Judges who female or LGBT law clerks should avoid Forum

[84651846190]

Jfc, I genuinely wonder how some TLSers can function irl. They must be absolutely paralyzed with fear about what others think about them.

[Anonymous User]

I worked with a judge whose name has been mentioned ITT. (Mods: PM me privately for proof, if you must.) The rumors here are garbage, in my own experience.

I'm all for sharing horror stories you know are true from your own experience, but it's another thing to play a tormented game of telephone when it comes to reputations.

[Nebby]

I worked with a judge whose name has been mentioned ITT. (Mods: PM me privately for proof, if you must.) The rumors here are garbage, in my own experience.

I'm all for sharing horror stories you know are true from your own experience, but it's another thing to play a tormented game of telephone when it comes to reputations.

Were you a female or LGBT law clerk?

[Anonymous User]

I worked with a judge whose name has been mentioned ITT. (Mods: PM me privately for proof, if you must.) The rumors here are garbage, in my own experience.

I'm all for sharing horror stories you know are true from your own experience, but it's another thing to play a tormented game of telephone when it comes to reputations.

Were you a female or LGBT law clerk?

I won't say, but I know people from both groups who were happy (as happy as could be). None ever mentioned the abuse shared by people here.

[Thesaurus]

I worked with a judge whose name has been mentioned ITT. (Mods: PM me privately for proof, if you must.) The rumors here are garbage, in my own experience.

I'm all for sharing horror stories you know are true from your own experience, but it's another thing to play a tormented game of telephone when it comes to reputations.

Were you a female or LGBT law clerk?

I won't say, but I know people from both groups who were happy (as happy as could be).

You wrote an anon post about other people’s good experiences working for a judge you didn’t name. It’s ok, you can tell us you’re a straight guy.

[Anonymous User]

I worked with a judge whose name has been mentioned ITT. (Mods: PM me privately for proof, if you must.) The rumors here are garbage, in my own experience.

I'm all for sharing horror stories you know are true from your own experience, but it's another thing to play a tormented game of telephone when it comes to reputations.

Were you a female or LGBT law clerk?

I won't say, but I know people from both groups who were happy (as happy as could be).

You wrote an anon post about other people’s good experiences working for a judge you didn’t name. It’s ok, you can tell us you’re a straight guy.

I'm clever enough to avoid outting myself by speaking from first person experience, if I were in any of those groups.

[Nebby]

I worked with a judge whose name has been mentioned ITT. (Mods: PM me privately for proof, if you must.) The rumors here are garbage, in my own experience.

I'm all for sharing horror stories you know are true from your own experience, but it's another thing to play a tormented game of telephone when it comes to reputations.

Were you a female or LGBT law clerk?

I won't say, but I know people from both groups who were happy (as happy as could be). None ever mentioned the abuse shared by people here.

Oh well, if they never told you, their BFF with whom they'd share even their darkest experiences, then you must be qualified to speak on their behalf. My bad buddy

[Anonymous User]

I worked with a judge whose name has been mentioned ITT. (Mods: PM me privately for proof, if you must.) The rumors here are garbage, in my own experience.

I'm all for sharing horror stories you know are true from your own experience, but it's another thing to play a tormented game of telephone when it comes to reputations.

Were you a female or LGBT law clerk?

I won't say, but I know people from both groups who were happy (as happy as could be). None ever mentioned the abuse shared by people here.

Oh well, if they never told you, their BFF with whom they'd share even their darkest experiences, then you must be qualified to speak on their behalf. My bad buddy

You learn a lot by spending 17 hours a day together.

-signing off

[84651846190]

I worked with a judge whose name has been mentioned ITT. (Mods: PM me privately for proof, if you must.) The rumors here are garbage, in my own experience.
I'm all for sharing horror stories you know are true from your own experience, but it's another thing to play a tormented game of telephone when it comes to reputations.

Were you a female or LGBT law clerk?

Ah, yes. The unassailable "but you're not high enough on the victim totem pole to have an opinion that counts" argument.

