Let's Talk 9th Circuit! Forum

[Anonymous User]

Anyone have insight into Holly Thomas? She just posted an 2023 opening this week and has (according to my schools clerkship office) already started interviewing?

Did a clerk drop and, if so, anyone know if Thomas is maybe a clerkship to avoid?

I had run ins with her outside the clerking sphere and she is super nice and also fairly reserved and quiet. Of course, people like that can still be bad bosses, but my impression with her was positive so I think that leans towards her being a good boss.

[Anonymous User]

Anyone have insight into Holly Thomas? She just posted an 2023 opening this week and has (according to my schools clerkship office) already started interviewing?

Did a clerk drop and, if so, anyone know if Thomas is maybe a clerkship to avoid?

I had run ins with her outside the clerking sphere and she is super nice and also fairly reserved and quiet. Of course, people like that can still be bad bosses, but my impression with her was positive so I think that leans towards her being a good boss.

Not OP, but OSCAR's showing that it's been filled already - is that accurate?

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone have a cutoff age for judges when they apply? I was thinking about applying to Gould, but was worried about his age and health. Same with a few other judges across different circuits

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone have a cutoff age for judges when they apply? I was thinking about applying to Gould, but was worried about his age and health. Same with a few other judges across different circuits

That's a somewhat valid concern, but Judge Gould isn't close to the age where that would concern me unless a recent clerk or someone else in the know told me about specific health issues or other concerns. Plenty of judges operate at close to their best well into their 80s.

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone have a cutoff age for judges when they apply? I was thinking about applying to Gould, but was worried about his age and health. Same with a few other judges across different circuits

That's a somewhat valid concern, but Judge Gould isn't close to the age where that would concern me unless a recent clerk or someone else in the know told me about specific health issues or other concerns. Plenty of judges operate at close to their best well into their 80s.

Judge Gould has MS and is wheelchair-bound. He's also 77. I don't think that's necessarily disqualifying, but if you look at an actuarial table I'm pretty sure he has a higher than average risk of dying in the next year (or any year thereafter).

[Anonymous User]

Anyone have a sense of what Judge Johnstone's looking for in his clerks/how he is as a boss? I've got some strong Montana connections--does he prioritize those?

[Anonymous User]

Any recent info on how with it or senile Bea is? He just posted three slots for 2025… he’ll be over 90 years old!

[Anonymous User]

Any recent info on how with it or senile Bea is? He just posted three slots for 2025… he’ll be over 90 years old!

When i saw Bea a few years ago he was super healthy and not senile. feel like this guy is gooing to live to 100. no idea if he has digressed.

[Anonymous User]

Any thoughts on Koh feeder potential? Seems like she's hired a few LR EIC/top of the class types.

[Anonymous User]

Clerked for a 90-year-old judge (albeit not in CA9) who was fantastic and totally with it and sharp. You'll see if they are senile in the interview.

[Anonymous User]

Any thoughts on Koh feeder potential? Seems like she's hired a few LR EIC/top of the class types.

Didn't Justice Jackson just hire a former Koh clerk? I might be misremembering the last David Lat update.

[Anonymous User]

Irrespective of politics, does anyone have a sense of how VanDyke is to clerk for?

[Anonymous User]

Irrespective of politics, does anyone have a sense of how VanDyke is to clerk for?

No idea about how he is as a boss, but I would note that there are other considerations besides “politics” that one should take into account before clerking for Van Dyke. The man is an absolute clown.

[Anonymous User]

Irrespective of politics, does anyone have a sense of how VanDyke is to clerk for?

No idea about how he is as a boss, but I would note that there are other considerations besides “politics” that one should take into account before clerking for Van Dyke. The man is an absolute clown.

That's one side of the aisle's view. I would imagine that most state SG's offices/conservative appellate groups would like a LVD clerk, right? My concern is more if he's good as a boss or not.

[Anonymous User]

Irrespective of politics, does anyone have a sense of how VanDyke is to clerk for?

No idea about how he is as a boss, but I would note that there are other considerations besides “politics” that one should take into account before clerking for Van Dyke. The man is an absolute clown.

That's one side of the aisle's view. I would imagine that most state SG's offices/conservative appellate groups would like a LVD clerk, right? My concern is more if he's good as a boss or not.

I know many connected elite conservatives that share a similar distaste for Van Dyke. But a Ninth Circuit clerkship is a Ninth Circuit clerkship. I think it depends on whether you care about being connected to that name for the rest of your career.

