Stanford 2010!!! Forum

[CardinalRules]

Folks on TLS would never act reductionist. Never ever.

The diversity of former graduate PI experiences afforded by a class that is 3x larger than Stanford or Yale really can't be discounted. HLS has a phenomenal PI network to build from (as do the other two, obviously), but yeah, I don't understand why everyone insists that each school has one (or two) typical career paths.

First of all, both HLS and SLS are phenomenal for PI work. If you want to do PI on the West Coast, SLS is just as good as HLS, no question about it.

Also, Kretzy's point about HLS' class size shouldn't be understated. Of course there are more folks doing PI out of HLS than SLS - the class is 3 times bigger!

Honestly, the truth is that above-median graduates of HYS can really do pretty much whatever they want except clerk for the Supreme Court (a role seemingly filled by Top 10% YLS and Top 5% HLS/SLS students).

How do you interpret above-median in the non-letter grade system? Just the high pass people?

[Kretzy]

Folks on TLS would never act reductionist. Never ever.

The diversity of former graduate PI experiences afforded by a class that is 3x larger than Stanford or Yale really can't be discounted. HLS has a phenomenal PI network to build from (as do the other two, obviously), but yeah, I don't understand why everyone insists that each school has one (or two) typical career paths.

First of all, both HLS and SLS are phenomenal for PI work. If you want to do PI on the West Coast, SLS is just as good as HLS, no question about it.

Also, Kretzy's point about HLS' class size shouldn't be understated. Of course there are more folks doing PI out of HLS than SLS - the class is 3 times bigger!

Honestly, the truth is that above-median graduates of HYS can really do pretty much whatever they want except clerk for the Supreme Court (a role seemingly filled by Top 10% YLS and Top 5% HLS/SLS students).

How do you interpret above-median in the non-letter grade system? Just the high pass people?

A plethora of Hs instead of just a smattering of them

[fidesverita]

managamy, i'm with you on tending towards HLS over SLS...and the funny thing is, having visited both schools more than once, i feel there is much more of a public interest vibe at HLS. anyone who has a sense of Stanford's PI strengths, please PM me or reply to this thread!

The bolded statement is indisputable. If you're committed to PI, you should start looking for housing in Cambridge. HLS is the gold standard for it.

SO glad that's your sense too!!! Almost ALL of the HLS vs. SLS posts I've seen have declared SLS to be the PI haven. I thought I was missing something. I'm sure they both have excellent opportunities...but the idea that HLS is only big law just doesn't jive with my experiences.

Hmm interesting... I haven't visited HLS but my impression has always been that HLs is the big "corporate law" haven. I thought PI were strong suits of NYU and SLS....

But honestly, whether you go to SLS or HLS or YLS doesn't matter. When you're in the top of the top, you can do pretty much anything you want.

[lawyering]

Honestly, the truth is that above-median graduates of HYS can really do pretty much whatever they want except clerk for the Supreme Court (a role seemingly filled by Top 10% YLS and Top 5% HLS/SLS students).

I'm not as concerned about PI opportunities once I graduate, I'm pretty sure any among HYS (as well as T14 in general) will pave the way for such opportunities. I'm more concerned right now with the atmosphere of the school, the PI classes I can take, and the student groups I can join, etc. I want to STUDY human rights law, not just practice it later

Also, I had absolutely nothing about "why Stanford" in my application. At the time it wasn't on my radar and I didn't expect to get in.

[crackberry]

Honestly, the truth is that above-median graduates of HYS can really do pretty much whatever they want except clerk for the Supreme Court (a role seemingly filled by Top 10% YLS and Top 5% HLS/SLS students).

I'm not as concerned about PI opportunities once I graduate, I'm pretty sure any among HYS (as well as T14 in general) will pave the way for such opportunities. I'm more concerned right now with the atmosphere of the school, the PI classes I can take, and the student groups I can join, etc. I want to STUDY human rights law, not just practice it later

The bolded is why I would pick SLS (or YLS) over HLS 100 times out of 100. Feel free to attribute that to spite, but for me, the more collegial, less cutthroat atmosphere at SLS (and YLS) is far more attractive than the do-whatever-it-takes-to-be-No. 1 mentality at HLS.

[lawyering]

Honestly, the truth is that above-median graduates of HYS can really do pretty much whatever they want except clerk for the Supreme Court (a role seemingly filled by Top 10% YLS and Top 5% HLS/SLS students).

