Feeders / Semi-Feeders Who Flex on Grades Forum

[Anonymous User]

Virgin YLS student: could get literally perfect grades but still has to wear high heels around Amy Chua's husband to get attention from feeders

Chad H/S/C student: merely needs top-5% grades on a few exams (against weaker competition!) for CADC judges to start sliding into the DMs

[Anonymous User]

There are a whole bunch of folks from HLS who clerked on SCOTUS and were only cum laude, but all were URM. That's not just one data point, that goes back at least 5-6 years.

[Anonymous User]

Virgin YLS student: could get literally perfect grades but still has to wear high heels around Amy Chua's husband to get attention from feeders

Chad H/S/C student: merely needs top-5% grades on a few exams (against weaker competition!) for CADC judges to start sliding into the DMs

Yeah, one downside of YLS's grading system is that you only have one semester of grades at the end of 1L (and no class prizes), which makes distinguishing students very difficult. So the only way to set yourself apart for clerkships is professor recommendations. That's great if you're good at that kind of thing or if you already know people or if you're from legal royalty. One of EK's clerks last year, for example, is the son of two former SCOTUS clerks, including the dean of NYU law. He's really smart in his own right, but not a surprise that the powers-to-be at Yale recommended him for a clerkship with Judge Garland. Likewise, EK also hired Judge Garland's daughter. I'm sure she's smart as well, but I'd be willing to put money on the fact that key profs at YLS already knew who she was as a 1L.

At HLS/SLS/Chicago, you can at least set yourself apart by grinding and getting great grades. Sears prize winner is still Sears prize winner regardless of connections and regardless of prof calls.

[Leif Erikson]

There are a whole bunch of folks from HLS who clerked on SCOTUS and were only cum laude, but all were URM. That's not just one data point, that goes back at least 5-6 years.

so what's your conclusion from that data?

[Anonymous User]

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.

I'm not talking shit lol I'm giving you honest feedback - those grades are neither necessary nor sufficient, and if you were actually your prof's fav you would have the clerkship

fact that you're talking about them sorta suggests you don't really understand how the game works at YLS

do you have a meaningful role on YLJ + other journals? have you published? what about involvement w/certain clinics? what'd you do before law school? post-law school career goals? diversity etc. and of course - the profs.

my s/o got 1 P in three years at YLS - last semester, when s/he'd no-showed a black-letter and already got the clerkships. good role on YLJ, recs from good profs. had one semi-feeder interview total, ended up doing CA2/9 - SDNY, and it took work to get that

it's not HLS. the transcript doesn't carry a ton of weight. that's why people care(d) about Chua.

[Anonymous User]

Yeah while YLS gets a lot of (justified) hype for its clerkship power it’s probably best for a certain type of student/personality. Of course YLS selects for those personalities in its fairly connections/Ivy-to-pointless-Oxbridge-MA-oriented admissions process

Whereas at Chicago faculty going to bat still matters, but faculty choose who to go to bat for in large part based on grades, not who’s particularly loquacious in office hours

My (semi-feeder) judge also seems to scrutinize YLS transcripts particularly hard, while mostly assuming that if you’re RBG, K&E, etc you did it the hard way

[Joachim2017]

Yeah while YLS gets a lot of (justified) hype for its clerkship power it’s probably best for a certain type of student/personality. Of course YLS selects for those personalities in its fairly connections/Ivy-to-pointless-Oxbridge-MA-oriented admissions process

Whereas at Chicago faculty going to bat still matters, but faculty choose who to go to bat for in large part based on grades, not who’s particularly loquacious in office hours

My (semi-feeder) judge also seems to scrutinize YLS transcripts particularly hard, while mostly assuming that if you’re RBG, K&E, etc you did it the hard way

I don't have a dog in this fight (didn't attend either of these schools), the chip-on-shoulder insecurity complex is pretty funny. I'm suuuure no one at Yale "did it the hard way", ALL of them came in from the Ivies, got pointless MAs at Oxford before joining YLS where their aunt/uncle has tenure, and then went on to clerk for the family friend, Judge Kavanaugh or Roberts, if, you know, they happened to fancy it. The real victims here are, of course, all those poor Yalies who have a tough time getting a spot with your (semi-feeder) judge.

