 2022 9:29 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Tue Jan 04, 2022 7:33 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Jan 02, 2022 5:29 pm
If you're liberal, SCOTUS is increasingly unlikely, period. Rn there are ~23 spots for conservatives and ~14 spots for liberals each year, assuming JR splits evenly. A lot of those will go to people with connections, the HLR/YLJ EICs, URMs, etc. That leaves a very small number of spots for people just picked based on grades and recs from across the T14.

For conservatives, it's much, much easier now and will be for the foreseeable future, especially if you're a woman. A lot of conservative semi-feeders will go for liberals semi-regularly, but they tend to be picky on grades for those spots, and those clerks are unlikely to go to SCOTUS.
Curious about the bolded--I've never read anything backed up with proof demonstrating that URMs have an easier time getting SCOTUS clerkships; in fact, everything I've read points to the contrary. Just wondering what you're basing your projection on, because I see this refrain (assuming URMs have a super easy time obtaining unicorn positions) a lot on TLS casually tossed around.

Not trying to be argumentative but am genuinely curious.

Anon bc clerk.
Not OP. Former clerk. It can't be true that URMs are overrepresented--just count the number of URM clerks every year. There aren't that many. It is true, however, that qualified URMs have an easier path to getting SCOTUS clerkships. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why. The Justices are very aware of the criticism re diversity. Believe me, most actively look for URMs with the minimum qualifications. So do feeder judges. Unfortunately there just aren't that many. There are a million reasons why that is so; not trying to get into a debate about them. But the lack of qualified URMs means that any URM that meets even the minimum qualifications are almost certain to get interviews.
Am quoted OP, this is what I meant. URMs are definitely underrepresented, but your odds of a SCOTUS clerkship as a URM magna HLS grad are very good in a way that they aren't for other liberal applicants atm. Note that I'm not saying they're not qualified--it's that contingent on meeting the qualification threshold, their odds are very good--and I personally think it's a good thing that the justices value diversity.

Also agreed with the above re: conservative women on similar lines. There just aren't that many women in Fed Soc--just look at the crazy gender ratio of Trump appointees--and the ones who do well academically get a lot of interest from SCOTUS, which drives ambitious conservative judges to try to hire them. Plus I'm sure a lot of conservative judges just don't want all-male chambers regardless of the SCOTUS bump.
One of Justice Kavanaugh's incoming clerks graduated cum laude at HLS, but is a URM who was at least somewhat involved in Fed Soc. Just one data point, but I don't know of another Kavanaugh hire who was only cum laude at HLS.

Seriously? What are you waiting for?

Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!


Post Reply Post Anonymous Reply  

Return to “Judicial Clerkships”