I'm not as concerned about PI opportunities once I graduate, I'm pretty sure any among HYS (as well as T14 in general) will pave the way for such opportunities. I'm more concerned right now with the atmosphere of the school, the PI classes I can take, and the student groups I can join, etc. I want to STUDY human rights law, not just practice it later

The bolded is why I would pick SLS (or YLS) over HLS 100 times out of 100. Feel free to attribute that to spite, but for me, the more collegial, less cutthroat atmosphere at SLS (and YLS) is far more attractive than the do-whatever-it-takes-to-be-No. 1 mentality at HLS.

Okay, but have you actually OBSERVED these different atmospheres? Because I got a huge biglaw vibe from Stanford when I visited. I did not like it there. And I've been to a health disparities conference run by a Harvard law student group, which was AMAZING. But now that I'm in at SLS, I will definitely be giving it a closer look.

[crackberry]

Okay, but have you actually OBSERVED these different atmospheres? Because I got a huge biglaw vibe from Stanford when I visited. I did not like it there. And I've been to a health disparities conference run by a Harvard law student group, which was AMAZING. But now that I'm in at SLS, I will definitely be giving it a closer look.

Well I've certainly observed it at SLS and definitely did not get that sense. I'll admit I've never visited HLS, so I can't say anything on that front from personal experience, but I know one of the former deans and a number of attorneys who are family friends who went there. With virtually no exception, they've said the biggest problem with HLS is its hyper-competitive atmosphere that encourages cutthroat competition and stepping on your classmates' throats. I have never gotten that sense from YLS or SLS.

That said, some people thrive on intense academic competition. It's just not for me.

[nicdmx]

Folks on TLS would never act reductionist. Never ever.

The diversity of former graduate PI experiences afforded by a class that is 3x larger than Stanford or Yale really can't be discounted. HLS has a phenomenal PI network to build from (as do the other two, obviously), but yeah, I don't understand why everyone insists that each school has one (or two) typical career paths.

First of all, both HLS and SLS are phenomenal for PI work. If you want to do PI on the West Coast, SLS is just as good as HLS, no question about it.

Also, Kretzy's point about HLS' class size shouldn't be understated. Of course there are more folks doing PI out of HLS than SLS - the class is 3 times bigger!

Honestly, the truth is that above-median graduates of HYS can really do pretty much whatever they want except clerk for the Supreme Court (a role seemingly filled by Top 10% YLS and Top 5% HLS/SLS students).

Based on this article:
--LinkRemoved--

It doesn't appear that SLS places very will in the Supreme Court. Not that it matters much given the limited number of these opportunities from any school.

[lawyering]

Okay, but have you actually OBSERVED these different atmospheres? Because I got a huge biglaw vibe from Stanford when I visited. I did not like it there. And I've been to a health disparities conference run by a Harvard law student group, which was AMAZING. But now that I'm in at SLS, I will definitely be giving it a closer look.

Well I've certainly observed it at SLS and definitely did not get that sense. I'll admit I've never visited HLS, so I can't say anything on that front from personal experience, but I know one of the former deans and a number of attorneys who are family friends who went there. With virtually no exception, they've said the biggest problem with HLS is its hyper-competitive atmosphere that encourages cutthroat competition and stepping on your classmates' throats. I have never gotten that sense from YLS or SLS.

That said, some people thrive on intense academic competition. It's just not for me.

Crackberry, I'd love to talk about your experiences at SLS sometime. If you'd like, I'm happy to give you my sense of Harvard (I live in the area so have more opportunities for scouting). I've met a bunch of HLS students and haven't gotten a sense of hyper competition at all--I wouldn't be happy with that either (I went to a very "help everyone" ugrad). I've also heard that HLS has changed a LOT in the last 10 years or so. I don't think I'd have wanted to go to the old Harvard. I think my opinion of SLS might be colored by the fact that I was there during interview time. No one looks relaxed in a suit!

[rui]

///

[crackberry]

Crackberry, I'd love to talk about your experiences at SLS sometime. If you'd like, I'm happy to give you my sense of Harvard (I live in the area so have more opportunities for scouting). I've met a bunch of HLS students and haven't gotten a sense of hyper competition at all--I wouldn't be happy with that either (I went to a very "help everyone" ugrad). I've also heard that HLS has changed a LOT in the last 10 years or so. I don't think I'd have wanted to go to the old Harvard. I think my opinion of SLS might be colored by the fact that I was there during interview time. No one looks relaxed in a suit!

PMed.

[crackberry]

Based on this article:
--LinkRemoved--

It doesn't appear that SLS places very will in the Supreme Court. Not that it matters much given the limited number of these opportunities from any school.

You can't draw too many conclusions with a data set of ONE year. Historically, only five schools have more than 100 Supreme Court clerks: Yale, Harvard, Stanford, Columbia and Chicago.

