Top Law Schools

I'm thinking of targeting a post-LS job with Google's Legal and Government relations dept and am wondering if anyone has any insight of, or experience with this.

I was thinking of gunning for BigLaw, but policy work with Google, particularly if in DC, seems like a much better fit.

rad lulz wrote:http://lmgtfy.com/?q=+Google%27s+Legal+ ... ions+dept+

Rad lulz, always clever.

I'm hoping for some anonymous first-hand knowledge.

Sorry; couldn't resist

This.

As well as the Microsoft 1L in-house legal internship.

In my inexpert opinion you're not getting in-house at Google without putting in a few years in biglaw first.

piccolittle wrote:In my inexpert opinion you're not getting in-house at Google without putting in a few years in biglaw first.

A few years at an elite firm from an elite school, too. In-house at Google or a similar firm would be the holy grail of in-house positions, and they have their pick of pretty much anyone they want.

If your reason for going to law school is to work in-house at Google, unless you're in at Stanford, you might want to reconsider law school.

kalvano wrote:

piccolittle wrote:In my inexpert opinion you're not getting in-house at Google without putting in a few years in biglaw first.

A few years at an elite firm from an elite school, too. In-house at Google or a similar firm would be the holy grail of in-house positions, and they have their pick of pretty much anyone they want.

If your reason for going to law school is to work in-house at Google, unless you're in at Stanford, you might want to reconsider law school.

My reason for going is that I want to be a lawyer. I'm just not set on in what way I want to use those skills. I think I could do well in BigLaw, but I wouldn't want to be there near long enough to make partner, which basically means I should leave after 2-3 years, lest I waste my time.

I don't think not going to Stanford is a big deal if my objective in working for Google was strictly policy and govt relations in their DC office.

Edit: Sloppily used language made it sound like I thought making partner took 2-3 yrs

txdude45 wrote:

kalvano wrote:

piccolittle wrote:In my inexpert opinion you're not getting in-house at Google without putting in a few years in biglaw first.

A few years at an elite firm from an elite school, too. In-house at Google or a similar firm would be the holy grail of in-house positions, and they have their pick of pretty much anyone they want.

If your reason for going to law school is to work in-house at Google, unless you're in at Stanford, you might want to reconsider law school.

My reason for going is that I want to be a lawyer. I'm just not set on in what way I want to use those skills. I think I could do well in BigLaw, but I wouldn't want to be there near long enough to make partner, which basically means if likely want to leave after 2-3 years.

I don't think not going to Stanford is a big deal if my objective in working for Google was strictly policy and govt relations in their DC office.

Google's in-house lawyers are going to be the equivalent of their in-house engineers and programmers and designers. Setting your sights only on Google is probably only slightly less insane than insisting you want to be a White House senior staffer or bust.

rinkrat19 wrote:Google's in-house lawyers are going to be the equivalent of their in-house engineers and programmers and designers. Setting your sights only on Google is probably only slight less insane than insisting you want to be a White House senior staffer or bust.

Not silly enough to think its google, or bust. Just evaluating that as a possible choice.

txdude45 wrote:

kalvano wrote:

piccolittle wrote:In my inexpert opinion you're not getting in-house at Google without putting in a few years in biglaw first.

A few years at an elite firm from an elite school, too. In-house at Google or a similar firm would be the holy grail of in-house positions, and they have their pick of pretty much anyone they want.

If your reason for going to law school is to work in-house at Google, unless you're in at Stanford, you might want to reconsider law school.

My reason for going is that I want to be a lawyer. I'm just not set on in what way I want to use those skills. I think I could do well in BigLaw, but I wouldn't want to be there near long enough to make partner, which basically means if likely want to leave after 2-3 years.

I don't think not going to Stanford is a big deal if my objective in working for Google was strictly policy and govt relations in their DC office.

You're talking about one of, if not the, most successful companies in the world that has a massive influence in government policy and the current state of the law in cutting-edge issues. You'll need a screamingly awesome résumé to even get looked at by them.

