AUSA/USAO hiring Forum

[Anonymous User]

The USAO offices are also by and large heavily relying on LinkedIn posts to display their job openings. Look up the official USAO account (I think it's run by EOUSAO) and you'll see a bunch of them. Link here: https://www.linkedin.com/company/usatto ... edView=all

They may be using LinkedIn, but I wouldn’t say they’re relying on it when active job postings are all going to be on usdoj.gov and USAjobs.

Anyway, by their nature, rolling applications aren’t going to show up in those kinds of announcements. If the OP wants specific postings, they can just go to usdoj.gov or USAjobs that compile all the active openings in one place. Offices that accept openings at any time, they’ll probably have to check the specific office web pages.

[Anonymous User]

The USAO offices are also by and large heavily relying on LinkedIn posts to display their job openings. Look up the official USAO account (I think it's run by EOUSAO) and you'll see a bunch of them. Link here: https://www.linkedin.com/company/usatto ... edView=all

No, not all offices post on LI.

Every AUSA and Trial Attorney position is listed on Justice.gov. Some USAOs will direct you to USAJOBS, some take applications directly; all of them post on the Justice Dept’s website

You can use that cancerous social media site to cross reference AUSAs in recent press releases to your common alma matter/hometown/cult, and network to learn more about the office.

Re the earlier questions about how long it takes to hear back, it really is office-dependent and some can take a long time due to factors out of your and even their control. Keep applying to any vacancies you see, even if you’re in the midst of interviews. Many offices can use your interviews for posting 1 to slot you into positing 2, but only if you’ve applied to both.

Good luck!

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone know anything about Northern District of Georgia hiring processes or timelines?

[Anonymous User]

For NYC USAOs what is the best way to get an AUSA job going down the ADA path? How doable is the ADA to AUSA path in NYC and what DA’s office is the best way to go? How long do you need to spend at the DA’s office?

[Anonymous User]

Can someone be an AUSA and decline to seek the death penalty in any case? I have a religious objection and am wondering if it could be an issue

[Anonymous User]

Can someone be an AUSA and decline to seek the death penalty in any case? I have a religious objection and am wondering if it could be an issue

I should start by saying that I've never had to deal with this (federal death penalty cases are very rare), but I'd be shocked if you couldn't, even if your objection was just part of your general moral code and not specifically tied to religion (but the religious element would seal it, I would think).

Although to be clear, you wouldn't get to make the call (you can make your pitch but if management decides otherwise, they decide otherwise), but you'd be able to get off the case. There's a huge bureaucratic process for getting approval to seek the death penalty to begin with, so there should be lots of opportunities to let management know that it's not the case for you. I think this goes more smoothly if you're known as a team player otherwise. Also, it doesn't mean that your office wouldn't pursue it as a death penalty case, just that you personally wouldn't have to work on it, in case that matters. (Frankly, there will also probably be plenty of people who do want to work a death penalty case since they're generally going to be large, complex/significant, and high publicity. I personally hate publicity but there are plenty who don't.)

[Anonymous User]

Can someone be an AUSA and decline to seek the death penalty in any case? I have a religious objection and am wondering if it could be an issue

Older AUSA here. As a practical matter, this happening to you would be almost virtually impossible. More academically, AUSA candidates are asked tough questions like this one during the interview process, and if you are uncomfortable with the duties of being a DOJ/USAO lawyer, you might get dinged. Your duty as a lawyer here is to represent the United States under President Biden or under President Trump. Presidential politics don't always trickle down to the level of line AUSAs. But they can.

Getting back to my first point: the feds don't seek the death penalty that frequently, and it can be even more rare depending on who the Attorney General is. If you are a junior-level lawyer, the odds that you will be staffed on a terrorism case where the DP might be sought are astronomical. By the time you're older when such odds increase, you know your way around the DOJ well enough to avoid such ethical quandaries.

