Let’s Talk DC Circuit! Forum

[Anonymous User]

What makes Millett and Pan so difficult?

I considered clerking for Millett and interviewed with her. I never heard she was difficult in terms of anything other than the hours of work she expects to do the job as well as she wants it to be done. I cannot say the same thing about Pan. I heard she was abusive to her clerks. Demeaning. Disrespectful. Just bad news. But it's possible she reformed after she was subjected to an investigation about mistreatment.

Pan has not, in fact, reformed herself. She is as abusive and disordered as ever. She’s also just not very efficient, which makes it a very chaotic experience. Millett is much more organized and competent but is also quite a difficult clerkship. She’s not abusive in quite the same way but she’s incredibly intense, fosters competition among the clerks, and can be very degrading herself. You do learn a lot though. Much of the circuit is not a great time right now tbh. But of the newer judges, Garcia and Katsas are fantastic bosses. Not sure I’d recommend any of the other Trump / Biden appointees.

From what I gleaned during my time on D.C. Cir., Judge Walker might be the best clerkship in the country in terms of how he treats clerks and his chambers culture. You have to be willing to live in Louisville, Kentucky though.

Yeah Walker is uniformly thought to be very nice and collegial. He isn’t always super checked in though, so I guess it depends on what you want out of the clerkship. But on vibe / hours / nice boss, Walker is definitely fantastic. Working remotely on the circuit is kind of odd though because, unlike most other circuits, nearly everyone else is in the building. So Walker’s clerks are pretty removed. Even Henderson, who works from out of state, has her clerks in the building at least.

What about the other senior judges? Edwards, Ginsburg, Sentelle, Randolph and Rogers.

Edwards makes you sign out to use the bathroom

Lmao... judges man what would we do without them...

[Anonymous User]

Anyone have insight on Judge Pillard and her hiring practices? I have heard anecdotally that she is less grade sensitive than you may think. Is this true? Also is it true that she doesn't hire people already with an appellate clerkship?

[Anonymous User]

Anyone have insight on Judge Pillard and her hiring practices? I have heard anecdotally that she is less grade sensitive than you may think. Is this true? Also is it true that she doesn't hire people already with an appellate clerkship?

Less grade sensitive in that she doesn't hire only summas, but I don't think I've met a Pillard clerk that wasn't magna. This is anecdotal evidence though.

[Anonymous User]

Anyone have insight on Judge Pillard and her hiring practices? I have heard anecdotally that she is less grade sensitive than you may think. Is this true? Also is it true that she doesn't hire people already with an appellate clerkship?

Less grade sensitive in that she doesn't hire only summas, but I don't think I've met a Pillard clerk that wasn't magna. This is anecdotal evidence though.

One thing about Pillard is she’s looking for people who want and are willing to dig deep into cases past the point of getting them right. This holds true for the circuit, but she especially favors it. I think most Pillard clerks will suggest that you mention something along that line during the interview. There is a bit of a caveat to the prior district court clerkship, in that said clerks are already accustomed to rapid decision-making and the mindset of "let's move on once we find the right answer" because of the nature of trial court work. It can be pretty challenging to shift gears into the "thoroughness and accuracy trump efficiency" approach, at least it was for me. I thought the learning curve was tough, but I’ve heard many good things about Pillard as a boss. Though she is huge on collegiality and the working across differences thing. So be prepared to compromise with the other chambers and have her sign onto some things she doesn’t necessarily agree with.

[Anonymous User]

lol come on. It’s the DC Circuit everyone has lots of time and is digging deep into cases. Pillard is a great Judge but it’s not like she’s some sage of the DC Cir.

I swear some clerks come on here to sell their judges and it’s just cringey and obvious.

[Anonymous User]

lol come on. It’s the DC Circuit everyone has lots of time and is digging deep into cases. Pillard is a great Judge but it’s not like she’s some sage of the DC Cir.

I swear some clerks come on here to sell their judges and it’s just cringey and obvious.

Yeah agreed - I’d be surprised if any CADC judge (or really any COA judge at all) doesn’t expect their clerks to dig deep into the cases/spend more time with it than they did on the district court. As evident from the other posts in this thread, at least Millet also expects her clerks to do a lot of (arguably unnecessary) work.

[Anonymous User]

lol come on. It’s the DC Circuit everyone has lots of time and is digging deep into cases. Pillard is a great Judge but it’s not like she’s some sage of the DC Cir.

I swear some clerks come on here to sell their judges and it’s just cringey and obvious.

Yeah agreed - I’d be surprised if any CADC judge (or really any COA judge at all) doesn’t expect their clerks to dig deep into the cases/spend more time with it than they did on the district court. As evident from the other posts in this thread, at least Millet also expects her clerks to do a lot of (arguably unnecessary) work.

Numerous judges on the DC Circuit show little inclination to delve deeply into the cases before them.

[Anonymous User]

lol come on. It’s the DC Circuit everyone has lots of time and is digging deep into cases. Pillard is a great Judge but it’s not like she’s some sage of the DC Cir.

I swear some clerks come on here to sell their judges and it’s just cringey and obvious.

Yeah agreed - I’d be surprised if any CADC judge (or really any COA judge at all) doesn’t expect their clerks to dig deep into the cases/spend more time with it than they did on the district court. As evident from the other posts in this thread, at least Millet also expects her clerks to do a lot of (arguably unnecessary) work.

Numerous judges on the DC Circuit show little inclination to delve deeply into the cases before them.

And numerous judges on the circuit invent issues, often unbriefed ones, and massively over-complicate relatively simple cases. Despite the case load, opinions are slow to come out, they instantiate overly complex and narrow holdings that fail to provide the parties or doctrine with much-needed resolution leading to successive appeals, etc. Just because a judge doesn’t go trolling for old law review articles to raise some illusory unbriefed jurisdictional issue doesn’t mean they aren’t thinking sharply about the cases and deciding them well. Clarity and concision in addressing the issues raised by the parties before the court is still a jurisprudential virtue to many.

[Anonymous User]

Has Judge Cooper (DDC) ever fed? There seems to be a lot of praise for him as a great boss, well connected, competitive clerkship app, etc. And there seems to be a sentiment that he's Boasberg/Moss level. But if I did my research correct, he's never fed for SCOTUS or Bristow. Curious what the discrepancy here is

[Anonymous User]

And numerous judges on the circuit invent issues, often unbriefed ones, and massively over-complicate relatively simple cases. Despite the case load, opinions are slow to come out, they instantiate overly complex and narrow holdings that fail to provide the parties or doctrine with much-needed resolution leading to successive appeals, etc. Just because a judge doesn’t go trolling for old law review articles to raise some illusory unbriefed jurisdictional issue doesn’t mean they aren’t thinking sharply about the cases and deciding them well. Clarity and concision in addressing the issues raised by the parties before the court is still a jurisprudential virtue to many.

The arguments in the Trump immunity case give a pretty good idea of which DC Circuit judges SCOTUS respects: Srinivasan and Katsas. And it tells you which ones they don't: Pan, Childs, and Henderson.

That is broadly reflected in the quality of work coming out chambers.