Based on this list (Brian Leiter's compilation of Supreme Court clerks by law school from 1991-2005), Stanford is fourth behind HLS, YLS and Chicago. I believe these four in that order (Harvard, Yale, Chicago, Stanford) are the top 4 in this category overall as well.

http://www.leiterrankings.com/jobs/1991 ... erks.shtml

There is no arguing that Harvard and Yale are the two best places to go if your goal is a SCOTUS clerkship. So many SCOTUS judges went to HLS/YLS that it only makes sense. That said, to say that SLS doesn't place very well in the Supreme Court is patently false.

[Dignan]

Based on this article:
--LinkRemoved--

It doesn't appear that SLS places very will in the Supreme Court. Not that it matters much given the limited number of these opportunities from any school.

You can't draw too many conclusions with a data set of ONE year. Historically, only five schools have more than 100 Supreme Court clerks: Yale, Harvard, Stanford, Columbia and Chicago.

I agree that you shouldn't draw general conclusions based on one year, but I have wondered if the recent (1980 - 2005) success of Stanford's SC clerk placement is partially related to the fact that two of the justices during that period (O'Connor and Renquist) were SLS grads. I noticed that both justices tended to hire SLS grads at a higher rate than the other justices. In general, it seems that justices display some preference towards graduates of their alma maters. Justice Stevens, for example, is the only justice who hires Northwestern grads with any regularity.

O'Connor and Renquist were not, of course, the only justices who hired SLS grads. And I expect that SLS will continue to have some success with SC clerk placement. But now that there are no Stanford grads on the Court, there is reason to think that Stanford's success in this area will decline at least a bit.

[crackberry]

I agree that you shouldn't draw general conclusions based on one year, but I have wondered if the recent (1980 - 2005) success of Stanford's SC clerk placement is partially related to the fact that two of the justices during that period (O'Connor and Renquist) were SLS grads. I noticed that both justices tended to hire SLS grads at a higher rate than the other justices. In general, it seems that justices display some preference towards graduates of their alma maters. Justice Stevens, for example, is the only justice who hires Northwestern grads with any regularity.

O'Connor and Renquist were not, of course, the only justices who hired SLS grads. And I expect that SLS will continue to have some success with SC clerk placement. But now that there are no Stanford grads on the Court, there is reason to think that Stanford's success in this area will decline at least a bit.

Yeah I agree. There is no question that justices display a very obvious preference for graduates of their alma maters and that the lack of an SLS alum on the bench now will impact the school's placement. This fact goes a long way in explaining why there are so many clerks from HLS and YLS, though it is somewhat of a self-fulfilling prophecy since the best schools produce the most justices and the most smart graduates.

Also, Rehnquist was notoriously frugal with his clerkships (he usually only hired three in contrast to other justices' five). If he'd hired more, SLS would likely have a bunch more clerkships.

[Dignan]

I agree that you shouldn't draw general conclusions based on one year, but I have wondered if the recent (1980 - 2005) success of Stanford's SC clerk placement is partially related to the fact that two of the justices during that period (O'Connor and Renquist) were SLS grads. I noticed that both justices tended to hire SLS grads at a higher rate than the other justices. In general, it seems that justices display some preference towards graduates of their alma maters. Justice Stevens, for example, is the only justice who hires Northwestern grads with any regularity.

O'Connor and Renquist were not, of course, the only justices who hired SLS grads. And I expect that SLS will continue to have some success with SC clerk placement. But now that there are no Stanford grads on the Court, there is reason to think that Stanford's success in this area will decline at least a bit.

Yeah I agree. There is no question that justices display a very obvious preference for graduates of their alma maters and that the lack of an SLS alum on the bench now will impact the school's placement. This fact goes a long way in explaining why there are so many clerks from HLS and YLS, though it is somewhat of a self-fulfilling prophecy since the best schools produce the most justices and the most smart graduates.

Also, Rehnquist was notoriously frugal with his clerkships (he usually only hired three in contrast to other justices' five). If he'd hired more, SLS would likely have a bunch more clerkships.

I don't think that's quite right. None of the current justices has five clerks (they all have four). To my knowledge, no justice has has ever had more than four clerks at once.

But it's true that Rehnquist usually hired only three clerks. That was also true of Justice Stevens until very recently.

Oh, and thanks for spelling "Rehnquist" correctly. I did not. I'm glad I didn't mention him, and misspell his name, in the "Why Stanford?" part of my personal statement.

[crackberry]

I don't think that's quite right. None of the current justices has five clerks (they all have four). To my knowledge, no justice has has ever had more than four clerks at once.