[Anonymous User]

Irrespective of politics, does anyone have a sense of how VanDyke is to clerk for?

No idea about how he is as a boss, but I would note that there are other considerations besides “politics” that one should take into account before clerking for Van Dyke. The man is an absolute clown.

That's one side of the aisle's view. I would imagine that most state SG's offices/conservative appellate groups would like a LVD clerk, right? My concern is more if he's good as a boss or not.

I know many connected elite conservatives that share a similar distaste for Van Dyke. But a Ninth Circuit clerkship is a Ninth Circuit clerkship. I think it depends on whether you care about being connected to that name for the rest of your career.

How much does judge reputation actually rub off on a clerk, though? Like I might have a vague sense of political affiliation from, say, an Oldham or Ho clerk, but even with them I'd be a bit disinclined to attribute those judge's priors to them. And the Ninth is the Ninth... I'll have to sleep on it before I send in an app.

[Anonymous User]

Irrespective of politics, does anyone have a sense of how VanDyke is to clerk for?

No idea about how he is as a boss, but I would note that there are other considerations besides “politics” that one should take into account before clerking for Van Dyke. The man is an absolute clown.

That's one side of the aisle's view. I would imagine that most state SG's offices/conservative appellate groups would like a LVD clerk, right? My concern is more if he's good as a boss or not.

Correct, and his clerks like him. LVD makes sense if you are targeting the world of conservative impact litigation, like what you describe (and I'd also throw in future GOP presidential administration jobs). You'd need to know going in that he's strongly disliked/not taken seriously by the other side and that some non-conservative employers could red flag you for that reason. In most of biglaw, I think a CA9 clerkship is still a CA9 clerkship and you'd be fine, but if you're not looking for a career in conservative advocacy it might be safer to choose a more run-of-the-mill GOP nominee if you have that option.

[Anonymous User]

A lot of conservative legal elite types view VanDyke as an embarrassment. Not all, but quite a few. If you’re in Fed Soc I don’t see why you’d prefer him over any other judge unless you had a particular connection to the area or something.

[Anonymous User]

Irrespective of politics, does anyone have a sense of how VanDyke is to clerk for?

No idea about how he is as a boss, but I would note that there are other considerations besides “politics” that one should take into account before clerking for Van Dyke. The man is an absolute clown.

That's one side of the aisle's view. I would imagine that most state SG's offices/conservative appellate groups would like a LVD clerk, right? My concern is more if he's good as a boss or not.

Correct, and his clerks like him. LVD makes sense if you are targeting the world of conservative impact litigation, like what you describe (and I'd also throw in future GOP presidential administration jobs). You'd need to know going in that he's strongly disliked/not taken seriously by the other side and that some non-conservative employers could red flag you for that reason. In most of biglaw, I think a CA9 clerkship is still a CA9 clerkship and you'd be fine, but if you're not looking for a career in conservative advocacy it might be safer to choose a more run-of-the-mill GOP nominee if you have that option.

Coming from a CA9 clerk: what's with this circlejerk about "a Ninth Circuit clerkship is a Ninth Circuit clerkship"?

I can't think of anyone that I respect and take seriously that views a CA9 clerkship as more prestigious / better regarded than any other circuit clerkship. Obviously there's variance across individual judges, but the median CA9 clerkship doesn't seem more impressive to me than the median CAX clerkship.

The only circuit I think is clearly above the others based on the court and not the individual judge is the D.C. Cir., and the only circuit I think is clearly below the others based on the court and not the individual judge is CA8 (and maaaybe CA1). But even on CA8 & CA1, there are judges I hugely respect and would have loved to clerk for.

Not sure whether this CA9 hype was ever justified, but let's nip it in the bud lest we get clowned on by clerks from other circuits.

[Anonymous User]

Irrespective of politics, does anyone have a sense of how VanDyke is to clerk for?

No idea about how he is as a boss, but I would note that there are other considerations besides “politics” that one should take into account before clerking for Van Dyke. The man is an absolute clown.

That's one side of the aisle's view. I would imagine that most state SG's offices/conservative appellate groups would like a LVD clerk, right? My concern is more if he's good as a boss or not.

