Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sat Jan 28, 2023 2:01 pm
Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sat Jan 28, 2023 12:25 pm
Anonymous User wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 12:52 pm
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.