[Anonymous User]

Can someone be an AUSA and decline to seek the death penalty in any case? I have a religious objection and am wondering if it could be an issue

Older AUSA here. As a practical matter, this happening to you would be almost virtually impossible. More academically, AUSA candidates are asked tough questions like this one during the interview process, and if you are uncomfortable with the duties of being a DOJ/USAO lawyer, you might get dinged. Your duty as a lawyer here is to represent the United States under President Biden or under President Trump. Presidential politics don't always trickle down to the level of line AUSAs. But they can.

Getting back to my first point: the feds don't seek the death penalty that frequently, and it can be even more rare depending on who the Attorney General is. If you are a junior-level lawyer, the odds that you will be staffed on a terrorism case where the DP might be sought are astronomical. By the time you're older when such odds increase, you know your way around the DOJ well enough to avoid such ethical quandaries.

Good to know, thanks. I suspect dinging someone for their religious beliefs would violate some kind of law or policy but that doesn’t mean it won’t happen…

I don’t have any issue with the role of the prosecutor in general. I’m generally not in favor of immigration laws or drug laws either, but I’d happily prosecute them if called to do so because it’s not my call as a 30 something lawyer to decide which laws get enforced. It’s really just in the context of the death penalty that my religion considers it never morally permissible and a serious sin to participate in.

[Anonymous User]

Good to know, thanks. I suspect dinging someone for their religious beliefs would violate some kind of law or policy but that doesn’t mean it won’t happen…

I don’t have any issue with the role of the prosecutor in general. I’m generally not in favor of immigration laws or drug laws either, but I’d happily prosecute them if called to do so because it’s not my call as a 30 something lawyer to decide which laws get enforced. It’s really just in the context of the death penalty that my religion considers it never morally permissible and a serious sin to participate in.

If you tried to bring up your religious beliefs during an interview, you would probably get dinged for being a goddamned weirdo, not for "religious reasons."

No one hiring a young AUSA is going to be interested in your personal beliefs about the death penalty, mainly because you will likely have anywhere from 5 to 10 years to go before you could prove yourself competent enough to get staffed on a case of such great importance in the first place. However, interviewers will be interested in your ability to articulate how to navigate the complex analysis of reconciling your personal feelings about various topics with your duties as a lawyer. If you cannot properly articulate this, you should probably be neither an AUSA nor a public defender.

[Anonymous User]

Good to know, thanks. I suspect dinging someone for their religious beliefs would violate some kind of law or policy but that doesn’t mean it won’t happen…

I don’t have any issue with the role of the prosecutor in general. I’m generally not in favor of immigration laws or drug laws either, but I’d happily prosecute them if called to do so because it’s not my call as a 30 something lawyer to decide which laws get enforced. It’s really just in the context of the death penalty that my religion considers it never morally permissible and a serious sin to participate in.

If you tried to bring up your religious beliefs during an interview, you would probably get dinged for being a goddamned weirdo, not for "religious reasons."

No one hiring a young AUSA is going to be interested in your personal beliefs about the death penalty, mainly because you will likely have anywhere from 5 to 10 years to go before you could prove yourself competent enough to get staffed on a case of such great importance in the first place. However, interviewers will be interested in your ability to articulate how to navigate the complex analysis of reconciling your personal feelings about various topics with your duties as a lawyer. If you cannot properly articulate this, you should probably be neither an AUSA nor a public defender.

Since you keep answering anonymously it’s hard to tell who you are, but there’s an AUSA who is needlessly hostile in all their answers in this thread and if that’s you, I’d suggest maybe chilling out or doing something else with your time. I think if someone was asked ‘how do you feel about prosecuting death penalty cases’ as the type of question you yourself mentioned was a possibility before, I think a reasonable answer is ‘I don’t in general have an objection to prosecuting cases even where they might conflict with my moral beliefs, but I can’t in that specific instances do so because I’m catholic’ and leave it at that. If someone was dinged for that, it would be on the basis of religious belief I think, and I’m not sure if your hostility on that ground is your usual personality peeking through or just further evidence of having an issue with someone’s religion.

