What do most SCOTUS clerks end up doing? Forum

[Anonymous User]

I went down a wiki rabbit hole not too long ago, and I decided to track what type of careers SCOTUS clerks fell into like 6-10 years after their clerkships ended. A small percentage will go into academia or high-level public service (judiciary, BigFed, etc.). A similarly small percentage will go into elite litigation boutiques (or even start their own such boutiques). But, somewhat depressingly, it seems like the majority ends up in BigLaw. Does that track? If so, that's kind of a letdown---to grind that hard for prestige only to end up in the same place as so many others.

[Anonymous User]

I went down a wiki rabbit hole not too long ago, and I decided to track what type of careers SCOTUS clerks fell into like 6-10 years after their clerkships ended. A small percentage will go into academia or high-level public service (judiciary, BigFed, etc.). A similarly small percentage will go into elite litigation boutiques (or even start their own such boutiques). But, somewhat depressingly, it seems like the majority ends up in BigLaw. Does that track? If so, that's kind of a letdown---to grind that hard for prestige only to end up in the same place as so many others.

I have no way of knowing this for sure, only anecdotes.
But the experience of a former supreme court clerk at biglaw is usually better than your average t14 grad grinding away in commercial litigation. Again. Just based on literally two convos. So, what do I know.

[Anonymous User]

I only know 3 younger SCOTUS clerks (under 50), so take what I say with a huge grain of salt. Two are pretty far up in the state AG offices (one is the SG of a state, and the other the head of a department). The third went to BL, then DOJ, and then general counsel for an agency, and is now a prof (she's the oldest one of these 3).

[Anonymous User]

David Lat puts out articles on this semi-regularly if you’re interested. Academia used to be very common but due to changes in the academic job market it’s become rare. Now the vast majority do biglaw or government (a mix of big fed and state SG’s offices, with a few AUSAs). Pretty much the same things feeder clerks do, but tilted towards Jones Day because of how cushy its I&A group is.

[Anonymous User]

David Lat puts out articles on this semi-regularly if you’re interested. Academia used to be very common but due to changes in the academic job market it’s become rare. Now the vast majority do biglaw or government (a mix of big fed and state SG’s offices, with a few AUSAs). Pretty much the same things feeder clerks do, but tilted towards Jones Day because of how cushy its I&A group is.

Hate to derail. but I'm curious. What changes do you mean specifically in the academic job market?

[Anonymous User]

David Lat puts out articles on this semi-regularly if you’re interested. Academia used to be very common but due to changes in the academic job market it’s become rare. Now the vast majority do biglaw or government (a mix of big fed and state SG’s offices, with a few AUSAs). Pretty much the same things feeder clerks do, but tilted towards Jones Day because of how cushy its I&A group is.

Hate to derail. but I'm curious. What changes do you mean specifically in the academic job market?

It's becoming far more common for entry level tenure-track applicants to have a Ph.D--and in many cases not any legal or clerking experience. I'm not sure if they're crowding out the traditional JD-only/SCOTUS clerk applicant. But schools seem much more interested in taking new faculty with some proven research track record and/or an "interdisciplinary" pitch.

More generally, in my anecdotal observation there has been a bit of a shift toward more empirical work and away from the purely "legal" scholarship among younger scholars. It's hard to say what exactly is causing this, but it might create a positive feedback loop as the "mold" of a young academic hotshot begins to look less like a SCOTUS clerk with a JD that they received magna/summa and more like a generic top-school graduate with with a PhD from a top program.

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone have a sense for what makes the Jones Day I&A group so attractive for SCOTUS clerks relative to other firms? I know they pay market bonuses, but that can't be the full story

[Anonymous User]

David Lat puts out articles on this semi-regularly if you’re interested. Academia used to be very common but due to changes in the academic job market it’s become rare. Now the vast majority do biglaw or government (a mix of big fed and state SG’s offices, with a few AUSAs). Pretty much the same things feeder clerks do, but tilted towards Jones Day because of how cushy its I&A group is.

Hate to derail. but I'm curious. What changes do you mean specifically in the academic job market?