[Anonymous User]

Yeah while YLS gets a lot of (justified) hype for its clerkship power it’s probably best for a certain type of student/personality. Of course YLS selects for those personalities in its fairly connections/Ivy-to-pointless-Oxbridge-MA-oriented admissions process

Whereas at Chicago faculty going to bat still matters, but faculty choose who to go to bat for in large part based on grades, not who’s particularly loquacious in office hours

My (semi-feeder) judge also seems to scrutinize YLS transcripts particularly hard, while mostly assuming that if you’re RBG, K&E, etc you did it the hard way

I don't have a dog in this fight (didn't attend either of these schools), the chip-on-shoulder insecurity complex is pretty funny. I'm suuuure no one at Yale "did it the hard way", ALL of them came in from the Ivies, got pointless MAs at Oxford before joining YLS where their aunt/uncle has tenure, and then went on to clerk for the family friend, Judge Kavanaugh or Roberts, if, you know, they happened to fancy it. The real victims here are, of course, all those poor Yalies who have a tough time getting a spot with your (semi-feeder) judge.

The judge I'm describing went to YLS and is happy to hire clerks from YLS, they just scrutinize transcripts particularly hard and would prefer some Ps with more black letter classes to straight Hs with lots of law and x (which would not get an interview). I didn't say anything like what you're attributing to me--obviously some YLS students do it "the hard way," that's why you check, otherwise you'd just chuck them. (But yes, it really is absurd how many YLS students have British terminal MAs because their faculty seem to really like them.)

[Anonymous User]

Yeah while YLS gets a lot of (justified) hype for its clerkship power it’s probably best for a certain type of student/personality. Of course YLS selects for those personalities in its fairly connections/Ivy-to-pointless-Oxbridge-MA-oriented admissions process

Whereas at Chicago faculty going to bat still matters, but faculty choose who to go to bat for in large part based on grades, not who’s particularly loquacious in office hours

My (semi-feeder) judge also seems to scrutinize YLS transcripts particularly hard, while mostly assuming that if you’re RBG, K&E, etc you did it the hard way

I don't have a dog in this fight (didn't attend either of these schools), the chip-on-shoulder insecurity complex is pretty funny. I'm suuuure no one at Yale "did it the hard way", ALL of them came in from the Ivies, got pointless MAs at Oxford before joining YLS where their aunt/uncle has tenure, and then went on to clerk for the family friend, Judge Kavanaugh or Roberts, if, you know, they happened to fancy it. The real victims here are, of course, all those poor Yalies who have a tough time getting a spot with your (semi-feeder) judge.

The judge I'm describing went to YLS and is happy to hire clerks from YLS, they just scrutinize transcripts particularly hard and would prefer some Ps with more black letter classes to straight Hs with lots of law and x (which would not get an interview). I didn't say anything like what you're attributing to me--obviously some YLS students do it "the hard way," that's why you check, otherwise you'd just chuck them. (But yes, it really is absurd how many YLS students have British terminal MAs because their faculty seem to really like them.)

I don't know what Joachim was objecting to. Yale's clerkship process is famously rough for students who don't have prior connections or refined dinner party skills. Yale will always be king of clerkships by number but it's no secret that nerdy introverts may do better with feeders out of HLS, SLS, or even Chicago.

[Anonymous User]

A few points:

1. The idea that getting top 5% at HLS / SLS / Chicago is just easy if you're smart and grind is...not true. At H, magna is 50 students, so top 5% is 25, and of these ~10 are going to go to SCOTUS every year. The numbers are just harsh, especially when DS'es can be a little random compared to normal grades.

2. At H particularly, there's so many 1L prof "slots" (7 doctrinal * 7 sections, plus Climenkos for 2 semesters of writing) that the variety in teaching and grading styles can be humongous / luck-of-the-draw. Some professors don't usually teach their assigned subjects or haven't in a while, some take...nontraditional approaches (using 1L courses as supportive of their own research projects or to generate interest for their off-topic electives instead of pure black-letter pedagogy, even using their self-written nontraditional casebooks), Climenkos are all over the place in terms of what kind of writing they like, there's a ton of visiting profs, etc. Some of this mix-and-matching on the teacher side works out, sometimes it's very eh, and there's rumors some profs don't even really blind grade (i.e., ask questions where you can disclose your URM status in an exam answer and get rewarded for it). There's certain sections that are known for being more functional and "traditional" than others and some that are notoriously a little duct-taped together and bonkers.

