Glaring problem with application? Forum

[Anonymous User]

I am one of the top ten students with LR at a lower T14 and the clerkship process has been a disaster. I applied narrowly - about 35 judges, all the feeders / others on 2/9/DC/7. I had 1 interview but silence since, and crickets from everyone else. I've now expanded my list, but hard to know if it's too late.

I am demoralized and confused because I think I have strong recs + writing samples. Should I assume there is something glaringly wrong in my application, or is this expected based on the randomness of the process with the most competitive judges? My clerkship office has reviewed my materials and told me they look good, and I've reviewed for typos to no end.

[Anonymous User]

I am one of the top ten students with LR at a lower T14 and the clerkship process has been a disaster. I applied narrowly - about 35 judges, all the feeders / others on 2/9/DC/7. I had 1 interview but silence since, and crickets from everyone else. I've now expanded my list, but hard to know if it's too late.

I am demoralized and confused because I think I have strong recs + writing samples. Should I assume there is something glaringly wrong in my application, or is this expected based on the randomness of the process with the most competitive judges? My clerkship office has reviewed my materials and told me they look good, and I've reviewed for typos to no end.

There's probably nothing glaringly wrong with your application. You just massively overrated your competitiveness for the top clerkships and applied way too narrowly.

[Anonymous User]

Expected based on the randomness of the process with the most competitive judges.

You’re a strong candidate, but that’s a very narrow application pool. Those judges are getting hundreds of applications - did you have anyone making calls to get your application pulled from the pile? Because other candidates will have done so.

[Anonymous User]

1 for 35 with those stats is actually fairly good/expected.

[kolio6]

I am one of the top ten students with LR at a lower T14 and the clerkship process has been a disaster. I applied narrowly - about 35 judges, all the feeders / others on 2/9/DC/7. I had 1 interview but silence since, and crickets from everyone else. I've now expanded my list, but hard to know if it's too late.

I am demoralized and confused because I think I have strong recs + writing samples. Should I assume there is something glaringly wrong in my application, or is this expected based on the randomness of the process with the most competitive judges? My clerkship office has reviewed my materials and told me they look good, and I've reviewed for typos to no end.

I’m sorry to say it, but you thought you were more competitive than you are. The top feeders on DC, Ninth, and the Second are going straight to the Y/H/S students that come recommended by professors they trust. That alone gives them 30-40 students to prioritize over you. Then you have UChicago dominating in the 7th. You had slim pickings without a call by a major professor.

This sucks because I think you probably are an awesome applicant and would make an excellent law clerk.

[Anonymous User]

Your clerkship office committed malpractice by letting you apply with such a list, but there’s nothing wrong with the app probably. I actually think one interview for only applying to 35 very competitive judges with your grades/school is above your xG.

There’s still a chance you’ll get something, but the more desirable judges on other circuits tend to also hire fast. Your second choice is someone else’s first choice. I would also apply immediately to every new appointee and consider whether you’d be willing to expand to district courts.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. Thanks everyone, this is helpful. Super frustrating because I was planning to apply more broadly, and my clerkship office told me to be selective (And never told me that HYSC had such pull over even the tippy top students at lower T14s). I did have Professors make calls, but they’re not the HYS heavy hitters and I targeted them mostly to feeders. Lesson learned.

Hopefully I can land a District Court now and try again more broadly for COAs throughout the year.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. Thanks everyone, this is helpful. Super frustrating because I was planning to apply more broadly, and my clerkship office told me to be selective (And never told me that HYSC had such pull over even the tippy top students at lower T14s). I did have Professors make calls, but they’re not the HYS heavy hitters and I targeted them mostly to feeders. Lesson learned.

Hopefully I can land a District Court now and try again more broadly for COAs throughout the year.

No reason to wait till next year. You have, I assume, 60+ spots on OSCAR. Might as well blanket all the other Circuit positions. Yes, it would have been better if you had applied to said positions on June 13, but worth a shot.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. Thanks everyone, this is helpful. Super frustrating because I was planning to apply more broadly, and my clerkship office told me to be selective (And never told me that HYSC had such pull over even the tippy top students at lower T14s). I did have Professors make calls, but they’re not the HYS heavy hitters and I targeted them mostly to feeders. Lesson learned.

Hopefully I can land a District Court now and try again more broadly for COAs throughout the year.