Less focus on clerkships and more focus on publishing.

[Anonymous User]

David Lat puts out articles on this semi-regularly if you’re interested. Academia used to be very common but due to changes in the academic job market it’s become rare. Now the vast majority do biglaw or government (a mix of big fed and state SG’s offices, with a few AUSAs). Pretty much the same things feeder clerks do, but tilted towards Jones Day because of how cushy its I&A group is.

Hate to derail. but I'm curious. What changes do you mean specifically in the academic job market?

Less focus on clerkships and more focus on publishing.

I'd bet that this goes along with the increased emphasis on additional advanced degrees in legal academia - not sure which is the chicken and which is the egg, whether people do the degrees to have more time/opportunity to publish, or if publishing more is just a side effect of more people having advanced degrees, but I think they're related. And If you're combining the JD with another degree, the timing (and incentive) for something like clerking for SCOTUS gets more complicated.

[Anonymous User]

In ye olden days law professors were straight out of SCOTUS clerkships, which used to hire straight out of law school without even a COA clerkship. Since that time both the SCOTUS path and the academia path have lengthened considerably, especially the latter, to the degree that they’re pretty incompatible. Nobody wants the SCOTUS clerk with a year or two in an appellate shop anymore, they want the less good law student with a lot of pubs and a PhD. If you go the biglaw path, you need publications while working biglaw, which is really hard, so you basically have to do a fellowship, which means a poorly-paid move across the country with uncertain job prospects. Much easier to just make partner at Jones Day and keep some intellectual interests on the side.

[Anonymous User]

I went down a wiki rabbit hole not too long ago, and I decided to track what type of careers SCOTUS clerks fell into like 6-10 years after their clerkships ended. A small percentage will go into academia or high-level public service (judiciary, BigFed, etc.). A similarly small percentage will go into elite litigation boutiques (or even start their own such boutiques). But, somewhat depressingly, it seems like the majority ends up in BigLaw. Does that track? If so, that's kind of a letdown---to grind that hard for prestige only to end up in the same place as so many others.

I have no way of knowing this for sure, only anecdotes.
But the experience of a former supreme court clerk at biglaw is usually better than your average t14 grad grinding away in commercial litigation. Again. Just based on literally two convos. So, what do I know.

How so? Easier path to partnership? Lower expectations of client development? Opportunity to work exclusively on high-level appellate litigation (assuming the firm has a group like that)?

[Anonymous User]

I went down a wiki rabbit hole not too long ago, and I decided to track what type of careers SCOTUS clerks fell into like 6-10 years after their clerkships ended. A small percentage will go into academia or high-level public service (judiciary, BigFed, etc.). A similarly small percentage will go into elite litigation boutiques (or even start their own such boutiques). But, somewhat depressingly, it seems like the majority ends up in BigLaw. Does that track? If so, that's kind of a letdown---to grind that hard for prestige only to end up in the same place as so many others.

I have no way of knowing this for sure, only anecdotes.
But the experience of a former supreme court clerk at biglaw is usually better than your average t14 grad grinding away in commercial litigation. Again. Just based on literally two convos. So, what do I know.

How so? Easier path to partnership? Lower expectations of client development? Opportunity to work exclusively on high-level appellate litigation (assuming the firm has a group like that)?

All the above. The clear acumen of such practitioners attracts clients (and associates tbh) per se, even if those clients aren’t going to use those lawyers in particular. Plus, the obvious range of choices they have encourages better-than-normal internal treatment.

[Anonymous User]

I went down a wiki rabbit hole not too long ago, and I decided to track what type of careers SCOTUS clerks fell into like 6-10 years after their clerkships ended. A small percentage will go into academia or high-level public service (judiciary, BigFed, etc.). A similarly small percentage will go into elite litigation boutiques (or even start their own such boutiques). But, somewhat depressingly, it seems like the majority ends up in BigLaw. Does that track? If so, that's kind of a letdown---to grind that hard for prestige only to end up in the same place as so many others.

