AUSA/USAO hiring Forum

(Issue areas, International Law, International Public Interest, Public Service in the private sector, Non-Profits, Public Interest Organizations, Government/ government agencies, employment settings)
Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Aug 13, 2021 6:24 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Fri Aug 13, 2021 4:51 pm
I am a current SDNY clerk. Would it be a disadvantage if I don't have a COA clerkship? Many thanks.
Caveat - I'm an AUSA but not in SDNY. Are you asking if you'll be at a disadvantage for USAOs generally, or for the SDNY office specifically? Speaking generally, I know a lot more AUSAs with DCt clerkships than with DCt + COA, and I think on average, DCt is more useful and you don't *need* a COA (unless you're looking at an appellate-specific job, that is). That said, all else equal, more brass rings are always better than fewer brass rings. If you're talking about SDNY, anecdotally, yeah, I've seen a number of people out of that office who have both.

In any case, are you asking because you're trying to decide whether to do a COA clerkship (and if you, do you have a realistic shot at one)? Would you otherwise want to do a COA? What else do you bring to the table? I've seen COA clerks get rejected b/c their materials weren't very good. Do you have practice experience, or do you plan to get practice experience? Are you going to work somewhere that you can make connections with former AUSAs? Etc. You don't need to answer all these questions here, I'm just saying that the assessment is generally more holistic than "does/doesn't have COA." If you end up in an applicant pool where all the applicants have COAs *and* all the other kinds of necessary qualifications/connections/interviewing ability, yeah, you might be at a disadvantage. Most hiring I've seen wouldn't remotely rule you out without a COA, though, and I'd never tell someone without a COA they shouldn't bother applying. If there are considerations weighing against you doing a COA (even if those are just, I don't want to move again, I want to start making more money, I want to start getting actual practice experience), taking those seriously is reasonable.

tl;dr - I think you need some kind of federal clerkship to be competitive [coming out of biglaw; if you go into local prosecution the standards tend to be different], but I don't think you need both DCt and COA, although having both might help in extremely competitive pools.

forthecause

New
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2020 12:51 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by forthecause » Thu Aug 19, 2021 4:43 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 8:40 pm
Not really - I applied to two offices, made it through the first cut at the other one (made a strategic error in the interview that I think sunk me at that stage) and got this one. In part I know my recommenders advocated for me really hard. (For instance, my current office does a LOT of drug cases and one of the grand poobahs was concerned that I hadn’t done a wiretap case. My mentor was like “they can LEARN to do a wiretap.” ) But it’s not just me - I also know a lot of other people who went from that office to other non-border districts.

Now, I think that if you were at the border district for, say, 10 years, and did nothing but border crime, it would be harder to move. But after putting in your dues, so to speak, you can move up to other non-border stuff - people who were in the reactive group when I was there are now doing white collar, complex drug cases, and violent crimes. So I think you can get a decent amount of experience with border crimes and either change offices at that point, or move into different kinds of work that will make you more competitive to move a little bit down the line. (FWIW, my current office has hired a fair bit since I got there, and overwhelmingly they’re AUSAs from other offices with ties to the area.)
Not to hijack this thread if it’s still current by asking a question of someone from a few years ago who might not even be on the forum anymore, but hopefully you or someone else reading can help me with this:
If I have a goal of becoming an AUSA or ICE prosecutor in Florida as a 300m target, what’s the best way to go about that? You mention that most new hires in the office you joined were laterals from other offices with ties to the region. Does that mean that going to a Florida school, then working my way into a border district USAO, say, and then lateraling to a FL USAO/ICE office would be just as reliable and/or quick a path as going T14 and trying to get into the same offices either straight up or by lateraling? Correct me if I’m wrong but for both paths I believe a stint in jag or prosecution might be a necessary first move, but after that, what do you/y’all think about those two paths compared in terms of reliability and time? Thanks

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Aug 19, 2021 8:19 pm

forthecause wrote:
Thu Aug 19, 2021 4:43 pm
Not to hijack this thread if it’s still current by asking a question of someone from a few years ago who might not even be on the forum anymore, but hopefully you or someone else reading can help me with this:
If I have a goal of becoming an AUSA or ICE prosecutor in Florida as a 300m target, what’s the best way to go about that? You mention that most new hires in the office you joined were laterals from other offices with ties to the region. Does that mean that going to a Florida school, then working my way into a border district USAO, say, and then lateraling to a FL USAO/ICE office would be just as reliable and/or quick a path as going T14 and trying to get into the same offices either straight up or by lateraling? Correct me if I’m wrong but for both paths I believe a stint in jag or prosecution might be a necessary first move, but after that, what do you/y’all think about those two paths compared in terms of reliability and time? Thanks
So, I'm the person you quoted and I don't think you're really talking about two different paths. The typical ways to get hired by a USAO are the same regardless of what school you go to or regardless of office: either clerk --> biglaw --> USAO, or local prosecution with lots of felony trials --> USAO. (There are always going to be some people who take different paths, but generalizing, these are the most common routes.) JAG can substitute for local prosecution (but you should only do that if you want to serve in the military anyway, not as a stepping stone to another job, and it's also pretty hard to get itself).

Point is, prepping to get into a non-FL USAO and then trying to lateral will look pretty much exactly like trying to get into a FL USAO. Which one you go to first will depend more on when there is a job opening and they hire you, than on one being easier to get than another. So yes, you could get into a FL USAO by working in another district first and then applying to FL when there are openings, or you could get hired into a FL USAO directly - it's really just going to depend on circumstances.

My point about people moving around was more that you're not stuck in the first office that hires you, and that having done the job of an AUSA makes you a more competitive candidate for another job as an AUSA. But you still have to get into the first office to start with, which goes back to making yourself a competitive candidate generally. Border districts do tend to hire more often than some offices (they're big and have higher turnover), so are somewhat easier, but they're still very competitive jobs (just maybe not as incredibly competitive as, say, SDNY/NDCA/CDCA). Keep in mind, though, that most of the districts in Florida are really border districts.

I don't think going to a respectable Florida school will necessarily weigh against you when applying for USAO jobs, although it will depend; I know lots and lots of non-T14 AUSAs, but there will always be some USAs/offices that will prefer T14 grads. If you want to take the clerk --> biglaw --> USAO route, obviously a T14 helps a lot just to get on that path. If you want to go local prosecution --> USAO, school pedigree is less important. A T14 generally gives you a lot more options, so all else equal, it's always probably a better bet. And I think all offices will hire out of biglaw, while not all offices love local prosecutors. But if you have to take out a lot of debt for T14 vs. little to no debt for the FL school, it's a tougher decision that boils down to a lot of personal choices.