I get the frustration. I’d also say, though, that you wanted to make sure you didn’t end up working for someone less “elite” and asking yourself “what if I’d been more selective and landed something with Sri?” Now you know how tough this process is, you’ll have greater appreciation for the opportunities you do get. Honestly, I think tippy-top conservatives might appreciate your app more — from my experience they generally look deeper into the pile.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. Thanks everyone, this is helpful. Super frustrating because I was planning to apply more broadly, and my clerkship office told me to be selective (And never told me that HYSC had such pull over even the tippy top students at lower T14s). I did have Professors make calls, but they’re not the HYS heavy hitters and I targeted them mostly to feeders. Lesson learned.

Hopefully I can land a District Court now and try again more broadly for COAs throughout the year.

In addition to HYS having more pull, those schools also use a H/P grading system that gives more applicants a claim to being the "tippy top." It's much easier for a feeder judge to hire a straight-H YLS applicant with a phone call from a trusted recommender than a lower T14 applicant who the judge can reason was beaten by 5-10 other people.

[Anonymous User]

There are, generously, maybe ten liberal feeders and semi-feeders (Srinivasan > Fletcher, Lohier, Millett, Pillard, Tatel > Barron, Calabresi, Friedland, Watford). Between them, they hire 40 clerks, of whom (conservatively) half will be from HYSC. That leaves 20 for the rest of the T14, which have 100 top-ten students. You need to be higher than "just" top-ten or have something special about your app (URM, dad is Merrick Garland, etc.) to be really competitive.

[Anonymous User]

That leaves 20 for the rest of the T14, which have 100 top-ten students.

And that doesn't even account for us plebes who steal a spot from our T14 overclassmates!

[Anonymous User]

There are, generously, maybe ten liberal feeders and semi-feeders (Srinivasan > Fletcher, Lohier, Millett, Pillard, Tatel > Barron, Calabresi, Friedland, Watford). Between them, they hire 40 clerks, of whom (conservatively) half will be from HYSC. That leaves 20 for the rest of the T14, which have 100 top-ten students. You need to be higher than "just" top-ten or have something special about your app (URM, dad is Merrick Garland, etc.) to be really competitive.

Clerked for one of these judges. I think first of all that greater than half the clerks are HYSC. In my chambers, HYS was fully every spot and that was not at all unusual. Some chambers may hire more broadly though. But anybody from a lower T14, except maybe the top 1-2 individual students, has virtually zero shot at any of these judges. Blunt and maybe unfair, but the reality.

Second, there are not really many feeders left, even amongst that crew. We need to stop talking about D appointees as “feeders.” With the current composition of the Court, at least half of those judges will have basically no additional pull over any other D appointee competitive circuit judge given age and recent retirements. Several (including my judge) also appear to have been focusing less on scotus hiring and pretty bluntly told clerks as much. On that list, the only ones I’d say are really still that committed to feeding are Srinivasan, Millett, Friedland and Lohier. And only Sri really offers a super meaningful leg up (although if he hires you, probably don’t need it).

[Anonymous User]

There are, generously, maybe ten liberal feeders and semi-feeders (Srinivasan > Fletcher, Lohier, Millett, Pillard, Tatel > Barron, Calabresi, Friedland, Watford). Between them, they hire 40 clerks, of whom (conservatively) half will be from HYSC. That leaves 20 for the rest of the T14, which have 100 top-ten students. You need to be higher than "just" top-ten or have something special about your app (URM, dad is Merrick Garland, etc.) to be really competitive.

Clerked for one of these judges. I think first of all that greater than half the clerks are HYSC. In my chambers, HYS was fully every spot and that was not at all unusual. Some chambers may hire more broadly though. But anybody from a lower T14, except maybe the top 1-2 individual students, has virtually zero shot at any of these judges. Blunt and maybe unfair, but the reality.

Second, there are not really many feeders left, even amongst that crew. We need to stop talking about D appointees as “feeders.” With the current composition of the Court, at least half of those judges will have basically no additional pull over any other D appointee competitive circuit judge given age and recent retirements. Several (including my judge) also appear to have been focusing less on scotus hiring and pretty bluntly told clerks as much. On that list, the only ones I’d say are really still that committed to feeding are Srinivasan, Millett, Friedland and Lohier. And only Sri really offers a super meaningful leg up (although if he hires you, probably don’t need it).

Curious to hear more on this priority shift if you're willing to share. A higher desire for clerks with career interests besides the traditional SCOTUS path? Less focus on the traditional academic credentials? Something else?

I agree that liberal feeders beyond Srinivasan seem to largely be a thing of the past, and I wouldn't be surprised if there are around as many liberals clerking for conservative semi/feeders (as counters) as there are clerking for liberal semi/feeders at this point. But I wasn't aware that judges were changing their focuses accordingly.