AUSA/USAO hiring Forum

[Anonymous User]

AUSA here in a major office. The interview/hiring process can be a total black box. Any particular office's practices and timeline on hiring can vary wildly, depending on funding, the number of open spots, overall caseloads, the style of the U.S. Attorney, etc. I've seen stretches where people were moved through the process very rapidly, with interviewing and offers extended all within a matter of weeks. But that was definitely not the case for me, nor was it for some of my colleagues.

Between my first interview and my final interview, my process lasted almost a year. I have no way of knowing, but I suspect I was considered a good candidate after my second interview but did not progress soon thereafter because they gave the spot to someone else and wanted to keep my application on file for the future. Thus commenced a limbo period of almost nine months until they asked me to come in for a final interview. My offer came the day after the final round.

I was lucky enough to get an interview at a USAO last Friday. I haven’t heard anything since. Am I done for? I realize this question probably can’t be answered with any accuracy but I would appreciate someone with any tea leaves they can provide chiming in.

AUSA here and here's how I analyzed my process when I went through it.

At the panel interview level, I figured I was maybe 1 out of 5 or so candidates who were interviewed. I already knew at that point that my odds of survival were decent for various reasons, but all things even, my odds were 1 out of 5. Maybe they interviewed more than 5, but that's a lot of time imposed on supervisory-level AUSAs who are busy as hell with cases and other stuff. For your emotional health, you should just focus on that 1 out of 5 figure (or whatever similar figure you think makes sense based on what you know).

Time elapsed between 1st interview and the phone call for the final interview with the U.S. Attorney: in my case, a few weeks. But there is no way to read anything into how short or how long your process is taking, for so many reasons. Maybe the biggest reason: the U.S.Atty plays a politician-like role in the office. That requires him or her to engage in an unbelievable amount of bullshit that is not part of your world: showing up to places to smile and shake hands; secret trips to Washington; speeches; conferences; boring-ass meetings in random other states; the list goes on. The point is that their schedule is busy and chaotic, and requires constant travel unlike most AUSAs. In the middle of this, some junior lawyer hoping to become an AUSA needs to be fit in to their schedule for a probably in-person interview that will last for maybe one hour, along with the FAUSA (First AUSA) whose schedule is also crazy. It could happen soon, or it might take a long time.

As an AUSA I've requested a simple document to be signed by the U.S.Atty that required no thought process or controversy, and it took almost a month to get it back from him.

I wish you good luck. If you don't make it, just try again one day now that you know you're a panel finalist.

[Anonymous User]

AUSA here in a major office. The interview/hiring process can be a total black box. Any particular office's practices and timeline on hiring can vary wildly, depending on funding, the number of open spots, overall caseloads, the style of the U.S. Attorney, etc. I've seen stretches where people were moved through the process very rapidly, with interviewing and offers extended all within a matter of weeks. But that was definitely not the case for me, nor was it for some of my colleagues.

AUSA who had quick hiring process here - yeah, it is a black box and varies a lot. I've always suspected that there's a difference between offices that accept rolling applications and offices that only hire when they have an immediate need. Some offices will take applications any time, but given the kind of approval process needed actually to hire anyone, I don't think there's any way to predict when those offices will act on those applications. They also tend to be larger, more competitive offices, where there's probably more flexibility and/or turnover. Conversely, the offices where I've worked don't accept rolling applications, so when they post a position, it's because they need someone and have already justified the hiring to EOUSA, so they act on it right away.

That's not to say that a rolling application office *has* act slowly, or that a posting-only office will necessarily move quickly - again, black box and variation. But I think it's another factor in the mix.

[Anonymous User]

Advice on interview with the USA? I interviewed this past week with a panel, and have an interview with the USA coming up.

[Anonymous User]

Advice on interview with the USA? I interviewed this past week with a panel, and have an interview with the USA coming up.

It's possible you are one of only two finalists. If the other guy or gal acts like a weirdo, you win. I now know who my finalist opponent was and the stories of how he lost the position are pretty funny.

So, don't be weird. Don't think outside of the box. Don't be flashy. Don't be political. Don't be an ass kisser. Keep your nutty ideas about life, the world, relationships, or your family to yourself. Your job if hired will be to keep your nose down, follow the rules, write competently, and not embarrass the office when you are sent to live court. It's a low bar at this point.