One thing you can try is going on LinkedIn and searching for Assistant US Attorney + Florida, and see what paths people took to get there.

You are exceedingly unlikely to work for a USAO right out of school regardless of where you attend. At the very least, you will have to clerk first (most of the local prosecutor types I know didn't clerk, but they worked for at least a few years). So you will need to figure out what path works better for you.

I'm not sure what you mean by ICE prosecutor - that's not really a thing. ICE doesn't do criminal stuff, it's all administrative. Many ICE attorneys are more like legal advisors for the agency. If you mean you want to work in immigration court deporting people, you'd work as a trial attorney in ICE's Office of the Principal Legal Advisor (OPLA). (Confusingly, there may be references to such attorneys exercising prosecutorial discretion, but they're not really called prosecutors.) I'm not sure about the path to such a job, but it's not the same as AUSA.

forthecause

New
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2020 12:51 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by forthecause » Fri Aug 20, 2021 11:18 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Aug 19, 2021 8:19 pm
forthecause wrote:
Thu Aug 19, 2021 4:43 pm
Not to hijack this thread if it’s still current by asking a question of someone from a few years ago who might not even be on the forum anymore, but hopefully you or someone else reading can help me with this:
If I have a goal of becoming an AUSA or ICE prosecutor in Florida as a 300m target, what’s the best way to go about that? You mention that most new hires in the office you joined were laterals from other offices with ties to the region. Does that mean that going to a Florida school, then working my way into a border district USAO, say, and then lateraling to a FL USAO/ICE office would be just as reliable and/or quick a path as going T14 and trying to get into the same offices either straight up or by lateraling? Correct me if I’m wrong but for both paths I believe a stint in jag or prosecution might be a necessary first move, but after that, what do you/y’all think about those two paths compared in terms of reliability and time? Thanks
So, I'm the person you quoted and I don't think you're really talking about two different paths. The typical ways to get hired by a USAO are the same regardless of what school you go to or regardless of office: either clerk --> biglaw --> USAO, or local prosecution with lots of felony trials --> USAO. (There are always going to be some people who take different paths, but generalizing, these are the most common routes.) JAG can substitute for local prosecution (but you should only do that if you want to serve in the military anyway, not as a stepping stone to another job, and it's also pretty hard to get itself).

Point is, prepping to get into a non-FL USAO and then trying to lateral will look pretty much exactly like trying to get into a FL USAO. Which one you go to first will depend more on when there is a job opening and they hire you, than on one being easier to get than another. So yes, you could get into a FL USAO by working in another district first and then applying to FL when there are openings, or you could get hired into a FL USAO directly - it's really just going to depend on circumstances.

My point about people moving around was more that you're not stuck in the first office that hires you, and that having done the job of an AUSA makes you a more competitive candidate for another job as an AUSA. But you still have to get into the first office to start with, which goes back to making yourself a competitive candidate generally. Border districts do tend to hire more often than some offices (they're big and have higher turnover), so are somewhat easier, but they're still very competitive jobs (just maybe not as incredibly competitive as, say, SDNY/NDCA/CDCA). Keep in mind, though, that most of the districts in Florida are really border districts.

I don't think going to a respectable Florida school will necessarily weigh against you when applying for USAO jobs, although it will depend; I know lots and lots of non-T14 AUSAs, but there will always be some USAs/offices that will prefer T14 grads. If you want to take the clerk --> biglaw --> USAO route, obviously a T14 helps a lot just to get on that path. If you want to go local prosecution --> USAO, school pedigree is less important. A T14 generally gives you a lot more options, so all else equal, it's always probably a better bet. And I think all offices will hire out of biglaw, while not all offices love local prosecutors. But if you have to take out a lot of debt for T14 vs. little to no debt for the FL school, it's a tougher decision that boils down to a lot of personal choices.

One thing you can try is going on LinkedIn and searching for Assistant US Attorney + Florida, and see what paths people took to get there.

You are exceedingly unlikely to work for a USAO right out of school regardless of where you attend. At the very least, you will have to clerk first (most of the local prosecutor types I know didn't clerk, but they worked for at least a few years). So you will need to figure out what path works better for you.

I'm not sure what you mean by ICE prosecutor - that's not really a thing. ICE doesn't do criminal stuff, it's all administrative. Many ICE attorneys are more like legal advisors for the agency. If you mean you want to work in immigration court deporting people, you'd work as a trial attorney in ICE's Office of the Principal Legal Advisor (OPLA). (Confusingly, there may be references to such attorneys exercising prosecutorial discretion, but they're not really called prosecutors.) I'm not sure about the path to such a job, but it's not the same as AUSA.
Thanks for the info. It really helps. I still don’t understand one thing though: let’s say two people do the same path (whether biglaw or prosecution or jag - I’m an Army sergeant in a combat role so that might give me an edge in jag by the way) and the only thing that’s different is one comes from a lower T14, say, and the other comes from a highly respected school in the same state as the USAO, like UF/FSU/Miami. Which, on average, might have the edge, if either? Also, just crossed my mind, I wonder if there might be a correlation between an office’s preference for biglaw or T14 vs jag or local school and that office’s political leanings. Politics seems very much wrapped up in the legal world from what I’ve gathered so far, so wouldn’t hurt to know that too if there’s an answer. Thanks again.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by Anonymous User » Sat Aug 21, 2021 1:11 am

There isn't a simple answer to this. No two people are really ever going to follow the same path, so there are always going to be things to compare beside school pedigree (very few fellow applicants will have your military experience, for instance). If everything else were literally equal, a T14 is going to be a safer bet than a non-T14, but if you have a USA who went to a respected local school, they might favor the local person.

In my experience, school has never really even been commented on, unless *extremely* good, and even then you need to have the other qualifications we're interested in. I can't swear this is how every office approaches this - the top major metro offices likely place more weight on school pedigree because they get even more applications and so have to weed out even more people - but I think that overall review of candidates is pretty holistic. My sense (from my limited participation in hiring) is actually that your grades are more important than the school you got them from. School matters in its ability to place you into jobs that make you competitive for the USAO, but we're looking for that experience rather than for a specific school name.

I don't think you can generalize by politics. Both Democrats and Republicans can be elitist about schools, or not elitist about schools. And offices can also change politically each time a new USA enters on duty, so you can't know which politics you'd have to satisfy.