Obviously if someone unbidden starts declaring their immense love for Jesus or something that would be pretty weird, but that’s not remotely what the other poster was suggesting at…

[Anonymous User]

Good to know, thanks. I suspect dinging someone for their religious beliefs would violate some kind of law or policy but that doesn’t mean it won’t happen…

I don’t have any issue with the role of the prosecutor in general. I’m generally not in favor of immigration laws or drug laws either, but I’d happily prosecute them if called to do so because it’s not my call as a 30 something lawyer to decide which laws get enforced. It’s really just in the context of the death penalty that my religion considers it never morally permissible and a serious sin to participate in.

If you tried to bring up your religious beliefs during an interview, you would probably get dinged for being a goddamned weirdo, not for "religious reasons."

No one hiring a young AUSA is going to be interested in your personal beliefs about the death penalty, mainly because you will likely have anywhere from 5 to 10 years to go before you could prove yourself competent enough to get staffed on a case of such great importance in the first place. However, interviewers will be interested in your ability to articulate how to navigate the complex analysis of reconciling your personal feelings about various topics with your duties as a lawyer. If you cannot properly articulate this, you should probably be neither an AUSA nor a public defender.

Since you keep answering anonymously it’s hard to tell who you are, but there’s an AUSA who is needlessly hostile in all their answers in this thread and if that’s you, I’d suggest maybe chilling out or doing something else with your time. I think if someone was asked ‘how do you feel about prosecuting death penalty cases’ as the type of question you yourself mentioned was a possibility before, I think a reasonable answer is ‘I don’t in general have an objection to prosecuting cases even where they might conflict with my moral beliefs, but I can’t in that specific instances do so because I’m catholic’ and leave it at that. If someone was dinged for that, it would be on the basis of religious belief I think, and I’m not sure if your hostility on that ground is your usual personality peeking through or just further evidence of having an issue with someone’s religion.

Obviously if someone unbidden starts declaring their immense love for Jesus or something that would be pretty weird, but that’s not remotely what the other poster was suggesting at…

Different AUSA, but I agree. The person who asked about this didn't remotely suggest they were going to proselytize in their interview or anything like that. And I had a judge ask me in an interview about my willingness to handle death penalty cases - not as a way to ding me, but mostly to raise the issue and let me know it would be fine (because they'd previously had a clerk who recused from a death penalty case for religious reasons). I'd be pretty surprised if the question came up in an AUSA interview (though for the record, IME the proposed answer above would be totally fine), but I get wondering about it.

As an AUSA I'll admit that people sometimes ask questions about the job that sound a little naive and/or like they very much want to pick and choose the bits they agree with (I don't mean you, DP question poster, this is just a more general observation), and that's not really how it works. You do have to be comfortable being a cog in a giant machine and representing something beyond and bigger than yourself. The older AUSA is right that there are ways that you can negotiate this as you go through your career, but it is a fundamental truth about doing the job.

[Anonymous User]

Good to know, thanks. I suspect dinging someone for their religious beliefs would violate some kind of law or policy but that doesn’t mean it won’t happen…

I don’t have any issue with the role of the prosecutor in general. I’m generally not in favor of immigration laws or drug laws either, but I’d happily prosecute them if called to do so because it’s not my call as a 30 something lawyer to decide which laws get enforced. It’s really just in the context of the death penalty that my religion considers it never morally permissible and a serious sin to participate in.

If you tried to bring up your religious beliefs during an interview, you would probably get dinged for being a goddamned weirdo, not for "religious reasons."

No one hiring a young AUSA is going to be interested in your personal beliefs about the death penalty, mainly because you will likely have anywhere from 5 to 10 years to go before you could prove yourself competent enough to get staffed on a case of such great importance in the first place. However, interviewers will be interested in your ability to articulate how to navigate the complex analysis of reconciling your personal feelings about various topics with your duties as a lawyer. If you cannot properly articulate this, you should probably be neither an AUSA nor a public defender.

Since you keep answering anonymously it’s hard to tell who you are, but there’s an AUSA who is needlessly hostile in all their answers in this thread and if that’s you, I’d suggest maybe chilling out or doing something else with your time.