Correct, and his clerks like him. LVD makes sense if you are targeting the world of conservative impact litigation, like what you describe (and I'd also throw in future GOP presidential administration jobs). You'd need to know going in that he's strongly disliked/not taken seriously by the other side and that some non-conservative employers could red flag you for that reason. In most of biglaw, I think a CA9 clerkship is still a CA9 clerkship and you'd be fine, but if you're not looking for a career in conservative advocacy it might be safer to choose a more run-of-the-mill GOP nominee if you have that option.

Coming from a CA9 clerk: what's with this circlejerk about "a Ninth Circuit clerkship is a Ninth Circuit clerkship"?

I can't think of anyone that I respect and take seriously that views a CA9 clerkship as more prestigious / better regarded than any other circuit clerkship. Obviously there's variance across individual judges, but the median CA9 clerkship doesn't seem more impressive to me than the median CAX clerkship.

The only circuit I think is clearly above the others based on the court and not the individual judge is the D.C. Cir., and the only circuit I think is clearly below the others based on the court and not the individual judge is CA8 (and maaaybe CA1). But even on CA8 & CA1, there are judges I hugely respect and would have loved to clerk for.

Not sure whether this CA9 hype was ever justified, but let's nip it in the bud lest we get clowned on by clerks from other circuits.

Yeah I just meant it’s a circuit clerkship. Didn’t mean to say ninth is better than other circuits.

[Anonymous User]

Irrespective of politics, does anyone have a sense of how VanDyke is to clerk for?

No idea about how he is as a boss, but I would note that there are other considerations besides “politics” that one should take into account before clerking for Van Dyke. The man is an absolute clown.

That's one side of the aisle's view. I would imagine that most state SG's offices/conservative appellate groups would like a LVD clerk, right? My concern is more if he's good as a boss or not.

Correct, and his clerks like him. LVD makes sense if you are targeting the world of conservative impact litigation, like what you describe (and I'd also throw in future GOP presidential administration jobs). You'd need to know going in that he's strongly disliked/not taken seriously by the other side and that some non-conservative employers could red flag you for that reason. In most of biglaw, I think a CA9 clerkship is still a CA9 clerkship and you'd be fine, but if you're not looking for a career in conservative advocacy it might be safer to choose a more run-of-the-mill GOP nominee if you have that option.

Coming from a CA9 clerk: what's with this circlejerk about "a Ninth Circuit clerkship is a Ninth Circuit clerkship"?

I can't think of anyone that I respect and take seriously that views a CA9 clerkship as more prestigious / better regarded than any other circuit clerkship. Obviously there's variance across individual judges, but the median CA9 clerkship doesn't seem more impressive to me than the median CAX clerkship.

The only circuit I think is clearly above the others based on the court and not the individual judge is the D.C. Cir., and the only circuit I think is clearly below the others based on the court and not the individual judge is CA8 (and maaaybe CA1). But even on CA8 & CA1, there are judges I hugely respect and would have loved to clerk for.

Not sure whether this CA9 hype was ever justified, but let's nip it in the bud lest we get clowned on by clerks from other circuits.

It's because for 40+ years, the 9th circuit in aggregate has sent the 2nd most clerks to SCOTUS behind CADC. This is also usually true on a year by year basis.

That doesn't mean the median judge in CA9 is better than the median judge in CAx.

And though this has been the pattern for 40+ years, it doesn't mean it will continue. That's TBD, and my money is on no given the weakened liberal presence and that the top conservative talent has many other options.

To me, it's like saying ' W&C/Susman/MoT has awesome litigators'. Does mean no other firm has awesome litigators? No of course not. But does the historic reputation and subsequent prestige continue to attract the best and brightest? Of course. All in all, it's just a convenient shorthand.

I wouldn't read too much into it either way.

[Anonymous User]

Irrespective of politics, does anyone have a sense of how VanDyke is to clerk for?

No idea about how he is as a boss, but I would note that there are other considerations besides “politics” that one should take into account before clerking for Van Dyke. The man is an absolute clown.

That's one side of the aisle's view. I would imagine that most state SG's offices/conservative appellate groups would like a LVD clerk, right? My concern is more if he's good as a boss or not.

Correct, and his clerks like him. LVD makes sense if you are targeting the world of conservative impact litigation, like what you describe (and I'd also throw in future GOP presidential administration jobs). You'd need to know going in that he's strongly disliked/not taken seriously by the other side and that some non-conservative employers could red flag you for that reason. In most of biglaw, I think a CA9 clerkship is still a CA9 clerkship and you'd be fine, but if you're not looking for a career in conservative advocacy it might be safer to choose a more run-of-the-mill GOP nominee if you have that option.

