Top Law Schools

At the outset, I'm absolutely not meaning to start a flame war. From posters in the know, and especially current clerks, I'm curious what the reaction has been to the Silberman letter (beyond eye-rolling at such a huge reply-all) across the ideological spectrum.

Fwiw my sense, from my position as a clerk for a conservative semi-feeder who regularly hires liberals, is that being involved in disrupting an event would probably be an auto-ding if we found out about it, and being on the open letter would get some skepticism but would not necessarily be a deal-breaker. I also don't imagine the judge is going to go out of their way to hunt people down, though. Take that for what it's worth as one clerk for one idiosyncratic chambers's perspective.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 17, 2022 9:41 pm

At the outset, I'm absolutely not meaning to start a flame war. From posters in the know, and especially current clerks, I'm curious what the reaction has been to the Silberman letter (beyond eye-rolling at such a huge reply-all) across the ideological spectrum.

Fwiw my sense, from my position as a clerk for a conservative semi-feeder who regularly hires liberals, is that being involved in disrupting an event would probably be an auto-ding if we found out about it, and being on the open letter would get some skepticism but would not necessarily be a deal-breaker. I also don't imagine the judge is going to go out of their way to hunt people down, though. Take that for what it's worth as one clerk for one idiosyncratic chambers's perspective.

My take on Silberman's email was that it was to put pressure on Yale to do something about the insanity gripping their campus - the Yale administrators have made it quite clear they aren't going to take any action on their own.

My judge hires liberals with some regularity and they would have cut someone protesting instantly. I suspect there are quite a few more who feel similarly, though they wouldn't openly state it. We wouldn't search for a signature on an open letter, but if we found it, it would also be an auto cut. We do Google search the people we think about bringing in for interviews.

This seems like much ado about nothing - the folks who lead protests like this are the NLG-type who tend to think clerking is being complicit with a corrupt system or whatever in the first place (and I'm saying this as a left-of-center person). Also, many of the judges who feel as Silberman does were never going to hire or interview the activist-type even if they did apply. They probably filled all their spots with their Fed Soc hires anyways, so the threat is an empty one. Like the above poster said, it's more about sending a message/protecting the poor little FedSoc boys at Yale than anything else.

Also, Silberman is known for these kinds of stunts - remember his email to the DC Circuit about the horrors of renaming monuments? https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/le ... story.html.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 17, 2022 11:01 pm

This seems like much ado about nothing - the folks who lead protests like this are the NLG-type who tend to think clerking is being complicit with a corrupt system or whatever in the first place (and I'm saying this as a left-of-center person). Also, many of the judges who feel as Silberman does were never going to hire or interview the activist-type even if they did apply. They probably filled all their spots with their Fed Soc hires anyways, so the threat is an empty one. Like the above poster said, it's more about sending a message/protecting the poor little FedSoc boys at Yale than anything else.

Also, Silberman is known for these kinds of stunts - remember his email to the DC Circuit about the horrors of renaming monuments? https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/le ... story.html.

2/3rds of the student body signed the letter condemning the administration, the rot at Yale Law is way deeper than just the NLG leadership.

Disagreeing with the admins' decision to station armed police at a talk by an anti-LGBT speaker isn't rot. Nor is signing the letter the same as being at the protest (though it is rich that someone will purport to support free speech but not recognize that protests are free speech).

Unfortunately I don't have an answer to the original question, but I have a really hard time thinking any Article III judge is going to be swayed by one other judge's opinion if they didn't already share it (I liked the follow up tweet quoting another judge's response as basically "please don't reply all and clog up my inbox.)

This is a deeply confusing thread. I get the idea of being angry at the idea of instituting a Heckler's veto against the event--but the idea of writing an open letter? Isn't that quintessential counterspeech? You all--and the judges you work for--are being incredible hypocrites.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 17, 2022 11:27 pm

This is a deeply confusing thread. I get the idea of being angry at the idea of instituting a Heckler's veto against the event--but the idea of writing an open letter? Isn't that quintessential counterspeech? You all--and the judges you work for--are being incredible hypocrites.

Yeah that person's position is so extreme I hope they're trolling - unfortunately they probably aren't though. The rot on the right is way deeper than just Silberman.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 17, 2022 11:27 pm

This is a deeply confusing thread. I get the idea of being angry at the idea of instituting a Heckler's veto against the event--but the idea of writing an open letter? Isn't that quintessential counterspeech? You all--and the judges you work for--are being incredible hypocrites.

I think with regard to the letter the objection won't be that being on an open letter is bad in principle, more that this specific letter may create doubts about the student's willingness to get along with social conservatives--judges have always screened for ideology and always will. The letter is also much easier to check than being at the protest.

