Interviewing advice Forum

[lavarman84]

Eh your employers may have been an outlier. Could also be a regional difference.

I interviewed in basically every region (South, Midwest, Texas, Northeast, Southwest, West Coast) in this country for federal clerkships. My employers weren't outliers. In fact, they were kinder and chiller than most in their interviewing style. It was still quite different from intern interviews. And I'll leave it at that.

[lavarman84]

Alright, beyond the radical advice that judges may want "polished professionalism and good grades," here's some actual insight from someone who's been on both sides of the clerkship interviewing process many times in the last 5 years:

- Every judge is different--some interview a large number of candidates per seat, some interview exclusively to confirm you're a fit and you have to screw something up to not get an offer. Most are somewhere in the middle. Your stats are not bad or atypical.

- Some candidates strike the wrong tone with judges. You want to be a little more deferential to them in conversation than you would a private sector employer. For most judges, the ideal clerk personality is someone who is comfortable disagreeing with the judge and respectfully trying to persuade him or her on the law, but will have no qualms putting their own opinions aside and doing exactly what the judge wants once the judge has made a decision. This can be a tricky balance to strike. I've seen candidates come off as too cocky or intractable, even where that approach would probably work in a different position.

- Have interests--academic or otherwise--that you can discuss. Come off as human and rounded. Fit interviews aren't just about professionalism, they're about inviting someone into a very small and often isolated workplace for a year. Most judges are pretty intellectually curious people. If the judge doesn't think he or she will enjoy daily interaction with you, bouncing ideas off you, talking about whatever his or her interests are, that can absolutely be a factor.

- Know your resume well. Be prepared to discuss any line on it. Judges who interview current law students are used to candidates not knowing what they want to do long-term yet, but having a narrative ("I'm pursuing X because Y...") can help. Relatedly, know your writing sample well.

- Get very comfortable with your answers to the standard questions: why you want to clerk, why this judge in particular, what you hope to gain from the experience, what you think you can bring to chambers, (for students) your favorite class or professor and why, (for attorneys) what you've learned from your career so far. Some version of these questions will be asked in the vast majority of interviews, usually toward the beginning. Having solid, consistent, but not overly-rehearsed answers to them can set the tone for the rest of the interview very well.

- Last but not least, the advice to get to know the judge and his or her process as well as possible--especially by talking to any former clerk you can--is on point. Don't feel like this is crossing any lines. Many judges actually expect that clerkship applicants will do it. Judges are impressed by preparedness. (My judge was jokingly pissed at his former clerk for spoiling a big hypothetical he asks in every interview, but seemed happy that I had done so much legwork that I knew exactly how to respond to the hypo as soon as he started asking.)

This advice is spot on. I'll echo the last point. Talk to former clerks about the process. If nobody at your law school clerked for that judge, just google former clerks and reach out. I had no issues connecting with former clerks even with judges who hadn't hired from my law school (as far as I could find).

[johndooley]

Eh your employers may have been an outlier. Could also be a regional difference.

I interviewed in basically every region (South, Midwest, Texas, Northeast, Southwest, West Coast) in this country for federal clerkships. My employers weren't outliers. In fact, they were kinder and chiller than most in their interviewing style. It was still quite different from intern interviews. And I'll leave it at that.

So you weren’t a great candidate and desperate based on your loose geography. Message received.

[nixy]

Eh your employers may have been an outlier. Could also be a regional difference.

I interviewed in basically every region (South, Midwest, Texas, Northeast, Southwest, West Coast) in this country for federal clerkships. My employers weren't outliers. In fact, they were kinder and chiller than most in their interviewing style. It was still quite different from intern interviews. And I'll leave it at that.

So you weren’t a great candidate and desperate based on your loose geography. Message received.

Stop showing your ass, dooley.

[Anonymous User]

Alright, beyond the radical advice that judges may want "polished professionalism and good grades," here's some actual insight from someone who's been on both sides of the clerkship interviewing process many times in the last 5 years:

- Every judge is different--some interview a large number of candidates per seat, some interview exclusively to confirm you're a fit and you have to screw something up to not get an offer. Most are somewhere in the middle. Your stats are not bad or atypical.

- Some candidates strike the wrong tone with judges. You want to be a little more deferential to them in conversation than you would a private sector employer. For most judges, the ideal clerk personality is someone who is comfortable disagreeing with the judge and respectfully trying to persuade him or her on the law, but will have no qualms putting their own opinions aside and doing exactly what the judge wants once the judge has made a decision. This can be a tricky balance to strike. I've seen candidates come off as too cocky or intractable, even where that approach would probably work in a different position.

- Have interests--academic or otherwise--that you can discuss. Come off as human and rounded. Fit interviews aren't just about professionalism, they're about inviting someone into a very small and often isolated workplace for a year. Most judges are pretty intellectually curious people. If the judge doesn't think he or she will enjoy daily interaction with you, bouncing ideas off you, talking about whatever his or her interests are, that can absolutely be a factor.

- Know your resume well. Be prepared to discuss any line on it. Judges who interview current law students are used to candidates not knowing what they want to do long-term yet, but having a narrative ("I'm pursuing X because Y...") can help. Relatedly, know your writing sample well.