Coming from a CA9 clerk: what's with this circlejerk about "a Ninth Circuit clerkship is a Ninth Circuit clerkship"?

I can't think of anyone that I respect and take seriously that views a CA9 clerkship as more prestigious / better regarded than any other circuit clerkship. Obviously there's variance across individual judges, but the median CA9 clerkship doesn't seem more impressive to me than the median CAX clerkship.

The only circuit I think is clearly above the others based on the court and not the individual judge is the D.C. Cir., and the only circuit I think is clearly below the others based on the court and not the individual judge is CA8 (and maaaybe CA1). But even on CA8 & CA1, there are judges I hugely respect and would have loved to clerk for.

Not sure whether this CA9 hype was ever justified, but let's nip it in the bud lest we get clowned on by clerks from other circuits.

How are CA8 and CA1 below the others? What metrics are we using here?

[Anonymous User]

Irrespective of politics, does anyone have a sense of how VanDyke is to clerk for?

No idea about how he is as a boss, but I would note that there are other considerations besides “politics” that one should take into account before clerking for Van Dyke. The man is an absolute clown.

That's one side of the aisle's view. I would imagine that most state SG's offices/conservative appellate groups would like a LVD clerk, right? My concern is more if he's good as a boss or not.

Correct, and his clerks like him. LVD makes sense if you are targeting the world of conservative impact litigation, like what you describe (and I'd also throw in future GOP presidential administration jobs). You'd need to know going in that he's strongly disliked/not taken seriously by the other side and that some non-conservative employers could red flag you for that reason. In most of biglaw, I think a CA9 clerkship is still a CA9 clerkship and you'd be fine, but if you're not looking for a career in conservative advocacy it might be safer to choose a more run-of-the-mill GOP nominee if you have that option.

Coming from a CA9 clerk: what's with this circlejerk about "a Ninth Circuit clerkship is a Ninth Circuit clerkship"?

I can't think of anyone that I respect and take seriously that views a CA9 clerkship as more prestigious / better regarded than any other circuit clerkship. Obviously there's variance across individual judges, but the median CA9 clerkship doesn't seem more impressive to me than the median CAX clerkship.

The only circuit I think is clearly above the others based on the court and not the individual judge is the D.C. Cir., and the only circuit I think is clearly below the others based on the court and not the individual judge is CA8 (and maaaybe CA1). But even on CA8 & CA1, there are judges I hugely respect and would have loved to clerk for.

Not sure whether this CA9 hype was ever justified, but let's nip it in the bud lest we get clowned on by clerks from other circuits.

How are CA8 and CA1 below the others? What metrics are we using here?

Under the modern prevailing view that judge matters more than circuit (which I think most circuit clerks would agree with), imo CA8 and to a lesser extent CA1 lack quality and depth. But like I said previously, there are rockstar and respected judges on both of those circuits. Just less so compared to any other circuit.

[Anonymous User]

Irrespective of politics, does anyone have a sense of how VanDyke is to clerk for?

No idea about how he is as a boss, but I would note that there are other considerations besides “politics” that one should take into account before clerking for Van Dyke. The man is an absolute clown.

That's one side of the aisle's view. I would imagine that most state SG's offices/conservative appellate groups would like a LVD clerk, right? My concern is more if he's good as a boss or not.

Correct, and his clerks like him. LVD makes sense if you are targeting the world of conservative impact litigation, like what you describe (and I'd also throw in future GOP presidential administration jobs). You'd need to know going in that he's strongly disliked/not taken seriously by the other side and that some non-conservative employers could red flag you for that reason. In most of biglaw, I think a CA9 clerkship is still a CA9 clerkship and you'd be fine, but if you're not looking for a career in conservative advocacy it might be safer to choose a more run-of-the-mill GOP nominee if you have that option.

Coming from a CA9 clerk: what's with this circlejerk about "a Ninth Circuit clerkship is a Ninth Circuit clerkship"?

I can't think of anyone that I respect and take seriously that views a CA9 clerkship as more prestigious / better regarded than any other circuit clerkship. Obviously there's variance across individual judges, but the median CA9 clerkship doesn't seem more impressive to me than the median CAX clerkship.

The only circuit I think is clearly above the others based on the court and not the individual judge is the D.C. Cir., and the only circuit I think is clearly below the others based on the court and not the individual judge is CA8 (and maaaybe CA1). But even on CA8 & CA1, there are judges I hugely respect and would have loved to clerk for.