I don't think you'd really be losing out much if you went to the local school. But I can't say that if you do, you'll never lose a job to someone from the T14 because the hiring committee decided they liked the T14 school better. That absolutely could happen (especially as you move down the rankings; I feel like I know a lot of AUSAs from T1 schools but fewer below that). It's just not inevitable and it really depends on each individual's path.

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


forthecause

New
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2020 12:51 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by forthecause » Sat Aug 21, 2021 3:15 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Sat Aug 21, 2021 1:11 am
There isn't a simple answer to this. No two people are really ever going to follow the same path, so there are always going to be things to compare beside school pedigree (very few fellow applicants will have your military experience, for instance). If everything else were literally equal, a T14 is going to be a safer bet than a non-T14, but if you have a USA who went to a respected local school, they might favor the local person.

In my experience, school has never really even been commented on, unless *extremely* good, and even then you need to have the other qualifications we're interested in. I can't swear this is how every office approaches this - the top major metro offices likely place more weight on school pedigree because they get even more applications and so have to weed out even more people - but I think that overall review of candidates is pretty holistic. My sense (from my limited participation in hiring) is actually that your grades are more important than the school you got them from. School matters in its ability to place you into jobs that make you competitive for the USAO, but we're looking for that experience rather than for a specific school name.

I don't think you can generalize by politics. Both Democrats and Republicans can be elitist about schools, or not elitist about schools. And offices can also change politically each time a new USA enters on duty, so you can't know which politics you'd have to satisfy.

I don't think you'd really be losing out much if you went to the local school. But I can't say that if you do, you'll never lose a job to someone from the T14 because the hiring committee decided they liked the T14 school better. That absolutely could happen (especially as you move down the rankings; I feel like I know a lot of AUSAs from T1 schools but fewer below that). It's just not inevitable and it really depends on each individual's path.
Ok great. Does any of this change if my goal is criminal AUSA vs civil? I can imagine the biglaw experience being more sought after for civil and prosecution experience possibly being more sought after for criminal. And maybe jag somewhere in between.

And if grades/writing/etc are more important than school often, then might it be more prudent to take the respected local school where, for the same amount of work, you’re likely to get better grades and maybe a better chance at law review, moot court, etc?

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by Anonymous User » Sat Aug 21, 2021 5:29 pm

I should have specified - I *was* talking about criminal positions. There are a lot fewer civil positions, and in some ways civil AUSA is a less desirable position than criminal, relative to the other options. If you want to do civil work, you can often do more sophisticated work and get paid more in the private sector than at the USAO. Obviously work/life balance is better with the government, but a lot of civil work is defensive, defending the government against suits (like slip-and-falls on government property, that kind of thing). There are affirmative civil positions enforcing civil rights, but not as many, and while those are good positions, there are also other good non-government positions doing that. Conversely, if you want to prosecute crime, there aren’t private sector alternatives, so criminal AUSA is arguably one of the best gigs around.

So no, there isn’t a default preference for local prosecution experience in hiring for criminal AUSA jobs; many offices prefer to hire out of biglaw for many criminal jobs, due to the work ethic and writing experience such positions give.

Re: grades at T14 v. T1 - I don’t think you can *rely* on doing better at the T1 school than at the T14. The differences in LSAT/GPA between the bands of schools aren’t large enough to guarantee a better performance at the lower ranked school (you can rely on this a bit more as you get to lower-ranked schools, but then you lose out on any name brand). Keep in mind that you’re graded on a curve and so how you do depends a lot on how your classmates do, which you can’t control. And LSAT/GPA aren’t perfect indicators of law school performance, either. Every year people who came into a school at the top of its LSAT/GPA range end up median, and those who came in median excel and transfer. You kind of need to assess your options on the assumption that you’ll have median grades at whatever school you attend - you may well do better, but you don’t want your employment plans to hinge on the best case scenario out of your school. Most people don’t have the best case scenario.

The other thing is that T14s can offer more opportunities to get experiences while in school because they tend to have more resources/money. There are just trade offs all round.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Aug 23, 2021 11:09 am

Recent anon, thank you for your insight to the above poster's questions. If you will indulge mine as well:

1. Is it normal for someone who has a civil background (say, 4 years at BL) to switch to criminal AUSA? Are there certain things that a civil litigator could do to improve their chances of getting accepted in the criminal division?

2. How does the USA office view court of appeals clerkships? I have the chance to double-clerk after my district court clerkship in a major city and I was debating whether I should do that or just start applying to USA offices.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Aug 23, 2021 11:46 am

IME, it’s very normal to go from civil biglaw to criminal AUSA. Some offices may well favor white collar experience, or it might be a tiebreaker between two very close candidates, but I don’t think that if an office is hiring out of biglaw, they’re really looking for demonstrated criminal experience (or they’d just hire a local prosecutor). What experience you’ve had in biglaw is probably more important than what practice area.

That said, getting criminal experience is definitely good. If you can do criminal pro bono, that’s very helpful. Also, some firms lend out associates to details with local DA’s offices; I don’t know how widespread this because I’ve mostly seen it in one specific metro area, but if it is an option, it’s great.

Beyond that, anything that will get you into court is helpful, so civil pro bono is good if it lets you take a more active role and gets you some court time. To be clear, USAOs know that biglaw associates don’t get into court much, so they’re not looking to see a completely polished, experienced litigator; I think it’s more that it shows your interest in what’s an important part of the AUSA job, and it also helps gives you some perspective that helps you perform better in interviews.

Clerking for a COA is never going to hurt you. Most AUSAs I know have a DCt clerkship and not a COA, but there are plenty of double clerks, too (I would say especially at the most competitive offices). It’s essentially required if you’re applying for an appellate position, although most offices have much smaller appellate divisions and expect line attorneys to do a lot of their own appeals, so there aren’t a lot of appellate-only positions.

I still don’t think a COA is required or will necessarily make up for other issues with your application (I’ve seen COA clerks get rejected), but if it’s something you otherwise want to do, go for it. If you really really don’t want to do it, like it interferes a lot with your personal life or you need the biglaw salary, I wouldn’t say it’s necessary. But I think it would be worth doing if it fits with the rest of your life.

ETA: I also wanted to add that this is all based on my own experience with a couple of offices and what I know about people in other offices, but offices can vary, so I can’t guarantee everything I say applies everywhere; ymmv, caveat emptor, etc.
Last edited by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 23, 2021 11:55 am, edited 1 time in total.