That was me, and I have no idea what needlessly hostile answers you are talking about in your ad hominem rant here. But setting the rant aside, apparently you think my blunt advice above, that bringing up religious issues during an AUSA interview is a dumb idea, is hostile. I didn't say that for the purpose of hurting your feelings or being hostile. I actually said it to give the poster or any other interested reader a perspective that will increase their chances of getting hired. If you are so sensitive to criticism that you can't even deal with such candid talk from someone who's actually trying to help, you might be in the wrong line of work.

I think if someone was asked ‘how do you feel about prosecuting death penalty cases’ as the type of question you yourself mentioned was a possibility before, I think a reasonable answer is ‘I don’t in general have an objection to prosecuting cases even where they might conflict with my moral beliefs, but I can’t in that specific instances do so because I’m catholic’ and leave it at that. If someone was dinged for that, it would be on the basis of religious belief I think, and I’m not sure if your hostility on that ground is your usual personality peeking through or just further evidence of having an issue with someone’s religion.

Again with the ad hominem. I'll once again ignore your commentary on what you think my personality is all about and focus on the point: If you changed the answer to your new quote instead of the original quote, sure, that sounds arguably more reasonable and maybe less weird. But you are still toying with being tagged as a weirdo if you choose to bring up your religion during an interview. Not only is it simply inappropriate, but federal interviewers are well-versed on the DOJ's guidelines for topics to cover during interviews, and if religion comes up, it will make them extremely uncomfortable due to EEO standards. Which, again, is a great way to just get yourself dinged.

Someone else cited an example of a federal judge asking about the death penalty. Again, a federal judge and his or her law clerks actually deal with death penalty issues. A line AUSA fresh out of law school is not going to touch a death penalty case because, again, (a) federal prosecutions seeking the death penalty are extremely rare, and (b) AUSAs assigned to such cases are going to be seasoned veterans with well over a decade of experience.

[Anonymous User]

I brought up the federal judge asking about the death penalty, mostly as a reason why someone might think a USAO would ask. I agree that they’re not going to, but it’s not completely unreasonable for someone who’s never worked for a USAO to wonder. I also agree that no one’s going to get put on a DP case until they have like 10+ year’s’ experience, but if the person who was asking the question originally is considering making a long-term commitment to the USAO I’m not sure why that would matter.

I also have interviewed for a USAO and FWIW, if the committee did ask about someone’s willingness to work a DP case (again, super unlikely), I would consider an answer referencing religious beliefs fair game. Even if they asked something about “can you separate your personal beliefs from the policies of the government that you’re tasked with enforcing,” I still think an answer that said “yes except for this one very specific circumstance that’s an issue for me because of my religion” would be fair game and I would not consider such a person a weirdo to be dinged. Rather, it would suggest to me that they’d thought pretty deeply about this (I don’t want to do a DP case but bc I’ve lived in non-DP states it never really occurred to me that it might arise).

Nothing the OP on this issue has said has suggested they’re going to just start talking about their religion out of the blue so I suspect that’s where some of the disconnect in this discussion has arisen. No need to tell someone not to talk about religion out of the blue when they’ve never suggest they’re going to do so.

(Also, obviously the USAO can’t ask about religion or make a decision based on someone’s religious beliefs so arguably if someone did bring it up, dinging them for “being a weirdo” would be a problem under those EEO laws you reference.)

[Anonymous User]

It’s really just in the context of the death penalty that my religion considers it never morally permissible and a serious sin to participate in.

If you say this, it raises legitimate questions about why you should even work for the DOJ, which is an institution that participates in the death penalty.

[Anonymous User]

(Also, obviously the USAO can’t ask about religion or make a decision based on someone’s religious beliefs so arguably if someone did bring it up, dinging them for “being a weirdo” would be a problem under those EEO laws you reference.)

A USAO would never ask about religion. Ever.