You might get some academic hypotheticals thrown at you, depending on who the USA is and their preference. (Federal guidelines do restrict their ability to be totally free-wheeling, so hypotheticals are a comfortable no-brainer way of passing time). Hypotheticals are easy if your mind is not racing and you're not in a state of panic. There's no right or wrong answer; they just want to see that your brain functions kind of like a responsible-minded, ethical young lawyer (if you are young) as you work your way through the problem out loud.

Good luck!

[Anonymous User]

Advice on interview with the USA? I interviewed this past week with a panel, and have an interview with the USA coming up.

It's possible you are one of only two finalists. If the other guy or gal acts like a weirdo, you win. I now know who my finalist opponent was and the stories of how he lost the position are pretty funny.

So, don't be weird. Don't think outside of the box. Don't be flashy. Don't be political. Don't be an ass kisser. Keep your nutty ideas about life, the world, relationships, or your family to yourself. Your job if hired will be to keep your nose down, follow the rules, write competently, and not embarrass the office when you are sent to live court. It's a low bar at this point.

You might get some academic hypotheticals thrown at you, depending on who the USA is and their preference. (Federal guidelines do restrict their ability to be totally free-wheeling, so hypotheticals are a comfortable no-brainer way of passing time). Hypotheticals are easy if your mind is not racing and you're not in a state of panic. There's no right or wrong answer; they just want to see that your brain functions kind of like a responsible-minded, ethical young lawyer (if you are young) as you work your way through the problem out loud.

Good luck!

USAs get fired every time the political party of the presidency changes unless they get a judgeship or run for office or something. That means hires are most USAs’ only legacy because in 10 years the hires will be all that’s left of that specific USA. Also, so many folks apply to every position that USAs can hire clerks/JAGs/ADAs/whatever profile they want. For you that means the prior panel decided you were smart/qualified/cool enough to justify moving you along the process. Now the USA will decide if you fit in their larger plan for the office, which means your job is to do a good job interviewing while also having the self awareness to articulate how your background fits the profile the USA is looking for.

[Anonymous User]

Advice on interview with the USA? I interviewed this past week with a panel, and have an interview with the USA coming up.

It's possible you are one of only two finalists. If the other guy or gal acts like a weirdo, you win. I now know who my finalist opponent was and the stories of how he lost the position are pretty funny.

So, don't be weird. Don't think outside of the box. Don't be flashy. Don't be political. Don't be an ass kisser. Keep your nutty ideas about life, the world, relationships, or your family to yourself. Your job if hired will be to keep your nose down, follow the rules, write competently, and not embarrass the office when you are sent to live court. It's a low bar at this point.

You might get some academic hypotheticals thrown at you, depending on who the USA is and their preference. (Federal guidelines do restrict their ability to be totally free-wheeling, so hypotheticals are a comfortable no-brainer way of passing time). Hypotheticals are easy if your mind is not racing and you're not in a state of panic. There's no right or wrong answer; they just want to see that your brain functions kind of like a responsible-minded, ethical young lawyer (if you are young) as you work your way through the problem out loud.

Good luck!

USAs get fired every time the political party of the presidency changes unless they get a judgeship or run for office or something. That means hires are most USAs’ only legacy because in 10 years the hires will be all that’s left of that specific USA. Also, so many folks apply to every position that USAs can hire clerks/JAGs/ADAs/whatever profile they want. For you that means the prior panel decided you were smart/qualified/cool enough to justify moving you along the process. Now the USA will decide if you fit in their larger plan for the office, which means your job is to do a good job interviewing while also having the self awareness to articulate how your background fits the profile the USA is looking for.

And I would say that because of this, USA interviews can vary a lot. I've interviewed with 2 USAs and one was a super super quiet/reserved type, where it quickly became clear that unless I carried the conversation and basically told stories about myself, we were going to sit and stare at each other in silence. The other was a much more conventional "tell me about yourself, why AUSA, why this office" kind of experience.

I think it can be tough to prepare b/c unless you're dealing with a really REALLY press-friendly USA or have connections who know the USA well, it can be tough to figure out what a specific USA is looking for enough to be able to pitch yourself to that vision, especially if you don't have much prosecution experieence. So my take is that it makes sense to speak honestly about yourself, your skills, and your reasons for wanting to be there. (That is, assuming you have reasons beyond "I hate biglaw," but most people can find some genuine reason for their interest - it could be a passion for public service, wanting to get actual trial/courtroom experience, wanting to move from state to federal work, etc.) Getting a job by pretending to be something you're not is never a great idea, really.

