Penn Clerkship Discussion/Movement Forum

[Anonymous User]

Did anyone in 2023 or 2024 (with the exception of the c/o 2023 student who got CA2 on plan last year) get any interviews in NY? Heard it's a total strikeout in NY which is insane.

I’ve heard of one ‘24 who supposedly had New York interviews and there are at least a couple with Newark spots. Stop posting the same bitter message on these threads.

[Anonymous User]

How does it favor those individuals? It's calls that get you picked off the pile. Not a life story that only comes out at an interview.

Resume and rec letters.

Of my six interviews, only one was from a judge that received a call on my behalf - and I am not sure if it was the call or the outreach I did to current clerks that helped get me out of that pile. I also know that my recommenders called (many) other judges and it did not get me pulled out of those judges' piles.

Not having well-connected profs who can call judges they know definitely hurts Penn students with the feeders/semi-feeders and in very desirable geographies. But outside that, it is definitely possible to have success as an interesting person with good grades and no pre-existing legal ties.

[Anonymous User]

I feel like Penn students just don’t apply broadly. There’s not enough judges in EDPA for everyone.

[Anonymous User]

Can we just admit the whole process is corrupt? I know so many top of the class people on Law Review who got nothing and I know several below median people who got clerkships because of their parents/families connections

How do you even know how these people got their clerkships or what their grades were? You don’t know anyone’s grades below cum laude cutoff. Stop worrying about everyone else. The same thing happens with OCI and other jobs. If anything the clerkship process favors people who have had more interesting lives than growing up in NYC/NYC suburbs to prep school to top college to NYC big law.

I agree its probably not best characterized as "corrupt" but its just incorrect the process favors those who didn't go to a prep school/top college?? Judges pretty clearly preference/have some bias in favor of people who went to top undergrads, especially HYPSM grads. Not that its corrupt, it's just the judge favoring their undergrad or finding another way to tiebreak between equal candidates. But it's definitely descriptively accurate.

[Anonymous User]

Can we just admit the whole process is corrupt? I know so many top of the class people on Law Review who got nothing and I know several below median people who got clerkships because of their parents/families connections

Law review meaningless at Penn and judges have caught on. Look at the 2023 honors list. Very loose correlation to LR.

Law Review is truly meaningless to many, probably most, judges now. It’s not even a minor boost to have it for the judges who don’t care. This isn’t just Penn it’s across the board at the top schools because selection is no longer tied to grades or even actual legal writing.

I posted this in another thread, but it’s pretty hard to take law review even remotely seriously when you see things like a T6 Magna applicant, with a pristine writing sample, who was a literal award winning journalist, not make law review.

Maybe true at penn but don't think it's true as a blanket statement for top schools - the non-fedsoc people at my HYSC who were on LR but non-honors/cum laude had markedly better results than their peers with equal/better grades. Seemed to effectively guarantee a non-feeder circuit clerkship.

[Anonymous User]

Can we just admit the whole process is corrupt? I know so many top of the class people on Law Review who got nothing and I know several below median people who got clerkships because of their parents/families connections

How do you even know how these people got their clerkships or what their grades were? You don’t know anyone’s grades below cum laude cutoff. Stop worrying about everyone else. The same thing happens with OCI and other jobs. If anything the clerkship process favors people who have had more interesting lives than growing up in NYC/NYC suburbs to prep school to top college to NYC big law.

I agree its probably not best characterized as "corrupt" but its just incorrect the process favors those who didn't go to a prep school/top college?? Judges pretty clearly preference/have some bias in favor of people who went to top undergrads, especially HYPSM grads. Not that its corrupt, it's just the judge favoring their undergrad or finding another way to tiebreak between equal candidates. But it's definitely descriptively accurate.

That’s not what the above post said at all? Was talking about the people who go straight from elite HS to college to law school with maybe a paralegal stint after college and have resumes that look just like everyone else’s. Probably better to be the top state school kid who did a Fulbright or something else similarly interesting before Penn Law.