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Aug 23, 2021 11:54 am

AUSAs (especially those in major metros), can you talk more about your workload and hours? I have heard it's basically biglaw time commitment -- how true is that? My district finally opened up applications, and while it's been a goal for a while, the prospect of maintaining my current hours for 1/3 (or less) the pay given the huge pay gap between AUSA and other fedgov is increasingly unappetizing.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Aug 23, 2021 12:36 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 11:54 am
AUSAs (especially those in major metros), can you talk more about your workload and hours? I have heard it's basically biglaw time commitment -- how true is that? My district finally opened up applications, and while it's been a goal for a while, the prospect of maintaining my current hours for 1/3 (or less) the pay given the huge pay gap between AUSA and other fedgov is increasingly unappetizing.
Hi. I’m an AUSA in the appellate division of a top five (by population) metro area. My hours rarely exceed 40/wk. But it does of course happen from time to time. The work seems to come in ebbs and flows. Sometimes I’ll have one or two briefs due for a month. Other times it’ll be closer to ten and a few oral args. But I really do average 40 hrs a week.

Just my personal experience. Appeals is a lot of self regulation and pacing. Not too many fires to be constantly putting out. Also, my first few years did require significantly more time as I figured out my best practices.

Good luck if you do decide to apply.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Aug 23, 2021 12:43 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 11:46 am
IME, it’s very normal to go from civil biglaw to criminal AUSA. Some offices may well favor white collar experience, or it might be a tiebreaker between two very close candidates, but I don’t think that if an office is hiring out of biglaw, they’re really looking for demonstrated criminal experience (or they’d just hire a local prosecutor). What experience you’ve had in biglaw is probably more important than what practice area.

That said, getting criminal experience is definitely good. If you can do criminal pro bono, that’s very helpful. Also, some firms lend out associates to details with local DA’s offices; I don’t know how widespread this because I’ve mostly seen it in one specific metro area, but if it is an option, it’s great.

Beyond that, anything that will get you into court is helpful, so civil pro bono is good if it lets you take a more active role and gets you some court time. To be clear, USAOs know that biglaw associates don’t get into court much, so they’re not looking to see a completely polished, experienced litigator; I think it’s more that it shows your interest in what’s an important part of the AUSA job, and it also helps gives you some perspective that helps you perform better in interviews.

Clerking for a COA is never going to hurt you. Most AUSAs I know have a DCt clerkship and not a COA, but there are plenty of double clerks, too (I would say especially at the most competitive offices). It’s essentially required if you’re applying for an appellate position, although most offices have much smaller appellate divisions and expect line attorneys to do a lot of their own appeals, so there aren’t a lot of appellate-only positions.

I still don’t think a COA is required or will necessarily make up for other issues with your application (I’ve seen COA clerks get rejected), but if it’s something you otherwise want to do, go for it. If you really really don’t want to do it, like it interferes a lot with your personal life or you need the biglaw salary, I wouldn’t say it’s necessary. But I think it would be worth doing if it fits with the rest of your life.

ETA: I also wanted to add that this is all based on my own experience with a couple of offices and what I know about people in other offices, but offices can vary, so I can’t guarantee everything I say applies everywhere; ymmv, caveat emptor, etc.
Thank you. This is very helpful. Regarding the criminal v. civil point, is there anything you'd suggest that I do during my clerkship to maximize my changes of getting into the criminal side of the USAO? Working on criminal cases is an obvious example, but I'm trying to see if there's anything else I can do to beef up my resume for my eventual application. Oh, and though I'm not sure to what extent this will change your answer, but I've done nearly all of what you've suggested above regarding getting court exposure (through pro bono and other endeavors).

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Aug 23, 2021 12:53 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 12:36 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 11:54 am
AUSAs (especially those in major metros), can you talk more about your workload and hours? I have heard it's basically biglaw time commitment -- how true is that? My district finally opened up applications, and while it's been a goal for a while, the prospect of maintaining my current hours for 1/3 (or less) the pay given the huge pay gap between AUSA and other fedgov is increasingly unappetizing.
Hi. I’m an AUSA in the appellate division of a top five (by population) metro area. My hours rarely exceed 40/wk. But it does of course happen from time to time. The work seems to come in ebbs and flows. Sometimes I’ll have one or two briefs due for a month. Other times it’ll be closer to ten and a few oral args. But I really do average 40 hrs a week.

Just my personal experience. Appeals is a lot of self regulation and pacing. Not too many fires to be constantly putting out. Also, my first few years did require significantly more time as I figured out my best practices.

Good luck if you do decide to apply.
Thanks for the response! This is helpful. I am thinking of applying for the appellate division as well -- which is probably a more natural fit for my credentials/experience, and the pay cut is much more appetizing if it also means reasonable hours. Did you start there or as a line AUSA? Any tips on what to emphasize in an appellate division cover letter, interviews, etc., coming out of biglaw? I have some appellate criminal experience, but it's on the other side of the v.

Would still love to hear from any others on workload at the trial level.

Register now!

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

It's still FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Aug 23, 2021 1:33 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 12:53 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 12:36 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 11:54 am
AUSAs (especially those in major metros), can you talk more about your workload and hours? I have heard it's basically biglaw time commitment -- how true is that? My district finally opened up applications, and while it's been a goal for a while, the prospect of maintaining my current hours for 1/3 (or less) the pay given the huge pay gap between AUSA and other fedgov is increasingly unappetizing.
Hi. I’m an AUSA in the appellate division of a top five (by population) metro area. My hours rarely exceed 40/wk. But it does of course happen from time to time. The work seems to come in ebbs and flows. Sometimes I’ll have one or two briefs due for a month. Other times it’ll be closer to ten and a few oral args. But I really do average 40 hrs a week.

Just my personal experience. Appeals is a lot of self regulation and pacing. Not too many fires to be constantly putting out. Also, my first few years did require significantly more time as I figured out my best practices.

Good luck if you do decide to apply.
Thanks for the response! This is helpful. I am thinking of applying for the appellate division as well -- which is probably a more natural fit for my credentials/experience, and the pay cut is much more appetizing if it also means reasonable hours. Did you start there or as a line AUSA? Any tips on what to emphasize in an appellate division cover letter, interviews, etc., coming out of biglaw? I have some appellate criminal experience, but it's on the other side of the v.