I also think that it's fair to ask bigger-picture questions about their vision for the office, what they see as the office's biggest challenges/opportunities, or maybe what, in their opinion, separates a great AUSA from a good AUSA. If they seem into talking about themselves, asking them about the transition to being USA is probably a good way to kill time (it doesn't sell them on you as much but most people like talking about themselves so they'll come away feeling good about you).

[Anonymous User]

Some USAs are appointed by the President after many years of service as line AUSAs just like you and me, at the local USAO for which the appointment was made. On the other extreme are USAs appointed for nakedly political reasons, who may have some AUSA experience in the past but not recently, who are essentially outsiders, and may have been picked because they are good political schmoozers with Democratic members of Congress or POTUS himself (or same for GOP during GOP presidencies).

A "DOJ Insider" USA is probably much less interested in political bullshit than the public would expect. You could see this play out in real time during the Trump presidency, when multiple USAs around the country refused to do Trump's bidding on one issue or another. The truth is that many such USAs, like many experienced AUSAs, only worship at the altar of what they deem to be the rule of law, not D or R.

During the Trump years, I saw cover letters come in to my office from student interns who brazenly wanted to tout their Fed Soc credentials and liked to stick Scalia quotes into their letters. At least in my office, that was a super efficient way to get your letter thrown into the trash. You're not being hired as press secretary, campaign chief, FAUSA, or being groomed for a SCOTUS application. A particular USA might be heavily biased in favor of your political views, but the hiring panel that screens you may not be, not to mention the FAUSA and others. Calm down and stick to the basics.

[Anonymous User]

I’m the anon who asked for interview advice; thank you so much for the thoughtful responses!

[ughbugchugplug]

If I am rejected how realistic is it that a second app will be successful? I just did my second (panel) interview and am worried it didn’t go so well. Do I have a real chance of getting the job if I try again or will my missed opportunity mean they’ve blackballed me?

[Anonymous User]

If I am rejected how realistic is it that a second app will be successful? I just did my second (panel) interview and am worried it didn’t go so well. Do I have a real chance of getting the job if I try again or will my missed opportunity mean they’ve blackballed me?

While I certainly can’t tell you a percentage chance that your second app will be successful, don’t worry about being blackballed.

Unless you truly fucked something up, you’re fine. Additional applications to the office are almost universally seen as a sign of commitment.

As an AUSA in a great office, I am fully aware that luck played a role in my résumé being plucked for an interview from the pool of hundreds they received. Not to mention being hired from the dozens of candidates interviewed.
Just because you don’t get it the first time, shouldn’t discourage you at all in the future.

Good luck!

[Anonymous User]

If I am rejected how realistic is it that a second app will be successful? I just did my second (panel) interview and am worried it didn’t go so well. Do I have a real chance of getting the job if I try again or will my missed opportunity mean they’ve blackballed me?

Also an AUSA here. You're asking a pretty nonsensical question, to be blunt. If you are blackballed, you will not get picked for an interview ever again. What would you have to lose by trying at least one more time?

[Anonymous User]

If I am rejected how realistic is it that a second app will be successful? I just did my second (panel) interview and am worried it didn’t go so well. Do I have a real chance of getting the job if I try again or will my missed opportunity mean they’ve blackballed me?

Third AUSA here. It is common for people to apply multiple times. If you don’t get the job the first time, how successful you’ll be in the future depends on why you didn’t get hired. For lots of people, it’s going to be that they don’t have quite as much relevant experience as we’d like to see in certain things - they have potential
but don’t seem ready to run their own cases, say - so applying with more experience will often result in a better outcome. Other times a candidate can be great but the person who gets the job just has an edge - more relevant experience, better connections, a better fit with the powers that be. So applying again in a different pool may have a better outcome. Sometimes someone has the credentials but just doesn’t impress in person. That person is probably less likely to get looked at seriously in the future (depending on the pool), but they’re certainly not blackballed, and if they really polish their application enough to look like they’ve improved, they’ll still have a shot.

I think the only thing that could blackball someone is just really being egregiously bad in the interview, enough so that people just can’t see you in the job/don’t want to work with you. Like racist/sexist bad, or just flat out not getting how the job works and getting the law wrong (not in the sense of unfamiliarity, just applying it wrong), or having an incredibly offputting personality you could never put in front of a jury. But the thing is, the people who make it to the interview stage are good enough that I think it’s *rare* to have them tank the interview that badly. They’re usually either just slightly less good than the person who gets the offer, or just kind of underwhelming. My experience is limited, but I haven’t interviewed anyone so terrible that I’d just never consider them again. Most fall into “great but someone else is a little better” or “needs more time.” The “meh” group is pretty small, and probably by definition doesn’t include people who get a second round interview.