I agree that the loudest ones at the protest almost certainly aren't applying to Fed Soc judges anyway, though a significant proportion of federal clerks are now liberals clerking for Republican-appointed judges, so I think it could be a serious concern for students open to going that route.

I also agree with nixy that Silberman's opinion alone won't sway anyone, but I suspect that many judges on the right (and some on the left) will agree with him. Walker, who replied in agreement, is generally seen as not particularly ideological afaik, and hires liberals, for example.

Clerk for a liberal judge - being involved in a peaceful protest of right wing bigots would not hurt an applicant's chances at all.

I am a liberal clerking for a conservative judge in a few years who signed the letter, mostly on a whim and due to severe peer pressure--not smart, yes, I know. I have two questions. First, should I be legitimately afraid of having my clerkship rescinded, and second, given that this is a semi-feeder, should I worry that conservative Justices down the line will be looking for this in 2-3 years when I think I may apply?

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 18, 2022 12:12 am

I am a liberal clerking for a conservative judge in a few years who signed the letter, mostly on a whim and due to severe peer pressure--not smart, yes, I know. I have two questions. First, should I be legitimately afraid of having my clerkship rescinded, and second, given that this is a semi-feeder, should I worry that conservative Justices down the line will be looking for this in 2-3 years when I think I may apply?

I think your chance of getting rescinded is 0--that would be a huge faux pas, the sort of thing that could get a school to blacklist a judge, and your judge obviously isn't so ideological that they wouldn't hire you. Your chances for SCOTUS as a liberal counter-clerking for a conservative semi-feeder were frankly already very, very low, unless you keep perfect grades and later land Sutton or something, but depending on how Googlable this thing ends up being, it could maybe end up being a problem--e.g. I can't imagine it would impress BMK or NMG or their clerks.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 18, 2022 12:19 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 18, 2022 12:12 am

I am a liberal clerking for a conservative judge in a few years who signed the letter, mostly on a whim and due to severe peer pressure--not smart, yes, I know. I have two questions. First, should I be legitimately afraid of having my clerkship rescinded, and second, given that this is a semi-feeder, should I worry that conservative Justices down the line will be looking for this in 2-3 years when I think I may apply?

I think your chance of getting rescinded is 0--that would be a huge faux pas, the sort of thing that could get a school to blacklist a judge, and your judge obviously isn't so ideological that they wouldn't hire you. Your chances for SCOTUS as a liberal counter-clerking for a conservative semi-feeder were already very, very low, but depending on how Googlable this thing ends up being, it could maybe end up being a problem--e.g. I can't imagine it would impress BMK, who's presumably one of the ones you'd be targeting, or his clerks.

Same situation except it's a conservative feeder, which may have given me a decent shot. Are justices really going to google "Yale law protest open letter" and ctrl + f for an interviewee's name? Seems excessive.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 17, 2022 11:41 pm

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 17, 2022 11:27 pm

This is a deeply confusing thread. I get the idea of being angry at the idea of instituting a Heckler's veto against the event--but the idea of writing an open letter? Isn't that quintessential counterspeech? You all--and the judges you work for--are being incredible hypocrites.

Yeah that person's position is so extreme I hope they're trolling - unfortunately they probably aren't though. The rot on the right is way deeper than just Silberman.

The letter isn’t counterspeech - as the last poster indicated, it was designed for its advocates to harass anyone who didn’t sign and to propagate a false impression of what happened at the event.

And to the future clerks, I wouldn’t particularly worry about your judges withdrawing offers, but maybe don’t sign letters in the future unless you fully agree with everything said and are willing to stand behind the consequences?

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 18, 2022 12:27 am

The letter isn’t counterspeech - as the last poster indicated, it was designed for its advocates to harass anyone who didn’t sign and to propagate a false impression of what happened at the event.

Pretty sure this conclusion itself is pretty ideological.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 18, 2022 12:29 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 18, 2022 12:27 am

The letter isn’t counterspeech - as the last poster indicated, it was designed for its advocates to harass anyone who didn’t sign and to propagate a false impression of what happened at the event.

Pretty sure this conclusion itself is pretty ideological.

As anyone who goes to Yale could tell you, and one of the previous posters intimated, there was enormous pressure from the people who wrote the letter placed on members of affinity groups, the wall, etc., to sign.

In any case, I didn't mean to start a flame war over litigating the contents of the open letter, because it's not on the topic of this thread and I won't change any minds. I'll just repeat what I said before - numerous judges would care about physically trying to shut down a speech/heckling (not just standing in the back with a poster or leading a counterevent) and not just hardcore conservatives like Silberman, but much more moderate ones like Walker (2d Cir.). Signing a letter that at best, is specious, likely will not hurt anyone, especially not anyone past this Plan cycle, but it isn't going to help anyone either.

