Double Circuit Clerk Forum

[Anonymous User]

There seems to be a small, (but maybe also somewhat growing) trend of double clerking for circuit. I am wondering is that really only done for people who are gunning for SCOTUS or are there any other reasons one would want to double clerk?

[not2spicy4]

There seems to be a small, (but maybe also somewhat growing) trend of double clerking for circuit. I am wondering is that really only done for people who are gunning for SCOTUS or are there any other reasons one would want to double clerk?

Three reasons come to mind for me: (1) one clerkship is with a regional circuit, one is with the DC circuit, and you really want the admin law exposure; (2) one clerkship is with the federal circuit, the other is with either DC or a regional circuit; (3) you want to be a law professor and you're buying yourself time to write without closing the door on your partnership prospects. And I'm sure there are idiosyncratic reasons for a handful of people that aren't covered by the three reasons I've suggested + SCOTUS.

[lavarman84]

I don't really see why you'd want to be a double COA clerk if you're not gunning for SCOTUS. If you want to double clerk, do a COA and a D. Ct. You'll learn a lot more. I feel like a second year of COA clerking is a waste, outside of the networking value. But maybe you have a specific reason why you're thinking it's a good idea?

[Anonymous User]

I don't really see why you'd want to be a double COA clerk if you're not gunning for SCOTUS. If you want to double clerk, do a COA and a D. Ct. You'll learn a lot more. I feel like a second year of COA clerking is a waste, outside of the networking value. But maybe you have a specific reason why you're thinking it's a good idea?

I don't. I'm just in the position where I accepted a clerkship for a circuit court for 2024 and am now wondering if I should withdraw all my applications for 2025 circuits or just keep them out there in the ether. (Have withdrawn all applications for circuits in the circuit I am clerking in).

[lavarman84]

I don't really see why you'd want to be a double COA clerk if you're not gunning for SCOTUS. If you want to double clerk, do a COA and a D. Ct. You'll learn a lot more. I feel like a second year of COA clerking is a waste, outside of the networking value. But maybe you have a specific reason why you're thinking it's a good idea?

I don't. I'm just in the position where I accepted a clerkship for a circuit court for 2024 and am now wondering if I should withdraw all my applications for 2025 circuits or just keep them out there in the ether. (Have withdrawn all applications for circuits in the circuit I am clerking in).

I'd probably just withdraw them, unless there's a specific judge you have a burning desire to clerk for and don't mind spending another year doing basically the same job.

[Anonymous User]

It's not a benefit to your career for the most part. But it's not a big detriment and it's one of the most fun jobs you'll ever have. So I say go for it if you feel like it.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. I think, based on the above feedback, what I'm going to do is withdraw like half my circuit apps and keep only the ones for judges I especially like.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. I think, based on the above feedback, what I'm going to do is withdraw like half my circuit apps and keep only the ones for judges I especially like.

This is what I did--ended up getting a feeder COA and having a great year. Didn't help my career much (I didn't even apply to SCOTUS), but it was fun and educational.

[Anonymous User]

My judge said he only saw value in doing a double circuit clerkship if one was with the DC Circuit, and generally didn't hire double circuit clerks for this reason.

As others have said, the reason to do a second circuit clerkship is if the second judge is on CADC, is a feeder, or otherwise is uniquely suited to help your career. For the other 95% of applicants, a district clerkship is going to be a much better use of a second clerkship year than an additional circuit clerkship will be.

[Anonymous User]

My judge said he only saw value in doing a double circuit clerkship if one was with the DC Circuit, and generally didn't hire double circuit clerks for this reason.

As others have said, the reason to do a second circuit clerkship is if the second judge is on CADC, is a feeder, or otherwise is uniquely suited to help your career. For the other 95% of applicants, a district clerkship is going to be a much better use of a second clerkship year than an additional circuit clerkship will be.

Is it worth pursuing a feeder clerkship if you are a real longshot for SCOTUS based on grades? I graduated like top 10-15% from a T10 school but landed a semi-feeder and I think I have a good shot at clerking for a feeder.

I don't really want to move just for the feeder clerkship, but I would like to take a shot at SCOTUS if it's possible. I guess I'm wondering if anyone has insight on situations like this. Can the right judges still give you a good shot at SCOTUS even if you don't have glittering academic credentials, at least by SCOTUS standards. I'd be targeting conservatives.

[Anonymous User]

My judge said he only saw value in doing a double circuit clerkship if one was with the DC Circuit, and generally didn't hire double circuit clerks for this reason.

As others have said, the reason to do a second circuit clerkship is if the second judge is on CADC, is a feeder, or otherwise is uniquely suited to help your career. For the other 95% of applicants, a district clerkship is going to be a much better use of a second clerkship year than an additional circuit clerkship will be.

Is it worth pursuing a feeder clerkship if you are a real longshot for SCOTUS based on grades? I graduated like top 10-15% from a T10 school but landed a semi-feeder and I think I have a good shot at clerking for a feeder.

I don't really want to move just for the feeder clerkship, but I would like to take a shot at SCOTUS if it's possible. I guess I'm wondering if anyone has insight on situations like this. Can the right judges still give you a good shot at SCOTUS even if you don't have glittering academic credentials, at least by SCOTUS standards. I'd be targeting conservatives.

Excellent question, and pretty much the exact same one I once grappled with. My stats were a little better (top 5% at a mid-T14 with improving grades each year) and my first clerkship was with a judge who was well known and respected but was not a feeder.