3. The idea that schmoozing is some kind of Yale-specific thing is pretty bonkers; even with a tough curve at SLS or a pretty real grading system at HLS, the benefits of having profs call is fairly universal, especially among liberals where grades can only separate to some extent given how many apps are chasing so few feeder slots.

4. Most importantly, the idea that schmoozing is some kind of unrelated venture to academic performance is simply untrue. Most profs have an exceptionally keen eye for students who don't really "get it" but just want to chat about life by showing up in OH every week or asking pointless hypos in class. The best "users" of connections are those who aced or did well in a class and also showed up to OH during and after the semester, i.e., those who balanced their merit with actually trying to make a connection. This is different than undergrad, sure, but it's a lot like the real working world, where plenty of people do it every day without some kind of hallowed sense that you need to be Prime Bill Clinton charismatically to make it happen. Also, most profs, even and maybe even especially name-brand ones, bend over backward to make mentorship connections possible, even if you're not in their class. The issue is more that law school tends to accept a certain personality type that will thirst over a professor name in their gunner group chat instead of sending a damn email or showing up to a damn room. It's really not that hard and takes so much less than "refined dinner party skills." I guarantee you that a lot of conversations that lead to these supposedly unattainable connections are just background small talk and center on career interests rather than idk talking about what your favorite three-hole stretch at Augusta National is.

[Anonymous User]

Same Anon. Also the thing about pointless Oxbridge MA's at Y is true, but the conflation of it with family connections to judges is...weird? It's a lot more like a Fulbright, which plenty of state-school kids do without connections, and it's not like going to some fancy ball at Balliol College gives you an automatic pass into the Illuminati. The people who go at Rhodes et al. Scholars have a leg up, sure, but it's because the credential is cool, not because there's a secret handshake involved.

[The Lsat Airbender]

The idea that getting top 5% at HLS / SLS / Chicago is just easy if you're smart and grind is...not true.

big if true

[Anonymous User]

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.

Question for this person or anyone else from a semi-feeder/feeder that has looked at Y apps. Does one P between three years (after 3 semesters of grades) make a difference? Is it really the case that all Hs are expected?

[Anonymous User]

A few points:

1. The idea that getting top 5% at HLS / SLS / Chicago is just easy if you're smart and grind is...not true. At H, magna is 50 students, so top 5% is 25, and of these ~10 are going to go to SCOTUS every year. The numbers are just harsh, especially when DS'es can be a little random compared to normal grades.

2. At H particularly, there's so many 1L prof "slots" (7 doctrinal * 7 sections, plus Climenkos for 2 semesters of writing) that the variety in teaching and grading styles can be humongous / luck-of-the-draw. Some professors don't usually teach their assigned subjects or haven't in a while, some take...nontraditional approaches (using 1L courses as supportive of their own research projects or to generate interest for their off-topic electives instead of pure black-letter pedagogy, even using their self-written nontraditional casebooks), Climenkos are all over the place in terms of what kind of writing they like, there's a ton of visiting profs, etc. Some of this mix-and-matching on the teacher side works out, sometimes it's very eh, and there's rumors some profs don't even really blind grade (i.e., ask questions where you can disclose your URM status in an exam answer and get rewarded for it). There's certain sections that are known for being more functional and "traditional" than others and some that are notoriously a little duct-taped together and bonkers.

3. The idea that schmoozing is some kind of Yale-specific thing is pretty bonkers; even with a tough curve at SLS or a pretty real grading system at HLS, the benefits of having profs call is fairly universal, especially among liberals where grades can only separate to some extent given how many apps are chasing so few feeder slots.