- Get very comfortable with your answers to the standard questions: why you want to clerk, why this judge in particular, what you hope to gain from the experience, what you think you can bring to chambers, (for students) your favorite class or professor and why, (for attorneys) what you've learned from your career so far. Some version of these questions will be asked in the vast majority of interviews, usually toward the beginning. Having solid, consistent, but not overly-rehearsed answers to them can set the tone for the rest of the interview very well.

- Last but not least, the advice to get to know the judge and his or her process as well as possible--especially by talking to any former clerk you can--is on point. Don't feel like this is crossing any lines. Many judges actually expect that clerkship applicants will do it. Judges are impressed by preparedness. (My judge was jokingly pissed at his former clerk for spoiling a big hypothetical he asks in every interview, but seemed happy that I had done so much legwork that I knew exactly how to respond to the hypo as soon as he started asking.)

Re #3, I would also add that if you can identify an academic topic you were passionate about in law school (ideally something obliquely relevant to your judge's interests), try to steer the conversation to it for a few minutes to show that you aren't a soulless robot. Feel free to seem legitimately excited about it. People are attracted to passion within reason. Just don't get stuck on the issue lest you seem monomaniacal. It's a balance worth seeking, I think.

[Anonymous User]

Alright, beyond the radical advice that judges may want "polished professionalism and good grades," here's some actual insight from someone who's been on both sides of the clerkship interviewing process many times in the last 5 years:
- Last but not least, the advice to get to know the judge and his or her process as well as possible--especially by talking to any former clerk you can--is on point. Don't feel like this is crossing any lines. Many judges actually expect that clerkship applicants will do it. Judges are impressed by preparedness. (My judge was jokingly pissed at his former clerk for spoiling a big hypothetical he asks in every interview, but seemed happy that I had done so much legwork that I knew exactly how to respond to the hypo as soon as he started asking.)

Although it is "not different from advice for private-sector interviews," I really want to emphasize this one. Both my COA and district judges wanted to give offers to people who would accept; one gauge of that was if they had done the legwork to contact former clerks from their school (and both of them would ask their former clerks to tell them if anyone reached out before an interview). I think many don't do this, and it does seem to make a difference (you learn more about chambers and the interview, judge gets a signal that you're serious about this clerkship in particular).

[lavarman84]

Eh your employers may have been an outlier. Could also be a regional difference.

I interviewed in basically every region (South, Midwest, Texas, Northeast, Southwest, West Coast) in this country for federal clerkships. My employers weren't outliers. In fact, they were kinder and chiller than most in their interviewing style. It was still quite different from intern interviews. And I'll leave it at that.

So you weren’t a great candidate and desperate based on your loose geography. Message received.

I enjoy experiencing new parts of the country and was willing to clerk anywhere. I was blessed to clerk for two federal judges who were great bosses and even better people. As somebody who attended a good but not great law school, I didn't have the luxury of being picky, particularly with my COA applications.

Ultimately, I got to experience new places and cultures, worked under and with great people, and am now extremely happy working my dream job. So whatever sort of candidate I was, I was just good enough to land the clerkships that got me to where I wanted to go. Can't rain on my parade, friend.

[Anonymous User]

Alright, beyond the radical advice that judges may want "polished professionalism and good grades," here's some actual insight from someone who's been on both sides of the clerkship interviewing process many times in the last 5 years:
- Last but not least, the advice to get to know the judge and his or her process as well as possible--especially by talking to any former clerk you can--is on point. Don't feel like this is crossing any lines. Many judges actually expect that clerkship applicants will do it. Judges are impressed by preparedness. (My judge was jokingly pissed at his former clerk for spoiling a big hypothetical he asks in every interview, but seemed happy that I had done so much legwork that I knew exactly how to respond to the hypo as soon as he started asking.)

Although it is "not different from advice for private-sector interviews," I really want to emphasize this one. Both my COA and district judges wanted to give offers to people who would accept; one gauge of that was if they had done the legwork to contact former clerks from their school (and both of them would ask their former clerks to tell them if anyone reached out before an interview). I think many don't do this, and it does seem to make a difference (you learn more about chambers and the interview, judge gets a signal that you're serious about this clerkship in particular).

Echoing the advice to seek out former clerks. I did all the stock preparation for a COA interview and none of it ended up being relevant. My judge basically only cared about you as a person, your background, your personal values, where you grew up, whether you'd vibe with the chambers location. Basically seemed to be looking for nice people who they could work with. Contrary to the typical clerkship office advice, we didn't discuss the law or my writing sample.

This was exactly as a former clerk said it would be, which gave me a nice edge going in (that info let me know how I should be answering questions, where to steer the conversation, etc.) It also gave me a chance to explain why I wanted to clerk for this judge, as I had that connection to a clerk who spoke highly of their time there; which is invaluable given that, for most of us, the real reason is that we want to clerk and are forced to apply extremely broadly given the competition.

[nealric]

Can we all please agree that we should stop feeding the troll at this point?

Agreed. I like this site specifically because there aren’t many trolls here anymore.

That is a great idea. Ban 90% of users and scare off 5% when only a handful were trolls. Now TLS is a ghost town compared to 2018. #winning

I can count on one hand the number of active posters (i.e. excluding straight spam bots) I have had to ban over the roughly 7 years I've been a moderator at TLS. I logged on during my lunch break to over half a dozen complaints about your posting just over the last 48 hours. This latest spree has earned a 1-week ban. There will be no further warnings.