Would still love to hear from any others on workload at the trial level.
I went straight into our office appellate shop. I know some offices require new appellate hires to do a six-nine month rotation in a trial division. Our office did/does not. I can't speak too intelligently to the perspective of coming out of biglaw. I did time as a local DA and then spent two years as an assistant AG in a state AG's criminal appeal office. But, as you probably have guessed, I would emphasize your experience with criminal appeals, even if it is limited, and your desire to do that type of work. It is 95% reading and writing. I love that I get time to just sit and think about an issue. My boss expects me to sit and research for days sometimes. Expertise in the issue is the expectation. But that's not for everyone. To that end, I'd tailor an appellate spot cover letter to mention that you are down to do some hard core research and writing...b/c that's the job. Any trial experience will still be very useful in being an Appellate AUSA. I think it would be a struggle to hop right into appeals without a solid understanding of what prepping a trial and calling some witnesses actually looks like. So emphasize what ya got.

It'll help to know some of the issues appellate shops are working on. I would be versed in "crime of violence" issues post Dimaya, Johnson, and Davis.

If you have annny experience doing habeas cases your appeals board interviewers will love that. It's a tricky and confusing part of criminal appeals (they arn't technically "appeals" but "collateral attacks") that some tend to shy away from. If you can show even some enthusiasm for handling what others will not want to handle, that's prob. a good thing.

As you may have surmised, I've got a bit of a break in the schedule right now so feel free to ask away. :)

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Aug 23, 2021 1:48 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 11:54 am
AUSAs (especially those in major metros), can you talk more about your workload and hours? I have heard it's basically biglaw time commitment -- how true is that? My district finally opened up applications, and while it's been a goal for a while, the prospect of maintaining my current hours for 1/3 (or less) the pay given the huge pay gap between AUSA and other fedgov is increasingly unappetizing.
Short answer: I think this varies a lot by office (and by USA), and you'd need to talk to people in the specific office to be certain about this.

Longer answer: with the caveat that I'm not in a major metro, I would say that AUSA is like biglaw in that you have to be willing to put in whatever hours the work takes, and sometimes that's biglaw hours, but IME it doesn't consistently require biglaw hours. So, if I'm in trial it's pretty much a 24/7 proposition, and if I'm preparing for trial I'm going to work late and on weekends, maybe 60-80 hour weeks for the 3-4 weeks before trial, depending on things like the size/complexity of the trial and degree of pretrial litigation. I average probably 2 trials a year, but it varies a lot - I had a colleague who had 4 trials in 2 months once, just luck of the draw.

I'd say that an average non-trial week is probably 40-50 hours, again, depending on what's going on. Some weeks can be more. Personally I prefer to work later in the evenings and not to work on weekends at all, which is pretty doable unless I have a big evidentiary hearing or major pleading (I still might get those done during the week, but they can bleed into the weekends). Other people are happier working on weekends.

But again, I'm not in a major metro. I'll note that when I've had to communicate with people in SDNY they seem to respond to a lot of e-mails between 8 & 9 pm; I'm not usually even on my email (or getting emails) then unless I know there's something I need to monitor. I also had a friend in a major border district who worked weekends a lot at least when they started, just due to volume. It's also possible I'm just a slacker!

So, you have to be prepared to do the work; it's not one of those federal jobs where you're literally forbidden to work more than 40 hours and they have to give you comp time for anything over. On the other hand, there's no yearly target or anything. All your hours at work "count." Vacations and days off are completely respected (I guess unless it starts to cause problems with your cases/for other people, but I haven't encountered that).

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Aug 23, 2021 1:53 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 1:33 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 12:53 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 12:36 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 11:54 am
AUSAs (especially those in major metros), can you talk more about your workload and hours? I have heard it's basically biglaw time commitment -- how true is that? My district finally opened up applications, and while it's been a goal for a while, the prospect of maintaining my current hours for 1/3 (or less) the pay given the huge pay gap between AUSA and other fedgov is increasingly unappetizing.
Hi. I’m an AUSA in the appellate division of a top five (by population) metro area. My hours rarely exceed 40/wk. But it does of course happen from time to time. The work seems to come in ebbs and flows. Sometimes I’ll have one or two briefs due for a month. Other times it’ll be closer to ten and a few oral args. But I really do average 40 hrs a week.

Just my personal experience. Appeals is a lot of self regulation and pacing. Not too many fires to be constantly putting out. Also, my first few years did require significantly more time as I figured out my best practices.

Good luck if you do decide to apply.
Thanks for the response! This is helpful. I am thinking of applying for the appellate division as well -- which is probably a more natural fit for my credentials/experience, and the pay cut is much more appetizing if it also means reasonable hours. Did you start there or as a line AUSA? Any tips on what to emphasize in an appellate division cover letter, interviews, etc., coming out of biglaw? I have some appellate criminal experience, but it's on the other side of the v.

Would still love to hear from any others on workload at the trial level.
I went straight into our office appellate shop. I know some offices require new appellate hires to do a six-nine month rotation in a trial division. Our office did/does not. I can't speak too intelligently to the perspective of coming out of biglaw. I did time as a local DA and then spent two years as an assistant AG in a state AG's criminal appeal office. But, as you probably have guessed, I would emphasize your experience with criminal appeals, even if it is limited, and your desire to do that type of work. It is 95% reading and writing. I love that I get time to just sit and think about an issue. My boss expects me to sit and research for days sometimes. Expertise in the issue is the expectation. But that's not for everyone. To that end, I'd tailor an appellate spot cover letter to mention that you are down to do some hard core research and writing...b/c that's the job. Any trial experience will still be very useful in being an Appellate AUSA. I think it would be a struggle to hop right into appeals without a solid understanding of what prepping a trial and calling some witnesses actually looks like. So emphasize what ya got.

It'll help to know some of the issues appellate shops are working on. I would be versed in "crime of violence" issues post Dimaya, Johnson, and Davis.

If you have annny experience doing habeas cases your appeals board interviewers will love that. It's a tricky and confusing part of criminal appeals (they arn't technically "appeals" but "collateral attacks") that some tend to shy away from. If you can show even some enthusiasm for handling what others will not want to handle, that's prob. a good thing.

As you may have surmised, I've got a bit of a break in the schedule right now so feel free to ask away. :)
Really appreciate this response! I'm generally familiar with Dimaya/ACCA/etc. from clerking, and will brush up if I get an interview. 95% reading and writing sounds great. Coming into biglaw from an appellate clerkship, my biggest beef was the speed at which we have to arrive at recommendations -- there's just not enough time to go deep enough to really get the issues right. So the prospect of working at that pace again is really appealing.