[Anonymous User]

Can we just admit the whole process is corrupt? I know so many top of the class people on Law Review who got nothing and I know several below median people who got clerkships because of their parents/families connections

Law review meaningless at Penn and judges have caught on. Look at the 2023 honors list. Very loose correlation to LR.

Law Review is truly meaningless to many, probably most, judges now. It’s not even a minor boost to have it for the judges who don’t care. This isn’t just Penn it’s across the board at the top schools because selection is no longer tied to grades or even actual legal writing.

I posted this in another thread, but it’s pretty hard to take law review even remotely seriously when you see things like a T6 Magna applicant, with a pristine writing sample, who was a literal award winning journalist, not make law review.

Maybe true at penn but don't think it's true as a blanket statement for top schools - the non-fedsoc people at my HYSC who were on LR but non-honors/cum laude had markedly better results than their peers with equal/better grades. Seemed to effectively guarantee a non-feeder circuit clerkship.

I think Penn LR is less of a gold star than HLR, which to my knowledge actually still has a write on process that includes legal writing

[Anonymous User]

Can we just admit the whole process is corrupt? I know so many top of the class people on Law Review who got nothing and I know several below median people who got clerkships because of their parents/families connections

Law review meaningless at Penn and judges have caught on. Look at the 2023 honors list. Very loose correlation to LR.

Law Review is truly meaningless to many, probably most, judges now. It’s not even a minor boost to have it for the judges who don’t care. This isn’t just Penn it’s across the board at the top schools because selection is no longer tied to grades or even actual legal writing.

I posted this in another thread, but it’s pretty hard to take law review even remotely seriously when you see things like a T6 Magna applicant, with a pristine writing sample, who was a literal award winning journalist, not make law review.

Maybe true at penn but don't think it's true as a blanket statement for top schools - the non-fedsoc people at my HYSC who were on LR but non-honors/cum laude had markedly better results than their peers with equal/better grades. Seemed to effectively guarantee a non-feeder circuit clerkship.

Three questions here:

(1) whether LR matters for candidates with honors [yes]

(2) whether LR matters for candidates without honors [yes, and more than for (1)]

(3) whether judges should care about Penn’s LR [no - see the recent honors list. About half of coif wasn’t LR. Admission is based on an east-to-cheat Bluebook exam, hue, and a qualified grades metric]

[Anonymous User]

Can we just admit the whole process is corrupt? I know so many top of the class people on Law Review who got nothing and I know several below median people who got clerkships because of their parents/families connections

Law review meaningless at Penn and judges have caught on. Look at the 2023 honors list. Very loose correlation to LR.

Law Review is truly meaningless to many, probably most, judges now. It’s not even a minor boost to have it for the judges who don’t care. This isn’t just Penn it’s across the board at the top schools because selection is no longer tied to grades or even actual legal writing.

I posted this in another thread, but it’s pretty hard to take law review even remotely seriously when you see things like a T6 Magna applicant, with a pristine writing sample, who was a literal award winning journalist, not make law review.

Maybe true at penn but don't think it's true as a blanket statement for top schools - the non-fedsoc people at my HYSC who were on LR but non-honors/cum laude had markedly better results than their peers with equal/better grades. Seemed to effectively guarantee a non-feeder circuit clerkship.

Three questions here:

(1) whether LR matters for candidates with honors [yes]

(2) whether LR matters for candidates without honors [yes, and more than for (1)]

(3) whether judges should care about Penn’s LR [no - see the recent honors list. About half of coif wasn’t LR. Admission is based on an east-to-cheat Bluebook exam, hue, and a qualified grades metric]

Yeah, that's fair! The OP I was responding to was making a blanket statement about LR at topic schools and, like, maybe that point holds true for Penn, but I definitely don't think it should be exported out. On plan judges definitely still care about it from some schools

[Anonymous User]

Judges have no idea about the selection process for PLR v HLR or YLJ, so that's not true. And every school uses diversity to some extent in LR selection, so that isn't an argument to the contrary.

[Anonymous User]

One thing is clear: for a school ranked as high as we are, our clerkship outcomes are pretty dismal. I know some people on this thread will fight me on this because they got an EDPA clerkship, but taken as a whole, the outcomes are very poor. I don't know why that is exactly but I don't get paid tons of money a year either.