I'm not saying it's impossible, but in-house positions are highly competitive, period. It's an entirely different stratosphere when you're talking about companies like Google. You'll need incredible credentials to even get a look. I said Stanford simply because its in their backyard and their chief legal officer went there. But you'd probably need a top-6 school and a very prestigious firm for a fe years to even have a shot at getting your résumé read.

Just to clarify, I'm not saying I'd want to do litigation, or IP for google. I'm talking about advancing googles interests from a policy standpoint in DC. I understand a law degree may or may not even be necessary for this. However, my goal is to be a lawyer and since I'm not even 100% that policy/advocacy work is what I'd want to do, going to law school is still a necessity in my mind.

txdude45 wrote:Just to clarify, I'm not saying I'd want to do litigation, or IP for google. I'm talking about advancing googles interests from a policy standpoint in DC. I understand a law degree may or may not even be necessary for this. However, my goal is to be a lawyer and since I'm not even 100% that policy/advocacy work is what I'd want to do, going to law school is still a necessity in my mind.

I don't think you're grasping the point. Regardless of what you want to do for Google, you will need a top-notch résumé to even get looked at.

kalvano wrote:

txdude45 wrote:Just to clarify, I'm not saying I'd want to do litigation, or IP for google. I'm talking about advancing googles interests from a policy standpoint in DC. I understand a law degree may or may not even be necessary for this. However, my goal is to be a lawyer and since I'm not even 100% that policy/advocacy work is what I'd want to do, going to law school is still a necessity in my mind.

I don't think you're grasping the point. Regardless of what you want to do for Google, you will need a top-notch résumé to even get looked at.

Give me some credit. I'm dense, but not a total dunce. I know I'll need impressive stuff, I guess I was hoping that wouldn't necessarily need to involve sweatshop work.

law degree + 3-4 years experience at a top-notch firm + experience in relevant field + be "googly"

txdude45 wrote:

kalvano wrote:

txdude45 wrote:Just to clarify, I'm not saying I'd want to do litigation, or IP for google. I'm talking about advancing googles interests from a policy standpoint in DC. I understand a law degree may or may not even be necessary for this. However, my goal is to be a lawyer and since I'm not even 100% that policy/advocacy work is what I'd want to do, going to law school is still a necessity in my mind.

I don't think you're grasping the point. Regardless of what you want to do for Google, you will need a top-notch résumé to even get looked at.

Give me some credit. I'm dense, but not a total dunce. I know I'll need impressive stuff, I guess I was hoping that wouldn't necessarily need to involve sweatshop work.

Unfortunately, most desirable places require big law. The best thing you can do is plan to give yourself the most options. Ending up at the right firm will get you opportunities at amazing companies all over the country. Who knows, in six years Google might be old news.

That's my plan, at least. I could have ended up in-house in tech and worked my way up, but I knew going to big law would give me options beyond the company I worked at. In-house is also pretty stagnant, with limited room for advancement. If you have nothing legal on your resume besides Google, it will be hard to sell yourself later in your career when there's no more room for you to move up and it's time to move out. Hope that makes sense.

Edit: Do you have LinkedIn? I did a search for Googlers in Government Relations in D.C. and these are the people it pulled up. I find it's good to get a sense of the backgrounds of people you want to emulate for planning purposes

I don't know anyone who works for Google's legal department, but I do have two friends who work for Google in other capacities. Contrary to what everyone here has stated, Google does not limit hiring to graduates from top level schools.

Both of my friends who work for Google graduated from fairly mediocre colleges at the middle of their class, and neither one of them had prior work experience in their field.

From what they've told me, Google is more interested in hiring good people who are friendly and easy to get along with. I can't say for sure that the same is true for the legal department, but if it is, you'll have more luck getting a job with Google by being an all around swell guy than by being the top 1% from Stanford with big law experience.

It would make a huge difference whether it's hiring for CSE positions we're talking about, or hiring for in-house legal positions. I would imagine given the CSE bubble that it's much easier getting a job there as a programer than it is as a lawyer. FWIW none of the UW CSE people I know seem to have any problems getting jobs and internships there. I wouldn't assume this carries over to in-house legal positions, though.