Some follow-up:
  • My district has openings in several divisions right now, including appeals. Strategically, if I want to maximize my odds of the appellate division, is it better to only apply for that division, or also to list criminal/natsec? I imagine applying to multiple is better for maximizing odds of getting in at all, but there are many more criminal openings than appellate. But at the same time, I haven't had trial experience, so if that is very valuable for appellate division, it sounds like it might actually be better to start as a line AUSA and later try to move up.
  • On that note: how many appellate AUSAs in your group started as trial-level prosecutors?
  • I'm lucky enough to have a couple options for criminal appellate briefing to use as a writing sample, including some habeas, which it sounds like will be helpful. Would you go with (1) a state criminal appellate brief (2) a state criminal habeas petition (3) a federal circuit court brief in an adjacent area (think: immigration, etc.) or (4) if all of those are a little stale, more recent civil appellate writing?
  • Let's say you get a case and think the government's position below was definitely wrong, but below the level of indefensible. You could make an argument, but if pushed to the point, you're pretty convinced the government's reading of relevant law is wrong. How much leeway do you have to make a recommendation to e.g. concede on the law and argue harmless error, or even affirmatively ask for a reverse/remand? Does the appellate AUSA gig feel more like having the government as a client, where your goal is more to advocate for the government's long-term interest, or are you more focused on getting the law right? (I felt like this tension kept coming up during my clerkship -- the government is the biggest repeat player in the federal courts, so it seemed like the government attorneys were generally more willing to concede points to maintain long-term credibility, but that wasn't uniformly the case.)
  • Do you handle most/all of your own oral arguments?

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Aug 23, 2021 1:59 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 12:43 pm
Thank you. This is very helpful. Regarding the criminal v. civil point, is there anything you'd suggest that I do during my clerkship to maximize my changes of getting into the criminal side of the USAO? Working on criminal cases is an obvious example, but I'm trying to see if there's anything else I can do to beef up my resume for my eventual application. Oh, and though I'm not sure to what extent this will change your answer, but I've done nearly all of what you've suggested above regarding getting court exposure (through pro bono and other endeavors).
I would let your judge know that you're aiming for AUSA and therefore want to get what exposure you can to criminal stuff (depending on the judge's needs, of course). Often judges handle criminal stuff themselves, but if they know you're interested they might adjust that for you. In particular, judges often handle sentencings by themselves too (relatively few sentencings require any kind of written order), but ask your judge if you can observe any semi-substantial sentencings (read the pleadings ahead of time even if you're not working on it). I think being able to talk thoughtfully about sentencing can be helpful in an AUSA interview. Obviously working on a criminal trial is great. All depends on how your judge chooses to run things, of course. (And of course the more your judge knows you want to do this, the more they can help out advocating for you, if they have such connections and are willing to do so. Some won't, but some will.)

Get unlimited access to all forums and topics

Register now!

I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...


Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Aug 23, 2021 2:31 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 1:59 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 12:43 pm
Thank you. This is very helpful. Regarding the criminal v. civil point, is there anything you'd suggest that I do during my clerkship to maximize my changes of getting into the criminal side of the USAO? Working on criminal cases is an obvious example, but I'm trying to see if there's anything else I can do to beef up my resume for my eventual application. Oh, and though I'm not sure to what extent this will change your answer, but I've done nearly all of what you've suggested above regarding getting court exposure (through pro bono and other endeavors).
I would let your judge know that you're aiming for AUSA and therefore want to get what exposure you can to criminal stuff (depending on the judge's needs, of course). Often judges handle criminal stuff themselves, but if they know you're interested they might adjust that for you. In particular, judges often handle sentencings by themselves too (relatively few sentencings require any kind of written order), but ask your judge if you can observe any semi-substantial sentencings (read the pleadings ahead of time even if you're not working on it). I think being able to talk thoughtfully about sentencing can be helpful in an AUSA interview. Obviously working on a criminal trial is great. All depends on how your judge chooses to run things, of course. (And of course the more your judge knows you want to do this, the more they can help out advocating for you, if they have such connections and are willing to do so. Some won't, but some will.)
Got it. I have nothing else to add other than the fact that I (we) really appreciate your time and advice. Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with the community.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Aug 23, 2021 2:36 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 2:31 pm
Got it. I have nothing else to add other than the fact that I (we) really appreciate your time and advice. Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with the community.
Other anon asking lots of questions - seconded in full.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Aug 23, 2021 2:55 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 1:53 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 1:33 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 12:53 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 12:36 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 11:54 am
AUSAs (especially those in major metros), can you talk more about your workload and hours? I have heard it's basically biglaw time commitment -- how true is that? My district finally opened up applications, and while it's been a goal for a while, the prospect of maintaining my current hours for 1/3 (or less) the pay given the huge pay gap between AUSA and other fedgov is increasingly unappetizing.
Hi. I’m an AUSA in the appellate division of a top five (by population) metro area. My hours rarely exceed 40/wk. But it does of course happen from time to time. The work seems to come in ebbs and flows. Sometimes I’ll have one or two briefs due for a month. Other times it’ll be closer to ten and a few oral args. But I really do average 40 hrs a week.

Just my personal experience. Appeals is a lot of self regulation and pacing. Not too many fires to be constantly putting out. Also, my first few years did require significantly more time as I figured out my best practices.

Good luck if you do decide to apply.
Thanks for the response! This is helpful. I am thinking of applying for the appellate division as well -- which is probably a more natural fit for my credentials/experience, and the pay cut is much more appetizing if it also means reasonable hours. Did you start there or as a line AUSA? Any tips on what to emphasize in an appellate division cover letter, interviews, etc., coming out of biglaw? I have some appellate criminal experience, but it's on the other side of the v.

Would still love to hear from any others on workload at the trial level.
I went straight into our office appellate shop. I know some offices require new appellate hires to do a six-nine month rotation in a trial division. Our office did/does not. I can't speak too intelligently to the perspective of coming out of biglaw. I did time as a local DA and then spent two years as an assistant AG in a state AG's criminal appeal office. But, as you probably have guessed, I would emphasize your experience with criminal appeals, even if it is limited, and your desire to do that type of work. It is 95% reading and writing. I love that I get time to just sit and think about an issue. My boss expects me to sit and research for days sometimes. Expertise in the issue is the expectation. But that's not for everyone. To that end, I'd tailor an appellate spot cover letter to mention that you are down to do some hard core research and writing...b/c that's the job. Any trial experience will still be very useful in being an Appellate AUSA. I think it would be a struggle to hop right into appeals without a solid understanding of what prepping a trial and calling some witnesses actually looks like. So emphasize what ya got.