Silberman's trolling aside, is it just me, or are protests like these are kind of pointless and just virtue signaling? I would identify as very progressive, but it's not like the protest would have changed the minds of the speaker or anyone in Fed Soc. Honestly, it gives them just gives fringe figures like these more publicity and martyrdom.

Bigots are always going to exist (and Fed Soc is always going to find a way to bring the latest ones on campus, let's be real) - shouldn't the main goal be to make sure they don't get into positions of power where they can do real damage? Protests at a law school may be dramatic, but I'm not sure they accomplish anything. If students used the outrage generated by the controversy to raise funds for Lambda Legal or some organization helping LGBT people in Texas/Florida, then at least something productive would have come out of it.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 18, 2022 12:22 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 18, 2022 12:19 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 18, 2022 12:12 am

I am a liberal clerking for a conservative judge in a few years who signed the letter, mostly on a whim and due to severe peer pressure--not smart, yes, I know. I have two questions. First, should I be legitimately afraid of having my clerkship rescinded, and second, given that this is a semi-feeder, should I worry that conservative Justices down the line will be looking for this in 2-3 years when I think I may apply?

I think your chance of getting rescinded is 0--that would be a huge faux pas, the sort of thing that could get a school to blacklist a judge, and your judge obviously isn't so ideological that they wouldn't hire you. Your chances for SCOTUS as a liberal counter-clerking for a conservative semi-feeder were already very, very low, but depending on how Googlable this thing ends up being, it could maybe end up being a problem--e.g. I can't imagine it would impress BMK, who's presumably one of the ones you'd be targeting, or his clerks.

Same situation except it's a conservative feeder, which may have given me a decent shot. Are justices three years down the line really going to google "Yale law protest open letter" and ctrl + f for an interviewee's name? Seems excessive.

Unless it comes up on the first few pages of Google results for your name and "Yale," I imagine you'll probably be fine unless there's a clerk with a grudge about it or something--not impossible, but I agree that it's unlikely. The bigger risk (if any) will for people on the market in June.

The easy solutions are to keep your head down and not sign stuff you don't fully agree with--remember that you're at a glorified trade school, you're an adult, and student politics don't matter like at all, let alone enough to jeopardize your integrity, however much of a hothouse YLS is atm. (On the other hand, I wouldn't let a remote chance of eventual SCOTUS ramifications stop you from doing something you believe in.) But I suppose that's obvious in hindsight.

Similarly, a recent Advisory Opinions mentioned that liberal students at YLS who attend Fed Soc events have been getting harassed at Yale--idk to what extent that's true vs. hyperventilation, but if you want to go to a lunch talk, just go to the lunch talk. Have some self-respect. There's not a similar campaign at any other school in the country, and I guarantee most YLS students don't care either.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 18, 2022 12:36 am

Unless it comes up on the first few pages of Google results for your name and "Yale," I imagine you'll probably be fine unless there's a clerk with a grudge about it or something--not impossible, but I agree that it's unlikely. The bigger risk (if any) will for people on the market in June.

The letter is big enough now that I could see some judges asking their clerks to cross-check it, but I doubt it will matter in practice.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 18, 2022 1:19 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 18, 2022 12:36 am

Unless it comes up on the first few pages of Google results for your name and "Yale," I imagine you'll probably be fine unless there's a clerk with a grudge about it or something--not impossible, but I agree that it's unlikely. The bigger risk (if any) will for people on the market in June.

The letter is big enough now that I could see some judges asking their clerks to cross-check it, but I doubt it will matter in practice.

Like… several years from now?

Gotta chuckle at the powerful government official claiming that he's supporting free speech by asking other powerful government officials to retaliate against law students for protesting. Silberman manages to beclown himself again via email.

lavarman84 wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 18, 2022 2:36 am

Gotta chuckle at the powerful government official claiming that he's supporting free speech by asking other powerful government officials to retaliate against law students for protesting. Silberman manages to beclown himself again via email.

There is a fairly distinct difference between protesting as opposed to screaming incoherently and throwing a fit over speakers you don't like to try and stop their events. In fact, Yale (and most other schools, I'd imagine) has a policy against such actions but has chosen not to enforce it time and time agin.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 18, 2022 8:22 am

lavarman84 wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 18, 2022 2:36 am

Gotta chuckle at the powerful government official claiming that he's supporting free speech by asking other powerful government officials to retaliate against law students for protesting. Silberman manages to beclown himself again via email.