[Anonymous User]

If I am rejected how realistic is it that a second app will be successful? I just did my second (panel) interview and am worried it didn’t go so well. Do I have a real chance of getting the job if I try again or will my missed opportunity mean they’ve blackballed me?

In a desirable office you’ll have to apply over and over. I applied 10+ times before getting the job. Sometimes they’ll be hiring for a super specific niche, which can pull in either direction. Either a child porn specialist or a murder expert (needing experience, and therefore expensive) or someone cheap (inexperienced) because they just need bodies and can fit in more bodies with the same budget if they’re inexperienced. So you could have applied to the wrong need and have to keep applying until they’re looking for your schtick.

[Anonymous User]

If I am rejected how realistic is it that a second app will be successful? I just did my second (panel) interview and am worried it didn’t go so well. Do I have a real chance of getting the job if I try again or will my missed opportunity mean they’ve blackballed me?

Third AUSA here. It is common for people to apply multiple times. If you don’t get the job the first time, how successful you’ll be in the future depends on why you didn’t get hired. For lots of people, it’s going to be that they don’t have quite as much relevant experience as we’d like to see in certain things - they have potential
but don’t seem ready to run their own cases, say - so applying with more experience will often result in a better outcome. Other times a candidate can be great but the person who gets the job just has an edge - more relevant experience, better connections, a better fit with the powers that be. So applying again in a different pool may have a better outcome. Sometimes someone has the credentials but just doesn’t impress in person. That person is probably less likely to get looked at seriously in the future (depending on the pool), but they’re certainly not blackballed, and if they really polish their application enough to look like they’ve improved, they’ll still have a shot.

I think the only thing that could blackball someone is just really being egregiously bad in the interview, enough so that people just can’t see you in the job/don’t want to work with you. Like racist/sexist bad, or just flat out not getting how the job works and getting the law wrong (not in the sense of unfamiliarity, just applying it wrong), or having an incredibly offputting personality you could never put in front of a jury. But the thing is, the people who make it to the interview stage are good enough that I think it’s *rare* to have them tank the interview that badly. They’re usually either just slightly less good than the person who gets the offer, or just kind of underwhelming. My experience is limited, but I haven’t interviewed anyone so terrible that I’d just never consider them again. Most fall into “great but someone else is a little better” or “needs more time.” The “meh” group is pretty small, and probably by definition doesn’t include people who get a second round interview.

The second AUSA from above here. This is a fair analysis. I have heard grapevine stories about applicants who literally did tank their interviews and snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. To be fair, one of them didn't actually tank anything--it was a supervisory reference who gave a bad review about work product. But another one got all the way to the United States Attorney interview--which can be really perfunctory, all the work has been done, the USA only has time for a single interview so you're the presumptive finalist. And in that finalist interview, the applicant was so damn weird that the USA nixed them.

If you know for a fact that you are the sole interviewee at the last round interview with the United States Attorney, and you get nixed, you should probably ask yourself whether you are blackballed from future interviews. Short of that, keep trying.

[ughbugchugplug]

Ok, thank you all. I freely admit this is purely me venting anxiety and the points you’re making are pretty much what I should’ve expected anyway, but it’s nice to hear, and appreciated.

I actually think my interview was fine except for when they asked me to describe an issue I argued at oral argument. Believe it or not I did not actually prep for that fairly obvious question and flailed a bit. I don’t think messing that up is the kind of exceptional failure you guys are discussing that would result in a blackball, but I could see them thinking I’m not very good at explaining legal issues or reacting to surprises. Which honestly could be true - if I couldn’t explain it in the relative comfort of an interview it is fair to wonder if I could handle an unexpected question from a judge…

[Anonymous User]

Ok, thank you all. I freely admit this is purely me venting anxiety and the points you’re making are pretty much what I should’ve expected anyway, but it’s nice to hear, and appreciated.

I actually think my interview was fine except for when they asked me to describe an issue I argued at oral argument. Believe it or not I did not actually prep for that fairly obvious question and flailed a bit. I don’t think messing that up is the kind of exceptional failure you guys are discussing that would result in a blackball, but I could see them thinking I’m not very good at explaining legal issues or reacting to surprises. Which honestly could be true - if I couldn’t explain it in the relative comfort of an interview it is fair to wonder if I could handle an unexpected question from a judge…

Second AUSA here. Come on dude or gal, your comment is--saying this to support you--a little ridiculous. Putting you on the spot to field a question during an interview is the only way that they can differentiate you from another candidate, yes. That does not mean that this is actually a logical method of telling apart who is actually the better lawyer. The process is basically bullshit and it's all guesswork. Most of the USAO hires around the country do turn out to be good lawyers. You'd be surprised at how many turn out to be stinkers. If you don't get the job this time, brush yourself off and try again. If you got an interview, you're at least a shortlister.