And a USAO cannot ding someone based on their religious beliefs but it can ding them for being a weirdo. Good luck proving why you were dinged if you think EEO standards were violated.

[Anonymous User]

(Also, obviously the USAO can’t ask about religion or make a decision based on someone’s religious beliefs so arguably if someone did bring it up, dinging them for “being a weirdo” would be a problem under those EEO laws you reference.)

A USAO would never ask about religion. Ever.

And a USAO cannot ding someone based on their religious beliefs but it can ding them for being a weirdo. Good luck proving why you were dinged if you think EEO standards were violated.

I mean, sure, but that doesn’t mean that someone at a USAO (like me) wouldn’t find it troubling to decide someone was a weirdo for bringing up religion in response to a question where it was arguably relevant. You seem to have a problem with that, which kinda reflects more on you than someone who has religious beliefs.

[Anonymous User]

(Also, obviously the USAO can’t ask about religion or make a decision based on someone’s religious beliefs so arguably if someone did bring it up, dinging them for “being a weirdo” would be a problem under those EEO laws you reference.)

A USAO would never ask about religion. Ever.

And a USAO cannot ding someone based on their religious beliefs but it can ding them for being a weirdo. Good luck proving why you were dinged if you think EEO standards were violated.

I mean, sure, but that doesn’t mean that someone at a USAO (like me) wouldn’t find it troubling to decide someone was a weirdo for bringing up religion in response to a question where it was arguably relevant. You seem to have a problem with that, which kinda reflects more on you than someone who has religious beliefs.

This is why I suggested this might be the AUSA who has been rude to a number of people before. Is he/she acting like this because they are generally a jerk or because they are a jerk to religious people? Unclear. They also seem to have reading comprehension issues - the person’s explanation of why they don’t like the death penalty was not a proposed answer to an interview question.

[Anonymous User]

Good to know, thanks. I suspect dinging someone for their religious beliefs would violate some kind of law or policy but that doesn’t mean it won’t happen…

I don’t have any issue with the role of the prosecutor in general. I’m generally not in favor of immigration laws or drug laws either, but I’d happily prosecute them if called to do so because it’s not my call as a 30 something lawyer to decide which laws get enforced. It’s really just in the context of the death penalty that my religion considers it never morally permissible and a serious sin to participate in.

If you tried to bring up your religious beliefs during an interview, you would probably get dinged for being a goddamned weirdo, not for "religious reasons."

No one hiring a young AUSA is going to be interested in your personal beliefs about the death penalty, mainly because you will likely have anywhere from 5 to 10 years to go before you could prove yourself competent enough to get staffed on a case of such great importance in the first place. However, interviewers will be interested in your ability to articulate how to navigate the complex analysis of reconciling your personal feelings about various topics with your duties as a lawyer. If you cannot properly articulate this, you should probably be neither an AUSA nor a public defender.

Since you keep answering anonymously it’s hard to tell who you are, but there’s an AUSA who is needlessly hostile in all their answers in this thread and if that’s you, I’d suggest maybe chilling out or doing something else with your time.

That was me, and I have no idea what needlessly hostile answers you are talking about in your ad hominem rant here. But setting the rant aside, apparently you think my blunt advice above, that bringing up religious issues during an AUSA interview is a dumb idea, is hostile. I didn't say that for the purpose of hurting your feelings or being hostile. I actually said it to give the poster or any other interested reader a perspective that will increase their chances of getting hired. If you are so sensitive to criticism that you can't even deal with such candid talk from someone who's actually trying to help, you might be in the wrong line of work.

I think if someone was asked ‘how do you feel about prosecuting death penalty cases’ as the type of question you yourself mentioned was a possibility before, I think a reasonable answer is ‘I don’t in general have an objection to prosecuting cases even where they might conflict with my moral beliefs, but I can’t in that specific instances do so because I’m catholic’ and leave it at that. If someone was dinged for that, it would be on the basis of religious belief I think, and I’m not sure if your hostility on that ground is your usual personality peeking through or just further evidence of having an issue with someone’s religion.