[Thesaurus]

I worked with a judge whose name has been mentioned ITT. (Mods: PM me privately for proof, if you must.) The rumors here are garbage, in my own experience.
I'm all for sharing horror stories you know are true from your own experience, but it's another thing to play a tormented game of telephone when it comes to reputations.

Were you a female or LGBT law clerk?

Ah, yes. The unassailable "but you're not high enough on the victim totem pole to have an opinion that counts" argument.

The argument Nebby was making is that if you’re not a member of XYZ group you don’t necessarily know if members of said group are being mistreated because you’re not necessarily around or paying attention when it happens.

[A. Nony Mouse]

To be fair, that anon could be oblivious, but you'd have to be really oblivious working in chambers with people. It's pretty small and it would be hard to miss if a co-clerk was being mistreated.

[84651846190]

I worked with a judge whose name has been mentioned ITT. (Mods: PM me privately for proof, if you must.) The rumors here are garbage, in my own experience.
I'm all for sharing horror stories you know are true from your own experience, but it's another thing to play a tormented game of telephone when it comes to reputations.

Were you a female or LGBT law clerk?

Ah, yes. The unassailable "but you're not high enough on the victim totem pole to have an opinion that counts" argument.

The argument Nebby was making is that if you’re not a member of XYZ group you don’t necessarily know if members of said group are being mistreated because you’re not necessarily around or paying attention when it happens.

You obviously haven't clerked. Every clerk ends up being close with his/her co-clerks, so it's highly unlikely that a clerk would "not be around or paying attention." Also, we're talking about judges who supposedly make their work environment so caustic that people in certain groups cannot function in the workplace. I find it hard to believe that such an environment could or would be isolated to just one person without anyone else noticing. It's a bit ridiculous to just write off what someone who has actually clerked for a judge knows about his/her judge, because of how close-knit every chambers is.

[Nebby]

I worked with a judge whose name has been mentioned ITT. (Mods: PM me privately for proof, if you must.) The rumors here are garbage, in my own experience.
I'm all for sharing horror stories you know are true from your own experience, but it's another thing to play a tormented game of telephone when it comes to reputations.

Were you a female or LGBT law clerk?

Ah, yes. The unassailable "but you're not high enough on the victim totem pole to have an opinion that counts" argument.

I didn't know one could successfully fish for red herring in that bulky, white armor--but you did it!

I asked that question because, in a thread about judges' mistreatment of women or LGBT clerks, whether someone is of those groups will tend to influence how much weight to give such an anecdotal opinion. Anon was giving an anecdotal opinion, and therefore it's valid to probe the extent that anecdote is representative of the topic (anti-lgbt and anti-woman mistreatment). Anon appears to be a straight white male, therefore it's only reasonable to give their anecdotal experience less weight in a thread specifically asking about experiences anon could never experience first-hand.

One wouldn't go asking for white people's anecdotal opinions when looking for anecdotal experiences of anti-black discrimination.

[Nebby]

To be fair, that anon could be oblivious, but you'd have to be really oblivious working in chambers with people. It's pretty small and it would be hard to miss if a co-clerk was being mistreated.

Anon said they know people from both groups, not that they co-clerked with people from both groups. Even then, aren't you folks who did clerkships always stressing how different every chamber is? How can you square that with a principle that "it would be hard to miss if a co-clerk was being mistreated?" Are all chambers different except that it would be difficult to know when another clerk is mistreated?

[84651846190]

Anon never said he/she was a straight white male, but don't let that get in the way of your overly reductive narrative.

[Nebby]

Anon never said he/she was a straight white male, but don't let that get in the way of your overly reductive narrative.

In this instance, refusal to answer the question is pretty good circumstantial evidence. Particularly in an anonymous setting.

[A. Nony Mouse]

To be fair, that anon could be oblivious, but you'd have to be really oblivious working in chambers with people. It's pretty small and it would be hard to miss if a co-clerk was being mistreated.