There is a fairly distinct difference between protesting as opposed to screaming incoherently and throwing a fit over speakers you don't like to try and stop their events. In fact, Yale (and most other schools, I'd imagine) has a policy against such actions but has chosen not to enforce it time and time agin.

That difference is very much in the eye of the beholder. I don't doubt there are judges (besides Silverman) who disapprove of the students' behavior (as contested as some of the facts are) - to what extent they're going to try to find out if an applicant was involved and will hold it against that applicant, I can't say, of course. But I don't think it's going to be a particularly different subset of judges from those that already probably wouldn't have hired such applicants - I doubt it's really going to shut doors that were realistically open. Maybe a few, but only the margins.

To be fair, I doubt taking part in the protest/signing the letter is going to move the needle on the left, either, in part because of the point about whether such protests accomplish anything. They probably change about as many minds as Silverman's e-mail. I don't think there's anything wrong with getting invested in your law school community and in the expression of political viewpoints within that community - I don't have a problem with "virtue signaling" in that respect - but I agree that there are much more concrete actions you could take and that those are going to be much more meaningful to most people reviewing a resume.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 18, 2022 12:36 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 18, 2022 12:22 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 18, 2022 12:19 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 18, 2022 12:12 am

I am a liberal clerking for a conservative judge in a few years who signed the letter, mostly on a whim and due to severe peer pressure--not smart, yes, I know. I have two questions. First, should I be legitimately afraid of having my clerkship rescinded, and second, given that this is a semi-feeder, should I worry that conservative Justices down the line will be looking for this in 2-3 years when I think I may apply?

I think your chance of getting rescinded is 0--that would be a huge faux pas, the sort of thing that could get a school to blacklist a judge, and your judge obviously isn't so ideological that they wouldn't hire you. Your chances for SCOTUS as a liberal counter-clerking for a conservative semi-feeder were already very, very low, but depending on how Googlable this thing ends up being, it could maybe end up being a problem--e.g. I can't imagine it would impress BMK, who's presumably one of the ones you'd be targeting, or his clerks.

Same situation except it's a conservative feeder, which may have given me a decent shot. Are justices three years down the line really going to google "Yale law protest open letter" and ctrl + f for an interviewee's name? Seems excessive.

Unless it comes up on the first few pages of Google results for your name and "Yale," I imagine you'll probably be fine unless there's a clerk with a grudge about it or something--not impossible, but I agree that it's unlikely. The bigger risk (if any) will for people on the market in June.

The easy solutions are to keep your head down and not sign stuff you don't fully agree with--remember that you're at a glorified trade school, you're an adult, and student politics don't matter like at all, let alone enough to jeopardize your integrity, however much of a hothouse YLS is atm. (On the other hand, I wouldn't let a remote chance of eventual SCOTUS ramifications stop you from doing something you believe in.) But I suppose that's obvious in hindsight.

Similarly, a recent Advisory Opinions mentioned that liberal students at YLS who attend Fed Soc events have been getting harassed at Yale--idk to what extent that's true vs. hyperventilation, but if you want to go to a lunch talk, just go to the lunch talk. Have some self-respect. There's not a similar campaign at any other school in the country, and I guarantee most YLS students don't care either.

In a similar situation and would love to hear more people's thoughts on this if they have them.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 18, 2022 10:37 am

In a similar situation and would love to hear more people's thoughts on this if they have them.

How would anyone really know? I know my judge is aware of the recent incidents at Yale and has an exceptionally low opinion of people that try shutting down events. I doubt they would look kindly upon signing a letter that more or less endorses the activity, but it hasn't come up before as far as I am aware. I can't speak for other judges, but Judge Walker and Judge Komitte speaking out is a good indication shouting down speakers is not an activity held in high regard by a good number of judges - both of them hire many liberal students.

I would agree with some of the other posters. You are at a trade school. Don't worry about campus politics and live your own life. If you want to attend events, attend them. If you want to sign letters, sign them because you actually agree with the message contained, not because others are pressuring you to. If you want to protest, I would encourage following campus procedures, but otherwise, go ahead.

I am halfway convinced that this whole controversy is yet another in a series of elaborate psyops to get people talking about Yale Law, and What Happened at Yale Law, and the Students at Yale Law, and OMG can you believe this politics thing at Yale Law, and OMG prestigious clerkships at Yale Law.

Signed,

A very grumpy person who did not go to Yale Law, but who did and does work with people who went to Yale Law, and wow, do those Yale Law people not understand that the Yale Law things, like the internal politics of Yale Law Women and Yale Law Hardboiled Egg Society and Yale Law Journal, do not interest people who did not go to Yale Law.