Again with the ad hominem. I'll once again ignore your commentary on what you think my personality is all about and focus on the point: If you changed the answer to your new quote instead of the original quote, sure, that sounds arguably more reasonable and maybe less weird. But you are still toying with being tagged as a weirdo if you choose to bring up your religion during an interview. Not only is it simply inappropriate, but federal interviewers are well-versed on the DOJ's guidelines for topics to cover during interviews, and if religion comes up, it will make them extremely uncomfortable due to EEO standards. Which, again, is a great way to just get yourself dinged.

Someone else cited an example of a federal judge asking about the death penalty. Again, a federal judge and his or her law clerks actually deal with death penalty issues. A line AUSA fresh out of law school is not going to touch a death penalty case because, again, (a) federal prosecutions seeking the death penalty are extremely rare, and (b) AUSAs assigned to such cases are going to be seasoned veterans with well over a decade of experience.

From the beginning, the question was whether someone who IS an AUSA can bow out of a death penalty case in religious grounds. You inserted all talk of interviews. It is a totally separate question how to approach an interview. And it is a fair thing to consider that there may be interviewers with anti religious sentiment who would consider barely mentioning that someone has a faith to be a black mark against them, sure, just like there might be racist or sexist interviewers as well. Thank you for that insight.

[Anonymous User]

It’s really just in the context of the death penalty that my religion considers it never morally permissible and a serious sin to participate in.

If you say this, it raises legitimate questions about why you should even work for the DOJ, which is an institution that participates in the death penalty.

Not that I’m much of a theological scholar, but I think the doctrine on these issues bars direct participation in the wrongful conduct, not participation in the entity. For example, a catholic lawyer at a hospital (assuming they’re observant enough to care) could not draft consent forms for abortions but could draft contracts for medical supplies or something

[Anonymous User]

I'm pretty sure I'm being paranoid, but I'm feeling slightly crushed by my current job and need some reassurance (or a splash of cold, hard reality, depending on how people read my situation).

I interviewed for a criminal division AUSA position at a major non-NYC USAO. Interview process was very quick, and I interviewed with the USA about 3 weeks ago. I'm usually pretty decent at gauging my interview performance, and I came out of it thinking I had done well. The USA also ended by telling me that if I received an offer from a different office, I should reach out to him/the First AUSA before accepting that.

Since that interview, it's been total radio silence, but I've noticed that the office put up another job posting for criminal AUSA spots shortly after. I'm probably (hopefully?) being neurotic, but does this sound like a normal timeline to an offer? I think the job posting spooked me more than the lack of contact, but I'd appreciate any insight into how long it usually takes to go from USA interview to offer.

[Anonymous User]

Honestly, it depends. I got an offer sooner than that after my interview with the USA, BUT there were a variety of reasons why they were trying to get the hire completed quickly. There are plenty of boring reasons why it could be taking this long. They may not have quite decided (maybe the USA was out of town and couldn’t get all the finalist interviews done right away) or they may be waiting for final approval from DC. Or, it’s possible they’ve made an offer and you’re the backup, or they’ve eliminated you but aren’t sending out rejections until they have someone locked down with offer/acceptance. It’s just impossible to tell from your position.

As for posting for additional criminal slots, that depends too. It could be that the search you were part of failed, they didn’t want to hire any of you, and they’re starting over. But it’s much more likely (imo) that they got approval for more positions on top of the one that you interviewed for and are moving forward with those while the hiring for your line is finishing up.

Tl;dr - I think it’s too early to say that you’re definitely out of the running but it’s impossible to get much more specific than that.

[Anonymous User]

I'm pretty sure I'm being paranoid, but I'm feeling slightly crushed by my current job and need some reassurance (or a splash of cold, hard reality, depending on how people read my situation).

I interviewed for a criminal division AUSA position at a major non-NYC USAO. Interview process was very quick, and I interviewed with the USA about 3 weeks ago. I'm usually pretty decent at gauging my interview performance, and I came out of it thinking I had done well. The USA also ended by telling me that if I received an offer from a different office, I should reach out to him/the First AUSA before accepting that.