Anon said they know people from both groups, not that they co-clerked with people from both groups. Even then, aren't you folks who did clerkships always stressing how different every chamber is? How can you square that with a principle that "it would be hard to miss if a co-clerk was being mistreated?" Are all chambers different except that it would be difficult to know when another clerk is mistreated?

I (and the anon) was talking about clerks working for his/her judge in his/her chambers, not in other chambers.

Also just because chambers approach things differently doesn't mean you can't actually find out about what goes on in those chambers. I have a pretty good sense of how other judges in my district treated their clerks even though I didn't clerk for them. I have no idea how random Judge X across the country treats their clerks, of course. (Not that it matters since anon was talking about their own judge.)

[A. Nony Mouse]

Nebby, this probably isn't the hill to die on.

[Nebby]

What is dead may never die.

[Anonymous User]

I worked with a judge whose name has been mentioned ITT. (Mods: PM me privately for proof, if you must.) The rumors here are garbage, in my own experience.

I'm all for sharing horror stories you know are true from your own experience, but it's another thing to play a tormented game of telephone when it comes to reputations.

Were you a female or LGBT law clerk?

I won't say, but I know people from both groups who were happy (as happy as could be). None ever mentioned the abuse shared by people here.

Oh well, if they never told you, their BFF with whom they'd share even their darkest experiences, then you must be qualified to speak on their behalf. My bad buddy

You learn a lot by spending 17 hours a day together.

-signing off

Is the claim here that somehow clerkships are so unique that clerks will always tell their co-clerks about sexual, racial, or other harassment by their supervisor? Have none of the ongoing #metoo reveals taught us that victims do not always tell their coworkers (because that's what you are, coworkers first, friends second) about inappropriate behavior from their boss, especially not right when it happens? Is it not safe to say that a powerful judge, let's use Kozinski for the sake of argument, might wield the same level of control over your future career that, say, Louis CK might wield over that of a budding young comic?

Edit: didn't mean to post anonymously. -thebrownnote

[Mr. Blackacre]

Is the claim here that somehow clerkships are so unique that clerks will always tell their co-clerks about sexual, racial, or other harassment by their supervisor? Have none of the ongoing #metoo reveals taught us that victims do not always tell their coworkers (because that's what you are, coworkers first, friends second) about inappropriate behavior from their boss, especially not right when it happens? Is it not safe to say that a powerful judge, let's use Kozinski for the sake of argument, might wield the same level of control over your future career that, say, Louis CK might wield over that of a budding young comic?

Edit: didn't mean to post anonymously. -thebrownnote

Unfortunately the kind of people who would most need to learn from #metoo are also the kind who are least likely to listen. Probably also the type to say that working 17 hours a day (Kozinski clerk confirmed?) with someone necessarily means you'll know everything about them.

[pancakes3]

the claim is that they are a small, tight-knit group that work tons of hours together in close quarters.

the #metoo movement doesn't shine light on the fact that victims aren't telling their coworkers but rather a movement of victims blowing the whistle in a more public forum. weinstein et. al. is shocking to the public at large but it's not as shocking to people in the industry - and the same is going on here. the public (people who haven't worked in various chambers) are oblivious but people "in the industry" are more in the know.

so, like, chill...

[Mr. Blackacre]

the claim is that they are a small, tight-knit group that work tons of hours together in close quarters.

the #metoo movement doesn't shine light on the fact that victims aren't telling their coworkers but rather a movement of victims blowing the whistle in a more public forum. weinstein et. al. is shocking to the public at large but it's not as shocking to people in the industry - and the same is going on here. the public (people who haven't worked in various chambers) are oblivious but people "in the industry" are more in the know.

so, like, chill...

Except here it's used in reverse. This is someone using the one person they know to whom it hasn't happened to argue that the judge has never done it. At any rate, IMO part of the thing with the Hollywood sexual misconduct scandals (which btw are kind of separate from the #metoo hashtag) is that even some in the industry were unaware (Weinstein may be a bad example, but it's not like he's the only one. And also some women who had worked with him didn't know).