But it's true that Rehnquist usually hired only three clerks. That was also true of Justice Stevens until very recently.

Oh, and thanks for spelling "Rehnquist" correctly. I did not. I'm glad I didn't mention him, and misspell his name, in the "Why Stanford?" part of my personal statement.

Oops you're right. Most justices are allowed (and hire) four clerks. Chief Justices are allowed five, but Rehnquist only employed three. Roberts looks like he takes on four, like the rest of the court.

It should also be noted that Rehnquist only employed three clerks from SLS during his tenure on the Court. O'Connor, on the other hand, took on 16 SLS grads.

[Kretzy]

I don't think that's quite right. None of the current justices has five clerks (they all have four). To my knowledge, no justice has has ever had more than four clerks at once.

But it's true that Rehnquist usually hired only three clerks. That was also true of Justice Stevens until very recently.

Oh, and thanks for spelling "Rehnquist" correctly. I did not. I'm glad I didn't mention him, and misspell his name, in the "Why Stanford?" part of my personal statement.

Oops you're right. Most justices are allowed (and hire) four clerks. Chief Justices are allowed five, but Rehnquist only employed three. Roberts looks like he takes on four, like the rest of the court.

It should also be noted that Rehnquist only employed three clerks from SLS during his tenure on the Court. O'Connor, on the other hand, took on 16 SLS grads.

Has she taken an SLS grad as her single clerk since retiring?

[Dignan]

I don't think that's quite right. None of the current justices has five clerks (they all have four). To my knowledge, no justice has has ever had more than four clerks at once.

But it's true that Rehnquist usually hired only three clerks. That was also true of Justice Stevens until very recently.

Oh, and thanks for spelling "Rehnquist" correctly. I did not. I'm glad I didn't mention him, and misspell his name, in the "Why Stanford?" part of my personal statement.

Oops you're right. Most justices are allowed (and hire) four clerks. Chief Justices are allowed five, but Rehnquist only employed three. Roberts looks like he takes on four, like the rest of the court.

It should also be noted that Rehnquist only employed three clerks from SLS during his tenure on the Court.

I count a total of five: three while an associate justice (1971-1985) and two while the chief (1986-2005). Still, only 5 in 34 years? That's far fewer than I assumed, and it's below the SLS-clerk-hiring rate of many of the non-SLS alums on the Court.

[crackberry]

I count a total of five: three while an associate justice (1971-1985) and two while the chief (1986-2005). Still, only 5 in 34 years? That's far fewer than I assumed, and it's below the SLS-clerk-hiring rate of many of the non-SLS alums on the Court.

Oh right I was only looking at his tenure as an associate justice, which was pretty stupid of me. But yeah 5 in 34 years is nothing. Maybe it has something to do with ideology? I know SLS is pretty liberal but I can't imagine it's much more liberal than HLS or YLS.

Rehnquist did show a penchant for UVA grads, hiring a total of 14 of them in his 34 years on the bench (5 as an associate justice, 9 as chief justice). UVA has a reputation for being slightly more conservative than the rest of the T14 right?

While we're on the subject, I assume most interested parties saw this NYT story on Supreme Court clerkships:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/22/us/22 ... l?emc=eta1

[Dignan]

I count a total of five: three while an associate justice (1971-1985) and two while the chief (1986-2005). Still, only 5 in 34 years? That's far fewer than I assumed, and it's below the SLS-clerk-hiring rate of many of the non-SLS alums on the Court.

Oh right I was only looking at his tenure as an associate justice, which was pretty stupid of me. But yeah 5 in 34 years is nothing. Maybe it has something to do with ideology? I know SLS is pretty liberal but I can't imagine it's much more liberal than HLS or YLS.

If anything, the political culture at SLS is slightly more conservative than HLS and YLS.

I do think that there is an ideology-based explanation for Rehnquist's hiring pattern, but the explanation is only indirectly related to Stanford Law School. I suspect that the hiring pattern is an accident of geography. SLS is in the ninth circuit, which is by far the most liberal of the federal circuits. Although SLS grads land COA clerkships all over the country, they are, not surprisingly, disproportionally concentrated in the circuit in which the law school resides. The COA judges in the ninth circuit tend to "feed" the more liberal and moderate justices. The more conservative justices (Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas) rarely hire clerks who worked for COA judges in the ninth circuit. Looked at from this perspective, it's not all that surprising that Rehnquist hired so few SLS grads.

[crackberry]

If anything, the political culture at SLS is slightly more conservative than HLS and YLS.