4. Most importantly, the idea that schmoozing is some kind of unrelated venture to academic performance is simply untrue. Most profs have an exceptionally keen eye for students who don't really "get it" but just want to chat about life by showing up in OH every week or asking pointless hypos in class. The best "users" of connections are those who aced or did well in a class and also showed up to OH during and after the semester, i.e., those who balanced their merit with actually trying to make a connection. This is different than undergrad, sure, but it's a lot like the real working world, where plenty of people do it every day without some kind of hallowed sense that you need to be Prime Bill Clinton charismatically to make it happen. Also, most profs, even and maybe even especially name-brand ones, bend over backward to make mentorship connections possible, even if you're not in their class. The issue is more that law school tends to accept a certain personality type that will thirst over a professor name in their gunner group chat instead of sending a damn email or showing up to a damn room. It's really not that hard and takes so much less than "refined dinner party skills." I guarantee you that a lot of conversations that lead to these supposedly unattainable connections are just background small talk and center on career interests rather than idk talking about what your favorite three-hole stretch at Augusta National is.

No one says top 5% is easy, but if you are top 5% you want to be somewhere keeping score. The YLS system deemphasizes grades and emphasizes publishing, law journal, and RA/TA gigs. I have friends at YLS who benefited from that system. But I also have friends there who feel screwed because classmates who didn't try as hard as they did got on the "inside track" early. Maybe this is a problem everywhere, but much less if you graduate summa at HLS or highest honors at Chicago.

[Anonymous User]

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.

Question for this person or anyone else from a semi-feeder/feeder that has looked at Y apps. Does one P between three years (after 3 semesters of grades) make a difference? Is it really the case that all Hs are expected?

Different semi-feeder clerk. Not in our chambers, having a very black-letter-heavy transcript with all those Hs would be more important. But I’m somewhat confused by the question—even at YLS, how would you only have 3 semesters of grades in 3 years?

[Anonymous User]

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.

Question for this person or anyone else from a semi-feeder/feeder that has looked at Y apps. Does one P between three years (after 3 semesters of grades) make a difference? Is it really the case that all Hs are expected?

Different semi-feeder clerk. Not in our chambers, having a very black-letter-heavy transcript with all those Hs would be more important. But I’m somewhat confused by the question—even at YLS, how would you only have 3 semesters of grades in 3 years?

What counts as "black letter heavy?" Two a semester? 3 semesters is b/c still have one semester left, and one semester was P/F because of COVID.

[Anonymous User]

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.

How much would this feeder compromise? Juuuuust barely worse than Top 10%? Top 15% at HYS? Top quarter?

[Anonymous User]

A few points:

1. The idea that getting top 5% at HLS / SLS / Chicago is just easy if you're smart and grind is...not true. At H, magna is 50 students, so top 5% is 25, and of these ~10 are going to go to SCOTUS every year. The numbers are just harsh, especially when DS'es can be a little random compared to normal grades.

2. At H particularly, there's so many 1L prof "slots" (7 doctrinal * 7 sections, plus Climenkos for 2 semesters of writing) that the variety in teaching and grading styles can be humongous / luck-of-the-draw. Some professors don't usually teach their assigned subjects or haven't in a while, some take...nontraditional approaches (using 1L courses as supportive of their own research projects or to generate interest for their off-topic electives instead of pure black-letter pedagogy, even using their self-written nontraditional casebooks), Climenkos are all over the place in terms of what kind of writing they like, there's a ton of visiting profs, etc. Some of this mix-and-matching on the teacher side works out, sometimes it's very eh, and there's rumors some profs don't even really blind grade (i.e., ask questions where you can disclose your URM status in an exam answer and get rewarded for it). There's certain sections that are known for being more functional and "traditional" than others and some that are notoriously a little duct-taped together and bonkers.

3. The idea that schmoozing is some kind of Yale-specific thing is pretty bonkers; even with a tough curve at SLS or a pretty real grading system at HLS, the benefits of having profs call is fairly universal, especially among liberals where grades can only separate to some extent given how many apps are chasing so few feeder slots.

4. Most importantly, the idea that schmoozing is some kind of unrelated venture to academic performance is simply untrue. Most profs have an exceptionally keen eye for students who don't really "get it" but just want to chat about life by showing up in OH every week or asking pointless hypos in class. The best "users" of connections are those who aced or did well in a class and also showed up to OH during and after the semester, i.e., those who balanced their merit with actually trying to make a connection. This is different than undergrad, sure, but it's a lot like the real working world, where plenty of people do it every day without some kind of hallowed sense that you need to be Prime Bill Clinton charismatically to make it happen. Also, most profs, even and maybe even especially name-brand ones, bend over backward to make mentorship connections possible, even if you're not in their class. The issue is more that law school tends to accept a certain personality type that will thirst over a professor name in their gunner group chat instead of sending a damn email or showing up to a damn room. It's really not that hard and takes so much less than "refined dinner party skills." I guarantee you that a lot of conversations that lead to these supposedly unattainable connections are just background small talk and center on career interests rather than idk talking about what your favorite three-hole stretch at Augusta National is.