It'll help to know some of the issues appellate shops are working on. I would be versed in "crime of violence" issues post Dimaya, Johnson, and Davis.

If you have annny experience doing habeas cases your appeals board interviewers will love that. It's a tricky and confusing part of criminal appeals (they arn't technically "appeals" but "collateral attacks") that some tend to shy away from. If you can show even some enthusiasm for handling what others will not want to handle, that's prob. a good thing.

As you may have surmised, I've got a bit of a break in the schedule right now so feel free to ask away. :)
Really appreciate this response! I'm generally familiar with Dimaya/ACCA/etc. from clerking, and will brush up if I get an interview. 95% reading and writing sounds great. Coming into biglaw from an appellate clerkship, my biggest beef was the speed at which we have to arrive at recommendations -- there's just not enough time to go deep enough to really get the issues right. So the prospect of working at that pace again is really appealing.

Some follow-up:
  • My district has openings in several divisions right now, including appeals. Strategically, if I want to maximize my odds of the appellate division, is it better to only apply for that division, or also to list criminal/natsec? I imagine applying to multiple is better for maximizing odds of getting in at all, but there are many more criminal openings than appellate. But at the same time, I haven't had trial experience, so if that is very valuable for appellate division, it sounds like it might actually be better to start as a line AUSA and later try to move up.
  • On that note: how many appellate AUSAs in your group started as trial-level prosecutors?
  • I'm lucky enough to have a couple options for criminal appellate briefing to use as a writing sample, including some habeas, which it sounds like will be helpful. Would you go with (1) a state criminal appellate brief (2) a state criminal habeas petition (3) a federal circuit court brief in an adjacent area (think: immigration, etc.) or (4) if all of those are a little stale, more recent civil appellate writing?
  • Let's say you get a case and think the government's position below was definitely wrong, but below the level of indefensible. You could make an argument, but if pushed to the point, you're pretty convinced the government's reading of relevant law is wrong. How much leeway do you have to make a recommendation to e.g. concede on the law and argue harmless error, or even affirmatively ask for a reverse/remand? Does the appellate AUSA gig feel more like having the government as a client, where your goal is more to advocate for the government's long-term interest, or are you more focused on getting the law right? (I felt like this tension kept coming up during my clerkship -- the government is the biggest repeat player in the federal courts, so it seemed like the government attorneys were generally more willing to concede points to maintain long-term credibility, but that wasn't uniformly the case.)
  • Do you handle most/all of your own oral arguments?


-If it were me I would apply for all, and then in the hopeful interview you can specify your preference. I did something very similar, applied for openings in multiple divisions over multiple cities within the same district. I interviewed with five different divisions, and made my preference known for one. My first pick was actually not what was offered. So don't feel bad about letting them truthfully know your first choice is appeals. They may still offer you something else.
-People do transfer from line AUSAs to appeals. It's not super common but it happens. Almost everyone has some prosecutorial trial level experience. Whether that be with the state and then hopping into the office, or transferring up from a line ausa spot (i only say "up" because our floor is physically above the others in the office, not trying to imply any superiority). I can think of one person who went through DOJ Honors, circuit clerkship, t10 school law review, stint at big agency general counsel's office, intel officer, who did not have significant trial level experience prior to joining appeals.
-I submitted two writing samples because why not? A federal habeas response and a state supreme court response brief. All your options would be fine. Emphasize your best writing over subject matter. Obvi you cant submit an appellee response to a criminal appeal in the circuit...the team knows that, so just show off your best.
-Quite a bit of leeway. I wont get into the inner workings of DOJ but "do what's right"/ "pursue justice," all that jazz. If we need to concede we concede.
-In my office, everyone handles their own OAs in the circuit court and evidentiary hearings in habeas cases in the district courts. Of course the solicitor general takes over in SCOTUS.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Aug 23, 2021 3:08 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 2:55 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 1:53 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 1:33 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 12:53 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 12:36 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 11:54 am
AUSAs (especially those in major metros), can you talk more about your workload and hours? I have heard it's basically biglaw time commitment -- how true is that? My district finally opened up applications, and while it's been a goal for a while, the prospect of maintaining my current hours for 1/3 (or less) the pay given the huge pay gap between AUSA and other fedgov is increasingly unappetizing.
Hi. I’m an AUSA in the appellate division of a top five (by population) metro area. My hours rarely exceed 40/wk. But it does of course happen from time to time. The work seems to come in ebbs and flows. Sometimes I’ll have one or two briefs due for a month. Other times it’ll be closer to ten and a few oral args. But I really do average 40 hrs a week.

Just my personal experience. Appeals is a lot of self regulation and pacing. Not too many fires to be constantly putting out. Also, my first few years did require significantly more time as I figured out my best practices.

Good luck if you do decide to apply.
Thanks for the response! This is helpful. I am thinking of applying for the appellate division as well -- which is probably a more natural fit for my credentials/experience, and the pay cut is much more appetizing if it also means reasonable hours. Did you start there or as a line AUSA? Any tips on what to emphasize in an appellate division cover letter, interviews, etc., coming out of biglaw? I have some appellate criminal experience, but it's on the other side of the v.

Would still love to hear from any others on workload at the trial level.
I went straight into our office appellate shop. I know some offices require new appellate hires to do a six-nine month rotation in a trial division. Our office did/does not. I can't speak too intelligently to the perspective of coming out of biglaw. I did time as a local DA and then spent two years as an assistant AG in a state AG's criminal appeal office. But, as you probably have guessed, I would emphasize your experience with criminal appeals, even if it is limited, and your desire to do that type of work. It is 95% reading and writing. I love that I get time to just sit and think about an issue. My boss expects me to sit and research for days sometimes. Expertise in the issue is the expectation. But that's not for everyone. To that end, I'd tailor an appellate spot cover letter to mention that you are down to do some hard core research and writing...b/c that's the job. Any trial experience will still be very useful in being an Appellate AUSA. I think it would be a struggle to hop right into appeals without a solid understanding of what prepping a trial and calling some witnesses actually looks like. So emphasize what ya got.

It'll help to know some of the issues appellate shops are working on. I would be versed in "crime of violence" issues post Dimaya, Johnson, and Davis.

If you have annny experience doing habeas cases your appeals board interviewers will love that. It's a tricky and confusing part of criminal appeals (they arn't technically "appeals" but "collateral attacks") that some tend to shy away from. If you can show even some enthusiasm for handling what others will not want to handle, that's prob. a good thing.