I have no way of knowing this for sure, only anecdotes.
But the experience of a former supreme court clerk at biglaw is usually better than your average t14 grad grinding away in commercial litigation. Again. Just based on literally two convos. So, what do I know.

How so? Easier path to partnership? Lower expectations of client development? Opportunity to work exclusively on high-level appellate litigation (assuming the firm has a group like that)?

All the above. The clear acumen of such practitioners attracts clients (and associates tbh) per se, even if those clients aren’t going to use those lawyers in particular. Plus, the obvious range of choices they have encourages better-than-normal internal treatment.

Does this better QOL and attracting clients and associates extend even a little bit to Circuit clerks or clerks for mega feeders (who didn't end up on SCOTUS) or is this really just a uniquely SCOTUS clerk thing.

[Anonymous User]

I went down a wiki rabbit hole not too long ago, and I decided to track what type of careers SCOTUS clerks fell into like 6-10 years after their clerkships ended. A small percentage will go into academia or high-level public service (judiciary, BigFed, etc.). A similarly small percentage will go into elite litigation boutiques (or even start their own such boutiques). But, somewhat depressingly, it seems like the majority ends up in BigLaw. Does that track? If so, that's kind of a letdown---to grind that hard for prestige only to end up in the same place as so many others.

I have no way of knowing this for sure, only anecdotes.
But the experience of a former supreme court clerk at biglaw is usually better than your average t14 grad grinding away in commercial litigation. Again. Just based on literally two convos. So, what do I know.

How so? Easier path to partnership? Lower expectations of client development? Opportunity to work exclusively on high-level appellate litigation (assuming the firm has a group like that)?

All the above. The clear acumen of such practitioners attracts clients (and associates tbh) per se, even if those clients aren’t going to use those lawyers in particular. Plus, the obvious range of choices they have encourages better-than-normal internal treatment.

Does this better QOL and attracting clients and associates extend even a little bit to Circuit clerks or clerks for mega feeders (who didn't end up on SCOTUS) or is this really just a uniquely SCOTUS clerk thing.

Clients have no idea what a "mega-feeder" is, so having a name like "Katsas" or "Srinivasan" on the firm's website won't bring in any business. If you're gunning for a position in a top appellate/SCOTUS practice group, then clerking for a prominent judge obviously will help. And if you ultimately get such a job, your work may be more interesting than the stuff normal associates get.

[Anonymous User]

I went down a wiki rabbit hole not too long ago, and I decided to track what type of careers SCOTUS clerks fell into like 6-10 years after their clerkships ended. A small percentage will go into academia or high-level public service (judiciary, BigFed, etc.). A similarly small percentage will go into elite litigation boutiques (or even start their own such boutiques). But, somewhat depressingly, it seems like the majority ends up in BigLaw. Does that track? If so, that's kind of a letdown---to grind that hard for prestige only to end up in the same place as so many others.

I have no way of knowing this for sure, only anecdotes.
But the experience of a former supreme court clerk at biglaw is usually better than your average t14 grad grinding away in commercial litigation. Again. Just based on literally two convos. So, what do I know.

How so? Easier path to partnership? Lower expectations of client development? Opportunity to work exclusively on high-level appellate litigation (assuming the firm has a group like that)?

All the above. The clear acumen of such practitioners attracts clients (and associates tbh) per se, even if those clients aren’t going to use those lawyers in particular. Plus, the obvious range of choices they have encourages better-than-normal internal treatment.

Does this better QOL and attracting clients and associates extend even a little bit to Circuit clerks or clerks for mega feeders (who didn't end up on SCOTUS) or is this really just a uniquely SCOTUS clerk thing.

IME it can, though like all things it depends and is easier if you went to YSH. But specialized biglaw appellate practices tend to avoid quite a bit of the grind, and a SCOTUS clerkship is not mandatory for those. Beyond that, the clerkship per se might not get you the plum assignments and away from doc review at a V5 firm, but you’ll be offered opportunities to prove yourself relative to your peers, and once people know you as a good writing/motions type, that can stick and do you a lot of favors.