[Anonymous User]

the claim is that they are a small, tight-knit group that work tons of hours together in close quarters.

the #metoo movement doesn't shine light on the fact that victims aren't telling their coworkers but rather a movement of victims blowing the whistle in a more public forum. weinstein et. al. is shocking to the public at large but it's not as shocking to people in the industry - and the same is going on here. the public (people who haven't worked in various chambers) are oblivious but people "in the industry" are more in the know.

so, like, chill...

Except here it's used in reverse. This is someone using the one person they know to whom it hasn't happened to argue that the judge has never done it. At any rate, IMO part of the thing with the Hollywood sexual misconduct scandals (which btw are kind of separate from the #metoo hashtag) is that even some in the industry were unaware (Weinstein may be a bad example, but it's not like he's the only one. And also some women who had worked with him didn't know).

No, I've argued that the dozen or so people who I know, including those who proceeded me, worked alongside me, and succeeded me, represented a diverse background and none of those with whom I worked ever complained about treatment outside of the norm. Nor did I ever see such treatment with my own eyes.

Is my knowledge and experience dispositive? Of course not. But it's a closer perspective than offered elsewhere in this thread, I believe. And the reputation I've read here isn't something I'd heard before nor after my work. If there's a take away, it's this: read everything you see on message boards with a grain of salt.

[Nebby]

Here's my shocked face

CC:

I offer advice about the clerkship process to mentees at my T14 law school. A number of classmates and professors have warned me to steer female students, in particular, away from Judge Kozinski. They have told me that while he can be cruel to all of his clerks, he sexually harasses his female clerks, for example, pressuring them to wear revealing outfits and making comments of a sexual nature about their appearances. I have additionally been warned that Judge Kozinski is explicitly homophobic, and so I am urging my LGBT mentees not to apply to him either. (To be clear, these strike me as behaviors that, if true, should deter all of my mentees from applying to clerk for Judge Kozinski, but I understand that these types of behaviors have a more direct effect on some individuals).

Given that the Judge-clerk relationship puts the clerk in such close quarters with a very powerful authority figure, are there other judges who I should be warning my mentees, particularly my female or LGBT mentees, to stay away from because of their reputations for harassing law clerks?

Jesus. Brave, brave anon.

This strikes me as an excellent use of TLS. Let's all use the anonymous posting feature to spread vicious third-hand rumors about federal judges. What fun!

So people can only discuss judges and how they treat clerks non-anon? Is that your point here?

Look, if a poster wants to share a personal story about an experience with a judge, then I think the use of the anonymous feature would be appropriate (though, if the story were a damaging one, I would hope that the mods would make some effort to assess whether the poster was actually in a position to have had the experience).

But I think a damaging third-hand rumor in the passive voice--like "I have been warned that Judge Kozinski is explicitly homophobic"--is a different kettle of fish. It probably shouldn't be posted at all. And if it is to be posted, I don't see the need for anonymity.

this is gonna be my new go-to. i had the kozinski clerkship in the bag but my homosexuality kept me from accepting.

To be fair, OP is correct that Kozinski's chambers are full of horrors (he yells at his clerks all the time; they are required to be there until 1 AM most days even when there isn't work for them to do; he intentionally instills competition amongst them over who he will recommend to SCOTUS; and sexual harassment allegations have been repeated by enough people that I'd think it more than reasonable to be wary). I get that TLS is a tricky spot to go for for this kind of information, but given the culture of silence about judge behavior that exists in most circles (especially for judges less high profile than the Koz), there aren't many other sources besides anonymous internet messaging.

Koz's feeding power seems to be waning a lot incidentally. Probably because there's been enough whispering to cause people with options to look elsewhere.

no doubt Kozinski's chambers have a bad rap and he's done some weird shit (http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-kozi ... story.html), but the last statement is simply ridiculous. No way to discern a feeder pattern, especially not because of his practices in chambers.

How can a guy who seems like such a zany weird fella (like a class clown in a way) be such a jerk to his clerks? It just doesn't feel like it fits with that personality. I've read the horror stories, so I'm not doubting y'all. It's just so weird.