Really? Hmm I don't know. Granted, I don't know a whole lot about the politics of HLS and YLS, but I know SLS is pretty liberal. There are definitely parts of Stanford University that are quite conservative (Hoover Institution, the entire Econ department, much of the Poli Sci department) and I think the GSB (business school) is somewhat conservative, but the law school has so many liberal professors (incl. Pam Karlan and Kathleen Sullivan who are way out there in left field) that I think you'd be stretching to call it anything but liberal.

That said, you said "sightly more conservative." If HLS and YLS border on socialism then you may be right.

[Dignan]

If anything, the political culture at SLS is slightly more conservative than HLS and YLS.

Really? Hmm I don't know. Granted, I don't know a whole lot about the politics of HLS and YLS, but I know SLS is pretty liberal. There are definitely parts of Stanford University that are quite conservative (Hoover Institution, the entire Econ department, much of the Poli Sci department) and I think the GSB (business school) is somewhat conservative, but the law school has so many liberal professors (incl. Pam Karlan and Kathleen Sullivan who are way out there in left field) that I think you'd be stretching to call it anything but liberal.

That said, you said "sightly more conservative." If HLS and YLS border on socialism then you may be right.

Don't get me wrong: SLS is very liberal. Really, all the top law schools are liberal with the possible exceptions of Chicago and Virginia. (And, even at those schools, there are arguably more "liberal" professors than "conservative" ones.)

For years, Harvard and Yale were thought to be actively hostile to conservative points of view. At Harvard, that recently changed thanks to Dean Kagan. Still, I think the perception among conservatives is that Stanford has been slightly more friendly to conservative opinions than have Harvard and Yale.

And, maybe it's my own biases showing, but I don't think of Karlan and Sullivan as being way out in left field. Although both are liberal, I think their ideas are well within the legal mainstream.

Also, Stanford just hired Michael McConnell to be the director of the Constitutional Law Center. You'd have to try hard to find a more conservative professor in a comparable position at any of the other top law schools.

[ndnlawdc]

For years, Harvard and Yale were thought to be actively hostile to conservative points of view. At Harvard, that recently changed thanks to Dean Kagan. Still, I think the perception among conservatives is that Stanford has been slightly more friendly to conservative opinions than have Harvard and Yale.

And, maybe it's my own biases showing, but I don't think of Karlan and Sullivan as being way out in left field. Although both are liberal, I think their ideas are well within the legal mainstream.

Also, Stanford just hired Michael McConnell to be the director of the Constitutional Law Center. You'd have to try hard to find a more conservative professor in a comparable position at any of the other top law schools.

My perspective as a relative conservative at SLS (and a member of the Federalist Society) is that SLS is about as liberal as Yale and maybe more so than HLS. I felt out HLS for this when I visited, and the President of the FedSoc chapter at Yale is a good friend of mine. HLS, because of its size, can probably feel really liberal or really conservative depending on what you make of it. SLS feels solidly liberal. The law school sponsors the Shaking the Foundations conference, the public interest community is solidly liberal (making me the odd man out as a public interest-geared conservative), and the faculty are solidly liberal. Karlan and Sullivan are both very liberal (I have conlaw with Sullivan), which (as you said) doesn't make them out of the legal mainstream.

Michael McConnell doubled the number of conservatives on the faculty at SLS (to 2). He was quite the catch, and any law school would have loved to get him. I've no doubt that HLS (where his daughter is a 2L) or YLS would have hired him, but he hates the East Coast. Though I hope it signals a broadening of the mainstream at SLS, I don't think it makes the place (especially the student body) any more conservative. If anything, SLS feels slightly more apolitical because of the big IP/tech focus.

[jocelyne]

...

[crackberry]

My perspective as a relative conservative at SLS (and a member of the Federalist Society) is that SLS is about as liberal as Yale and maybe more so than HLS. I felt out HLS for this when I visited, and the President of the FedSoc chapter at Yale is a good friend of mine. HLS, because of its size, can probably feel really liberal or really conservative depending on what you make of it. SLS feels solidly liberal. The law school sponsors the Shaking the Foundations conference, the public interest community is solidly liberal (making me the odd man out as a public interest-geared conservative), and the faculty are solidly liberal. Karlan and Sullivan are both very liberal (I have conlaw with Sullivan), which (as you said) doesn't make them out of the legal mainstream.

Michael McConnell doubled the number of conservatives on the faculty at SLS (to 2). He was quite the catch, and any law school would have loved to get him. I've no doubt that HLS (where his daughter is a 2L) or YLS would have hired him, but he hates the East Coast. Though I hope it signals a broadening of the mainstream at SLS, I don't think it makes the place (especially the student body) any more conservative. If anything, SLS feels slightly more apolitical because of the big IP/tech focus.

Wow, thanks for the insight.