Our Fed Soc Chapter doesn't place people like that of similarly situated schools. Our professors barely have connections outside of Philadelphia. And the faculty apparently won't make calls unless pushed and begged. That's a disaster.

[Anonymous User]

Would love a semi comprehensive list of the best classes to take during 2L for clerkship/clerkship recommendation purposes.

[Anonymous User]

Can we just admit the whole process is corrupt? I know so many top of the class people on Law Review who got nothing and I know several below median people who got clerkships because of their parents/families connections

Law review meaningless at Penn and judges have caught on. Look at the 2023 honors list. Very loose correlation to LR.

Law Review is truly meaningless to many, probably most, judges now. It’s not even a minor boost to have it for the judges who don’t care. This isn’t just Penn it’s across the board at the top schools because selection is no longer tied to grades or even actual legal writing.

I posted this in another thread, but it’s pretty hard to take law review even remotely seriously when you see things like a T6 Magna applicant, with a pristine writing sample, who was a literal award winning journalist, not make law review.

Maybe true at penn but don't think it's true as a blanket statement for top schools - the non-fedsoc people at my HYSC who were on LR but non-honors/cum laude had markedly better results than their peers with equal/better grades. Seemed to effectively guarantee a non-feeder circuit clerkship.

Three questions here:

(1) whether LR matters for candidates with honors [yes]

(2) whether LR matters for candidates without honors [yes, and more than for (1)]

(3) whether judges should care about Penn’s LR [no - see the recent honors list. About half of coif wasn’t LR. Admission is based on an east-to-cheat Bluebook exam, hue, and a qualified grades metric]

Yeah, that's fair! The OP I was responding to was making a blanket statement about LR at topic schools and, like, maybe that point holds true for Penn, but I definitely don't think it should be exported out. On plan judges definitely still care about it from some schools

What is the view at other schools or “HYSC” on whether moot court participation matters at all

[Anonymous User]

Can we just admit the whole process is corrupt? I know so many top of the class people on Law Review who got nothing and I know several below median people who got clerkships because of their parents/families connections

Law review meaningless at Penn and judges have caught on. Look at the 2023 honors list. Very loose correlation to LR.

Law Review is truly meaningless to many, probably most, judges now. It’s not even a minor boost to have it for the judges who don’t care. This isn’t just Penn it’s across the board at the top schools because selection is no longer tied to grades or even actual legal writing.

I posted this in another thread, but it’s pretty hard to take law review even remotely seriously when you see things like a T6 Magna applicant, with a pristine writing sample, who was a literal award winning journalist, not make law review.

Maybe true at penn but don't think it's true as a blanket statement for top schools - the non-fedsoc people at my HYSC who were on LR but non-honors/cum laude had markedly better results than their peers with equal/better grades. Seemed to effectively guarantee a non-feeder circuit clerkship.

Three questions here:

(1) whether LR matters for candidates with honors [yes]

(2) whether LR matters for candidates without honors [yes, and more than for (1)]

(3) whether judges should care about Penn’s LR [no - see the recent honors list. About half of coif wasn’t LR. Admission is based on an east-to-cheat Bluebook exam, hue, and a qualified grades metric]

Yeah, that's fair! The OP I was responding to was making a blanket statement about LR at topic schools and, like, maybe that point holds true for Penn, but I definitely don't think it should be exported out. On plan judges definitely still care about it from some schools

What is the view at other schools or “HYSC” on whether moot court participation matters at all

Can only speak to HLS

Making the finals for Ames matters and winning/best oralist matters a lot. Getting to the finals pretty much guarantees a decent clerkship (or two!) and it's not uncommon to see someone who won Ames but didn't graduate with honors end up with doing district + appellate, one of which is with a semi-feeder or on a competitive court.

Otherwise, just participating or getting to semis doesn't seem to really matter very much if at all.

[Anonymous User]

Would love a semi comprehensive list of the best classes to take during 2L for clerkship/clerkship recommendation purposes.