As you may have surmised, I've got a bit of a break in the schedule right now so feel free to ask away. :)
Really appreciate this response! I'm generally familiar with Dimaya/ACCA/etc. from clerking, and will brush up if I get an interview. 95% reading and writing sounds great. Coming into biglaw from an appellate clerkship, my biggest beef was the speed at which we have to arrive at recommendations -- there's just not enough time to go deep enough to really get the issues right. So the prospect of working at that pace again is really appealing.

Some follow-up:
  • My district has openings in several divisions right now, including appeals. Strategically, if I want to maximize my odds of the appellate division, is it better to only apply for that division, or also to list criminal/natsec? I imagine applying to multiple is better for maximizing odds of getting in at all, but there are many more criminal openings than appellate. But at the same time, I haven't had trial experience, so if that is very valuable for appellate division, it sounds like it might actually be better to start as a line AUSA and later try to move up.
  • On that note: how many appellate AUSAs in your group started as trial-level prosecutors?
  • I'm lucky enough to have a couple options for criminal appellate briefing to use as a writing sample, including some habeas, which it sounds like will be helpful. Would you go with (1) a state criminal appellate brief (2) a state criminal habeas petition (3) a federal circuit court brief in an adjacent area (think: immigration, etc.) or (4) if all of those are a little stale, more recent civil appellate writing?
  • Let's say you get a case and think the government's position below was definitely wrong, but below the level of indefensible. You could make an argument, but if pushed to the point, you're pretty convinced the government's reading of relevant law is wrong. How much leeway do you have to make a recommendation to e.g. concede on the law and argue harmless error, or even affirmatively ask for a reverse/remand? Does the appellate AUSA gig feel more like having the government as a client, where your goal is more to advocate for the government's long-term interest, or are you more focused on getting the law right? (I felt like this tension kept coming up during my clerkship -- the government is the biggest repeat player in the federal courts, so it seemed like the government attorneys were generally more willing to concede points to maintain long-term credibility, but that wasn't uniformly the case.)
  • Do you handle most/all of your own oral arguments?


-If it were me I would apply for all, and then in the hopeful interview you can specify your preference. I did something very similar, applied for openings in multiple divisions over multiple cities within the same district. I interviewed with five different divisions, and made my preference known for one. My first pick was actually not what was offered. So don't feel bad about letting them truthfully know your first choice is appeals. They may still offer you something else.
-People do transfer from line AUSAs to appeals. It's not super common but it happens. Almost everyone has some prosecutorial trial level experience. Whether that be with the state and then hopping into the office, or transferring up from a line ausa spot (i only say "up" because our floor is physically above the others in the office, not trying to imply any superiority). I can think of one person who went through DOJ Honors, circuit clerkship, t10 school law review, stint at big agency general counsel's office, intel officer, who did not have significant trial level experience prior to joining appeals.
-I submitted two writing samples because why not? A federal habeas response and a state supreme court response brief. All your options would be fine. Emphasize your best writing over subject matter. Obvi you cant submit an appellee response to a criminal appeal in the circuit...the team knows that, so just show off your best.
-Quite a bit of leeway. I wont get into the inner workings of DOJ but "do what's right"/ "pursue justice," all that jazz. If we need to concede we concede.
-In my office, everyone handles their own OAs in the circuit court and evidentiary hearings in habeas cases in the district courts. Of course the solicitor general takes over in SCOTUS.
Thanks again for the response! Really appreciate your time and insights.

Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.

Register now, it's still FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Aug 23, 2021 3:25 pm

In case the non-appellate perspective is at all helpful:

1) I would apply to all openings, because then they can consider you for all openings. If you only apply for appellate they can only consider you for appellate even if they really like you and want to offer you something else.

2) most appellate AUSAs I know started in appellate. It is possible to move from trial to appellate, but when those openings came available they tended to go to the most experienced AUSAs in the office.

3) re: writing sample, whichever you think has the best writing and analysis. I haven’t seen anyone balk at a sample because it was about state law.

4) my experience has been that we regularly concede stuff if it’s clear under the the law we’re wrong. (Judges may not always agree on what’s clearly wrong, of course.)

5) my experience has always been that the person who authored the brief argued it in front of the appeals court, which includes line AUSAs handling their own appeals (at my first office it was assumed that line AUSAs would handle their own appeals on routine cases, but you could hand them off if you chose). But the appellate divisions where I’ve worked have been small (1-6 attorneys) so it wouldn’t be very efficient to have someone else get up to speed to argue an appeal someone else wrote (as appellate AUSA said, this is different for SCOTUS, of course. When one of the appellate AUSAs I know had a case go to SCOTUS, she was lucky just to be able to go watch the argument).

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Aug 24, 2021 4:39 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 3:25 pm
In case the non-appellate perspective is at all helpful:

1) I would apply to all openings, because then they can consider you for all openings. If you only apply for appellate they can only consider you for appellate even if they really like you and want to offer you something else.

2) most appellate AUSAs I know started in appellate. It is possible to move from trial to appellate, but when those openings came available they tended to go to the most experienced AUSAs in the office.

3) re: writing sample, whichever you think has the best writing and analysis. I haven’t seen anyone balk at a sample because it was about state law.

4) my experience has been that we regularly concede stuff if it’s clear under the the law we’re wrong. (Judges may not always agree on what’s clearly wrong, of course.)

5) my experience has always been that the person who authored the brief argued it in front of the appeals court, which includes line AUSAs handling their own appeals (at my first office it was assumed that line AUSAs would handle their own appeals on routine cases, but you could hand them off if you chose). But the appellate divisions where I’ve worked have been small (1-6 attorneys) so it wouldn’t be very efficient to have someone else get up to speed to argue an appeal someone else wrote (as appellate AUSA said, this is different for SCOTUS, of course. When one of the appellate AUSAs I know had a case go to SCOTUS, she was lucky just to be able to go watch the argument).
Thank you for your input. As someone also interested in the trial division, I appreciate your thoughts & advice.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Aug 25, 2021 1:21 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Aug 05, 2021 7:36 am
Any movement out of d mass?
Anon bumping my own question. I’ve heard of some snail mailed rejections (no interview), but I haven’t heard anything.

TLDR: any updates on d mass?

Anonymous User
Posts: 428117
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: AUSA/USAO hiring

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Sep 09, 2021 10:33 am

Any news out of EDNC?

Seriously? What are you waiting for?

Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!


Post Reply Post Anonymous Reply  

Return to “Public Interest & Government”