The answer is the usual "it depends" because so much of SCOTUS is Justice and relationship-dependent, but given your distance from the top of the class, I think you'd need to do so accepting that you'd remain a considerable long shot absent exceptionally compelling resume boosters (e.g. CT will reach a bit on GPA for someone who has made significant contributions to originalism, perhaps a Justice may respond to the right professor/feeder/litigator who says you're "the best in 20 years"). I would try to have frank conversations with your school (recommenders, clerkship office, dean) and your first judge about whether or not adding a feeder judge would make you a viable candidate. Then it's up to you whether moving a second time justifies the benefit you'd get from adding the feeder--I decided it wasn't and didn't pursue the feeder or SCOTUS.

[Anonymous User]

My judge said he only saw value in doing a double circuit clerkship if one was with the DC Circuit, and generally didn't hire double circuit clerks for this reason.

As others have said, the reason to do a second circuit clerkship is if the second judge is on CADC, is a feeder, or otherwise is uniquely suited to help your career. For the other 95% of applicants, a district clerkship is going to be a much better use of a second clerkship year than an additional circuit clerkship will be.

Is it worth pursuing a feeder clerkship if you are a real longshot for SCOTUS based on grades? I graduated like top 10-15% from a T10 school but landed a semi-feeder and I think I have a good shot at clerking for a feeder.

I don't really want to move just for the feeder clerkship, but I would like to take a shot at SCOTUS if it's possible. I guess I'm wondering if anyone has insight on situations like this. Can the right judges still give you a good shot at SCOTUS even if you don't have glittering academic credentials, at least by SCOTUS standards. I'd be targeting conservatives.

OP of the original thread. Just want to clarify this is not me but someone else (which is totally fine, I don't really subscribe to thread hijacking theory or whatever). Just say this to differentiate myself in case it matters. I'm probably just over top 5% or maybe under, so call it top 4-7 percent and not clerking for a feeder or semi-feeder and will almost certainly not be clerking for and do not have interest in pursuing SCOTUS to the extent this matters if the advice is different for me than the poster above.

I'm also totally fine moving to random cities, in fact I prefer it. This is likely the one time in my life I will get to live somewhere outside of New York or DC (although i will still be applying to DC Circuit judges)

[Anonymous User]

Do a trial court clerkship, you’ll learn a ton. The only real reason to do double appellate is to chase SCOTUS or maybe do the DC Cir if you want admin (though even then DDC would probably be superior).

[Anonymous User]

Yeah, in your case, OP, you should 100% do a district clerkship if you want to clerk a second time.

Tangential, but as someone who's clerked at both levels and is now several years removed from the law school bubble, I think the #1 misconception law students have is that district is easier or a step down from circuit. It is less "prestigious" because there are more judges available and they're a step further removed from SCOTUS, but it is absolutely a harder job, and arguably more helpful for most young attorneys' professional development. I was personally glad that I did circuit first even though the opposite order is more conventional.

[Anonymous User]

Earlier commenter who did two COA's.

Agreed that it's less smart than district and then COA or vice verse. But remember that you're playing with house money here. If you're getting 2 COA's, you've got biglaw on lock and can basically do anything you want. So, while it's not a "smart" career move necessarily, don't feel any shame about it if it's how it ends up.

[Anonymous User]

It could slow your career down, but it certainly won't harm it and could still raise your ceiling. The diversity of a district and an appellate clerkship makes more sense experientially. Appellate jobs are also very hard to break into, even with one nice appellate clerkship so two could help esp if one is the DC cirucit. The vast majority of litigators do trial phase work, so a district court is more apt for that stream of work.


Also scotus people are triple clerking now lol.

[Anonymous User]

It could slow your career down, but it certainly won't harm it and could still raise your ceiling. The diversity of a district and an appellate clerkship makes more sense experientially. Appellate jobs are also very hard to break into, even with one nice appellate clerkship so two could help esp if one is the DC cirucit. The vast majority of litigators do trial phase work, so a district court is more apt for that stream of work.


Also scotus people are triple clerking now lol.

Unrelated I guess, but on that point I wonder if the SCOTUS people triple clerking now will spread in like 10 years to us non-SCOTUS plebes. Because I remember before it used to be one circuit clerkship then SCOTUS (or occasional district then SCOTUS), but then SCOTUS clerks started doing two and eventually normal non-SCOTUS people started doing two. I wonder if in 10 years there will be a ton of double circuit + district or COA/DC/SSC people.

[Anonymous User]

It could slow your career down, but it certainly won't harm it and could still raise your ceiling. The diversity of a district and an appellate clerkship makes more sense experientially. Appellate jobs are also very hard to break into, even with one nice appellate clerkship so two could help esp if one is the DC cirucit. The vast majority of litigators do trial phase work, so a district court is more apt for that stream of work.


Also scotus people are triple clerking now lol.

Unrelated I guess, but on that point I wonder if the SCOTUS people triple clerking now will spread in like 10 years to us non-SCOTUS plebes. Because I remember before it used to be one circuit clerkship then SCOTUS (or occasional district then SCOTUS), but then SCOTUS clerks started doing two and eventually normal non-SCOTUS people started doing two. I wonder if in 10 years there will be a ton of double circuit + district or COA/DC/SSC people.

I don't believe triple clerking will become widespread. In fact, I can't recall any instance where a triple clerk at the SCOTUS got their clerkship because of their third clerkship. Typically, it's because there is a gap in the term they are leaving the second clerkship and starting at SCOTUS, and the justice places them with a friend.