Not sure whether this CA9 hype was ever justified, but let's nip it in the bud lest we get clowned on by clerks from other circuits.

How are CA8 and CA1 below the others? What metrics are we using here?

Under the modern prevailing view that judge matters more than circuit (which I think most circuit clerks would agree with), imo CA8 and to a lesser extent CA1 lack quality and depth. But like I said previously, there are rockstar and respected judges on both of those circuits. Just less so compared to any other circuit.

Yeah, I think we generally agree, but this doesn’t make much sense to me. If that’s how you rank Circuits, then CA2 and CA9 would be better than the others based off the number of stars in those Circuits? I can’t imagine most people being super impressed by the majority of the judges from CA10 or CA 11 or whatever. But I still think those are good Circuits to clerk on. Also, CA1 has like 4 judges and one of them is Judge Barron and Breyer and Souter came from there. Feels weird to toss them in, but I get that the size is weird and probably why you noted it.

[Anonymous User]

No idea about how he is as a boss, but I would note that there are other considerations besides “politics” that one should take into account before clerking for Van Dyke. The man is an absolute clown.

That's one side of the aisle's view. I would imagine that most state SG's offices/conservative appellate groups would like a LVD clerk, right? My concern is more if he's good as a boss or not.

Correct, and his clerks like him. LVD makes sense if you are targeting the world of conservative impact litigation, like what you describe (and I'd also throw in future GOP presidential administration jobs). You'd need to know going in that he's strongly disliked/not taken seriously by the other side and that some non-conservative employers could red flag you for that reason. In most of biglaw, I think a CA9 clerkship is still a CA9 clerkship and you'd be fine, but if you're not looking for a career in conservative advocacy it might be safer to choose a more run-of-the-mill GOP nominee if you have that option.

Coming from a CA9 clerk: what's with this circlejerk about "a Ninth Circuit clerkship is a Ninth Circuit clerkship"?

I can't think of anyone that I respect and take seriously that views a CA9 clerkship as more prestigious / better regarded than any other circuit clerkship. Obviously there's variance across individual judges, but the median CA9 clerkship doesn't seem more impressive to me than the median CAX clerkship.

The only circuit I think is clearly above the others based on the court and not the individual judge is the D.C. Cir., and the only circuit I think is clearly below the others based on the court and not the individual judge is CA8 (and maaaybe CA1). But even on CA8 & CA1, there are judges I hugely respect and would have loved to clerk for.

Not sure whether this CA9 hype was ever justified, but let's nip it in the bud lest we get clowned on by clerks from other circuits.

How are CA8 and CA1 below the others? What metrics are we using here?

Under the modern prevailing view that judge matters more than circuit (which I think most circuit clerks would agree with), imo CA8 and to a lesser extent CA1 lack quality and depth. But like I said previously, there are rockstar and respected judges on both of those circuits. Just less so compared to any other circuit.

Yeah, I think we generally agree, but this doesn’t make much sense to me. If that’s how you rank Circuits, then CA2 and CA9 would be better than the others based off the number of stars in those Circuits? I can’t imagine most people being super impressed by the majority of the judges from CA10 or CA 11 or whatever. But I still think those are good Circuits to clerk on. Also, CA1 has like 4 judges and one of them is Judge Barron and Breyer and Souter came from there. Feels weird to toss them in, but I get that the size is weird and probably why you noted it.

I've also never heard the view that "CA8 and to a lesser extent CA1 lack quality or depth" by anybody except this poster - maybe CA8 is overlooked because it's the most "flyover" of all the circuits by geography, but CA6 (and CA10 except arguably Colorado) is also mostly flyover states and there are good judges (most reputation-wise and as bosses) on all of those courts. This forum keeps on wanting to "rank" the circuits, but that's pointless because it's really more about individual judges. I wouldn't be surprised if employers give a "boost" to applicants who applied in their local circuit, but if a California firm is between one applicant who clerked on CA1 and one who clerked on CA4 (for example), it's more likely to come down to which applicant is a better fit/more personable than some belief that CA4 has more "quality or depth" as a court.

And to get back on topic, I do think that clerking for VanDyke sends a signal that you're very conservative - which would probably be a boost if you're applying to conservative public interest groups/state AGs offices. For other employers, that could be a negative or they might not care if you seem smart and a good personal fit.