[Anonymous User]

Is it common to be rejected without being told after a panel level interview? Or should you expect a letter/email saying thanks but no thanks?

[Anonymous User]

Is it common to be rejected without being told after a panel level interview? Or should you expect a letter/email saying thanks but no thanks?

You should get some kind of letter/email, but I can’t rule out the possibility that they’re just going to rely on a USAJobs notification once they fill the position and close it (assuming you applied via USAJobs). They may also not reject you until they have a candidate locked down and accepted, which can take a while for various reasons.

[Anonymous User]

Is it common to be rejected without being told after a panel level interview? Or should you expect a letter/email saying thanks but no thanks?

You should get some kind of letter/email, but I can’t rule out the possibility that they’re just going to rely on a USAJobs notification once they fill the position and close it (assuming you applied via USAJobs). They may also not reject you until they have a candidate locked down and accepted, which can take a while for various reasons.

Ok, thanks. Guess I can’t infer anything at this point based on no letter since they might just be waiting to lock another person down.

[Anonymous User]

Is it common to be rejected without being told after a panel level interview? Or should you expect a letter/email saying thanks but no thanks?

You should get some kind of letter/email, but I can’t rule out the possibility that they’re just going to rely on a USAJobs notification once they fill the position and close it (assuming you applied via USAJobs). They may also not reject you until they have a candidate locked down and accepted, which can take a while for various reasons.

Ok, thanks. Guess I can’t infer anything at this point based on no letter since they might just be waiting to lock another person down.

They could have also had their hiring process delayed for any number of reasons as well. If by panel interview you mean “not including the USA” and they haven’t arranged for you to meet with the USA, depending how long ago your interview was, yeah, that’s not a great sign, unfortunately.

[Anonymous User]

Is it common to be rejected without being told after a panel level interview? Or should you expect a letter/email saying thanks but no thanks?

You should get some kind of letter/email, but I can’t rule out the possibility that they’re just going to rely on a USAJobs notification once they fill the position and close it (assuming you applied via USAJobs). They may also not reject you until they have a candidate locked down and accepted, which can take a while for various reasons.

Ok, thanks. Guess I can’t infer anything at this point based on no letter since they might just be waiting to lock another person down.

They could have also had their hiring process delayed for any number of reasons as well. If by panel interview you mean “not including the USA” and they haven’t arranged for you to meet with the USA, depending how long ago your interview was, yeah, that’s not a great sign, unfortunately.

It was a month ago - second round interview with all front office brass except the USA. I’m holding out hope that the holidays interfered but yeah, might just have to try again next time.

[Anonymous User]

Is it common to be rejected without being told after a panel level interview? Or should you expect a letter/email saying thanks but no thanks?

You should get some kind of letter/email, but I can’t rule out the possibility that they’re just going to rely on a USAJobs notification once they fill the position and close it (assuming you applied via USAJobs). They may also not reject you until they have a candidate locked down and accepted, which can take a while for various reasons.

Ok, thanks. Guess I can’t infer anything at this point based on no letter since they might just be waiting to lock another person down.

They could have also had their hiring process delayed for any number of reasons as well. If by panel interview you mean “not including the USA” and they haven’t arranged for you to meet with the USA, depending how long ago your interview was, yeah, that’s not a great sign, unfortunately.

It was a month ago - second round interview with all front office brass except the USA. I’m holding out hope that the holidays interfered but yeah, might just have to try again next time.

USAs have to deal with a vomit-inducing amount of politics crap. You had both the holidays plus elections going on, so it's probably been a rough travel season for a bunch of them. There's hope. Good luck to all.

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone have a list of the USAO offices that hire on a rolling basis? I assume it’s the bigger ones but am not sure (maybe SDNY, NDCA, NDIL?)

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone have a list of the USAO offices that hire on a rolling basis? I assume it’s the bigger ones but am not sure (maybe SDNY, NDCA, NDIL?)

Honestly the easiest way to figure this out is to go to the websites for the offices that interest you and look for their employment page. If they offer you the opportunity to apply without going to USAjobs or without listing a specific posting and deadline, they hire on a rolling basis. (Doesn’t guarantee a particular timeline though.)

[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