I’m a bit older but I got a COA and I also was frustrated with the support for clerkships at Penn when I was there. I would like some useful info to go into this thread so here is my opinion. My general advice is either seek out professors who can really comment on your writing in detail or who got to know you well through class.

Bankruptcy with Skeel. He is a very good recommender and actually makes an effort to get to know students in class. He is very kind and approachable. Probably would be willing to help you even if you aren’t a killer applicant. He’s well connected in the 3rd Circuit and many judges will recognize his name throughout the country.

Crim Pro with Bibas, at least when he was a professor, he was solid if you were a strong applicant and busted your ass in his class. He also typically got to know people in his class even though he was super awkward. I’m not sure how he would be as a recommender now that he is on the bench.

Admin with Lee was pretty good and she also was generally willing to help applicants who weren’t top tier. It was pretty easy to get to know her in class but now that she’s the dean I’m not sure if it will be the same.

If you had Berman 1L and did well, absolutely take his Sports as Legal Systems class and participate a lot, especially if you are even remotely interested in sports. This class was kind of his pet project and it’s very easy to get to know him on a personal level if you take that class. He’s a strong recommender and a pretty widely respected academic.

I’d also recommend taking anything taught by your 1L LPS instructor. Some of them used to teach appellate or trial advocacy or some other writing type class during 2L. This is a great way to stay in touch with someone who can actually talk about your writing in a letter.

[Anonymous User]

Berman isn’t a strong recommender. And Bibas sent my stuff to NYC judges but I didn’t get a single whiff.

[Anonymous User]

Chris told me Lee was a strong recommender. Since she can see the recommendation letters, I attribute some weight to her assessment. She also seems invested in the process.

[Anonymous User]

Chris told me Lee was a strong recommender. Since she can see the recommendation letters, I attribute some weight to her assessment. She also seems invested in the process.

One of the judges I interviewed with actually asked me about something Professor Lee wrote in her letter when I interviewed. It caught me very off guard because it was related to a specific admin law topic but apparently whatever she said peaked this judge’s interest quite a bit. She also wrote the letter for me on fairly short notice and I honestly barely knew her. I just did well on her exam. She’s definitely a very strong recommender.

You can kind of tell when you ask the professors if they care much about helping out. At a minimum, the professor should want your transcript, resume, and a list of the judges you are targeting with the rationale for why along with any potential hooks or connections they can play up for those judges. The professor should also be happy to talk to you in person or on the phone about the application process and your background and interests.

[Anonymous User]

Shanor is an excellent recommender. Have also heard good things about Bibas.

[Anonymous User]

Judges have no idea about the selection process for PLR v HLR or YLJ, so that's not true. And every school uses diversity to some extent in LR selection, so that isn't an argument to the contrary.

Penn law review is simply not as impressive as HLR. No need to pretend we’re HLS even if OCS is pushing that idea. Judges that care about it care but plenty (especially conservative) don’t care at all.

[Anonymous User]

If you want to clerk in Philly, take appellate ad with Sweitzer. Last year a 3d Cir. judge asked him for a recommendation (who will be clerking, despite non honors/LR). If you do well in his class, he'll go to bat for you.

[Anonymous User]

I‘ve heard good things about Penn’s fedsoc resources. I think the issue lies with comparing Penn to HLS or Chicago. Compare us to NYU or CLS and fedsoc kids seem to do very well. Agree that our professors don’t seem especially well connected especially outside Philly.

[Anonymous User]

Did anyone get even a mere interview in DDC or EDVA?

[Anonymous User]

Berman isn’t a strong recommender. And Bibas sent my stuff to NYC judges but I didn’t get a single whiff.

Berman had a fairly good track record for c/o 2023 folks he wrote recs for. He’s most helpful if you take a second class with him (and ideally Constitutional Interpretation over Sports Law).

Your Bibas comment comes off as a bit entitled. Bibas sending your materials likely helped you get out of the pile for a closer second look. But judges are not required to interview you just because another judge sent them the package.

[Anonymous User]

1L here, is Heaton a good recommender? How about Feldman or Fisch?