No one says top 5% is easy, but if you are top 5% you want to be somewhere keeping score. The YLS system deemphasizes grades and emphasizes publishing, law journal, and RA/TA gigs. I have friends at YLS who benefited from that system. But I also have friends there who feel screwed because classmates who didn't try as hard as they did got on the "inside track" early. Maybe this is a problem everywhere, but much less if you graduate summa at HLS or highest honors at Chicago.

I mean... literally one person gets summa at HLS per graduating class. Guessing you meant magna?

[Anonymous User]

A few points:

1. The idea that getting top 5% at HLS / SLS / Chicago is just easy if you're smart and grind is...not true. At H, magna is 50 students, so top 5% is 25, and of these ~10 are going to go to SCOTUS every year. The numbers are just harsh, especially when DS'es can be a little random compared to normal grades.

2. At H particularly, there's so many 1L prof "slots" (7 doctrinal * 7 sections, plus Climenkos for 2 semesters of writing) that the variety in teaching and grading styles can be humongous / luck-of-the-draw. Some professors don't usually teach their assigned subjects or haven't in a while, some take...nontraditional approaches (using 1L courses as supportive of their own research projects or to generate interest for their off-topic electives instead of pure black-letter pedagogy, even using their self-written nontraditional casebooks), Climenkos are all over the place in terms of what kind of writing they like, there's a ton of visiting profs, etc. Some of this mix-and-matching on the teacher side works out, sometimes it's very eh, and there's rumors some profs don't even really blind grade (i.e., ask questions where you can disclose your URM status in an exam answer and get rewarded for it). There's certain sections that are known for being more functional and "traditional" than others and some that are notoriously a little duct-taped together and bonkers.

3. The idea that schmoozing is some kind of Yale-specific thing is pretty bonkers; even with a tough curve at SLS or a pretty real grading system at HLS, the benefits of having profs call is fairly universal, especially among liberals where grades can only separate to some extent given how many apps are chasing so few feeder slots.

4. Most importantly, the idea that schmoozing is some kind of unrelated venture to academic performance is simply untrue. Most profs have an exceptionally keen eye for students who don't really "get it" but just want to chat about life by showing up in OH every week or asking pointless hypos in class. The best "users" of connections are those who aced or did well in a class and also showed up to OH during and after the semester, i.e., those who balanced their merit with actually trying to make a connection. This is different than undergrad, sure, but it's a lot like the real working world, where plenty of people do it every day without some kind of hallowed sense that you need to be Prime Bill Clinton charismatically to make it happen. Also, most profs, even and maybe even especially name-brand ones, bend over backward to make mentorship connections possible, even if you're not in their class. The issue is more that law school tends to accept a certain personality type that will thirst over a professor name in their gunner group chat instead of sending a damn email or showing up to a damn room. It's really not that hard and takes so much less than "refined dinner party skills." I guarantee you that a lot of conversations that lead to these supposedly unattainable connections are just background small talk and center on career interests rather than idk talking about what your favorite three-hole stretch at Augusta National is.

No one says top 5% is easy, but if you are top 5% you want to be somewhere keeping score. The YLS system deemphasizes grades and emphasizes publishing, law journal, and RA/TA gigs. I have friends at YLS who benefited from that system. But I also have friends there who feel screwed because classmates who didn't try as hard as they did got on the "inside track" early. Maybe this is a problem everywhere, but much less if you graduate summa at HLS or highest honors at Chicago.

I mean... literally one person gets summa at HLS per graduating class. Guessing you meant magna?

I meant summa, but only as an extreme example. (Note that highest honors at Chicago is similarly rare). I think it's up for debate if magna (top 10%) at HLS is better than straight Hs at YLS. But top 1% or 2% at HLS is certainly better.