Since that interview, it's been total radio silence, but I've noticed that the office put up another job posting for criminal AUSA spots shortly after. I'm probably (hopefully?) being neurotic, but does this sound like a normal timeline to an offer? I think the job posting spooked me more than the lack of contact, but I'd appreciate any insight into how long it usually takes to go from USA interview to offer.

Would you mind sharing what the executive level/front office panel interviews were like- was it similar to the first round interviews? As well as the USA interview?

[Anonymous User]

I'm pretty sure I'm being paranoid, but I'm feeling slightly crushed by my current job and need some reassurance (or a splash of cold, hard reality, depending on how people read my situation).

I interviewed for a criminal division AUSA position at a major non-NYC USAO. Interview process was very quick, and I interviewed with the USA about 3 weeks ago. I'm usually pretty decent at gauging my interview performance, and I came out of it thinking I had done well. The USA also ended by telling me that if I received an offer from a different office, I should reach out to him/the First AUSA before accepting that.

Since that interview, it's been total radio silence, but I've noticed that the office put up another job posting for criminal AUSA spots shortly after. I'm probably (hopefully?) being neurotic, but does this sound like a normal timeline to an offer? I think the job posting spooked me more than the lack of contact, but I'd appreciate any insight into how long it usually takes to go from USA interview to offer.

Would you mind sharing what the executive level/front office panel interviews were like- was it similar to the first round interviews? As well as the USA interview?

For this office, the first and second rounds were largely similar. I guess there was maybe more of a discussion of substantive focuses in the second, since the office has different divisions focused on different areas, and you basically get placed right away without a formal rotation system. The USA interview was a little more aggressive (at least from the FAUSA's side). That one involved answering tough hypos about ethics, handling reluctant witnesses, etc.

And thank you, other Anon, for the earlier response.

[Anonymous User]

FWIW, both times I’ve interviewed with a USA, it’s been very mellow and polite. I think it depends a lot on the USA. I also didn’t find much difference between a first round interview and second round (non-USA) interview.

[Anonymous User]

I'm pretty sure I'm being paranoid, but I'm feeling slightly crushed by my current job and need some reassurance (or a splash of cold, hard reality, depending on how people read my situation).

I interviewed for a criminal division AUSA position at a major non-NYC USAO. Interview process was very quick, and I interviewed with the USA about 3 weeks ago. I'm usually pretty decent at gauging my interview performance, and I came out of it thinking I had done well. The USA also ended by telling me that if I received an offer from a different office, I should reach out to him/the First AUSA before accepting that.

Since that interview, it's been total radio silence, but I've noticed that the office put up another job posting for criminal AUSA spots shortly after. I'm probably (hopefully?) being neurotic, but does this sound like a normal timeline to an offer? I think the job posting spooked me more than the lack of contact, but I'd appreciate any insight into how long it usually takes to go from USA interview to offer.

Would you mind sharing what the executive level/front office panel interviews were like- was it similar to the first round interviews? As well as the USA interview?

For this office, the first and second rounds were largely similar. I guess there was maybe more of a discussion of substantive focuses in the second, since the office has different divisions focused on different areas, and you basically get placed right away without a formal rotation system. The USA interview was a little more aggressive (at least from the FAUSA's side). That one involved answering tough hypos about ethics, handling reluctant witnesses, etc.

And thank you, other Anon, for the earlier response.

Thank you so much for responding, I've been so nervous gearing up for this executive panel! It's been so hard to concentrate at my current job while going through the interview process, so I can only imagine how you are feeling! I have no idea if it's the same office (and I'm interviewing for civil) but I've heard from friends at various USAO that really the pace of interview processes really depends on schedules of execs and USA...it may just be that the USA may have been too busy to conduct a lot of interviews in the last three weeks that you haven't heard from them. I saw the new postings too, but I thought that was just a new posting for the new year based on attrition and funding. I've also heard that there tends to be more postings when there is a new USA or a USA on their way out.