Judges Known to Have Fired Clerks Forum

[Anonymous User]

Rumors that Gujarati either fired her clerk or her clerk quit because the clerkship was so rough.

I believe several have quit.

As I heard it, several have quit and one had their offer revoked at the last minute for completely unjustified reasons. Seems like a nightmare clerkship.

[Anonymous User]

Rumors that Gujarati either fired her clerk or her clerk quit because the clerkship was so rough.

I believe several have quit.

As I heard it, several have quit and one had their offer revoked at the last minute for completely unjustified reasons. Seems like a nightmare clerkship.

Offer revoked? How does that happen, I've honestly never heard of that. I assumed it maybe happened for the once in a blue moon clerk that like committed a crime or something, but just getting an offer revoked seems so foreign to me?

[Anonymous User]

Rumors that Gujarati either fired her clerk or her clerk quit because the clerkship was so rough.

I believe several have quit.

As I heard it, several have quit and one had their offer revoked at the last minute for completely unjustified reasons. Seems like a nightmare clerkship.

Offer revoked? How does that happen, I've honestly never heard of that. I assumed it maybe happened for the once in a blue moon clerk that like committed a crime or something, but just getting an offer revoked seems so foreign to me?

How can someone be on the court for 2 years and already have this reputation?

[Anonymous User]

Rumors that Gujarati either fired her clerk or her clerk quit because the clerkship was so rough.

I believe several have quit.

As I heard it, several have quit and one had their offer revoked at the last minute for completely unjustified reasons. Seems like a nightmare clerkship.

Offer revoked? How does that happen, I've honestly never heard of that. I assumed it maybe happened for the once in a blue moon clerk that like committed a crime or something, but just getting an offer revoked seems so foreign to me?

My understanding was that it was over something insane too. The prospective clerk intended to publish a student note or law review article criticizing some recent Supreme Court decision before starting the clerkship and gave the judge a heads-up. The judge revoked the prospective clerk's offer. (Heard this thirdhand--if someone knows more, please correct me).

[Anonymous User]

Rumors that Gujarati either fired her clerk or her clerk quit because the clerkship was so rough.

I believe several have quit.

As I heard it, several have quit and one had their offer revoked at the last minute for completely unjustified reasons. Seems like a nightmare clerkship.

Offer revoked? How does that happen, I've honestly never heard of that. I assumed it maybe happened for the once in a blue moon clerk that like committed a crime or something, but just getting an offer revoked seems so foreign to me?

My understanding was that it was over something insane too. The prospective clerk intended to publish a student note or law review article criticizing some recent Supreme Court decision before starting the clerkship and gave the judge a heads-up. The judge revoked the prospective clerk's offer. (Heard this thirdhand--if someone knows more, please correct me).

Lmao jfc. Unrelated, is that like standard practice to let your judge know beforehand (so not during the clerkship). Surely law students are allowed to write what I presume to be level-headed and well-reasoned articles criticizing a court decision before starting the clerkship.

[Anonymous User]

Rumors that Gujarati either fired her clerk or her clerk quit because the clerkship was so rough.

I believe several have quit.

As I heard it, several have quit and one had their offer revoked at the last minute for completely unjustified reasons. Seems like a nightmare clerkship.

Offer revoked? How does that happen, I've honestly never heard of that. I assumed it maybe happened for the once in a blue moon clerk that like committed a crime or something, but just getting an offer revoked seems so foreign to me?

My understanding was that it was over something insane too. The prospective clerk intended to publish a student note or law review article criticizing some recent Supreme Court decision before starting the clerkship and gave the judge a heads-up. The judge revoked the prospective clerk's offer. (Heard this thirdhand--if someone knows more, please correct me).

If this is the full story, that is absolutely batshit crazy.

[Anonymous User]

Rumors that Gujarati either fired her clerk or her clerk quit because the clerkship was so rough.

I believe several have quit.

As I heard it, several have quit and one had their offer revoked at the last minute for completely unjustified reasons. Seems like a nightmare clerkship.

Offer revoked? How does that happen, I've honestly never heard of that. I assumed it maybe happened for the once in a blue moon clerk that like committed a crime or something, but just getting an offer revoked seems so foreign to me?

My understanding was that it was over something insane too. The prospective clerk intended to publish a student note or law review article criticizing some recent Supreme Court decision before starting the clerkship and gave the judge a heads-up. The judge revoked the prospective clerk's offer. (Heard this thirdhand--if someone knows more, please correct me).

If this is true-- revoking an offer for government employment because of speech (especially speech criticizing the government) is hugely problematic, and likely illegal (you can get into the weeds about whether a clerk is a policy making position, etc.). I know there is zero chance the clerk would sue (and no clue if they could given cause of action stuff), but this is shocking behavior from a judge and shows very very little respect for 1 amendment/free speech (and unlike usual "free speech" debate, this actually does involve state action and retaliation for speech). With so much focus on free speech issues at law schools, if this is report is true, from a sitting judge, it should be huge news.

[Anonymous User]

Rumors that Gujarati either fired her clerk or her clerk quit because the clerkship was so rough.

I believe several have quit.

As I heard it, several have quit and one had their offer revoked at the last minute for completely unjustified reasons. Seems like a nightmare clerkship.

Offer revoked? How does that happen, I've honestly never heard of that. I assumed it maybe happened for the once in a blue moon clerk that like committed a crime or something, but just getting an offer revoked seems so foreign to me?

My understanding was that it was over something insane too. The prospective clerk intended to publish a student note or law review article criticizing some recent Supreme Court decision before starting the clerkship and gave the judge a heads-up. The judge revoked the prospective clerk's offer. (Heard this thirdhand--if someone knows more, please correct me).

If this is true-- revoking an offer for government employment because of speech (especially speech criticizing the government) is hugely problematic, and likely illegal (you can get into the weeds about whether a clerk is a policy making position, etc.). I know there is zero chance the clerk would sue (and no clue if they could given cause of action stuff), but this is shocking behavior from a judge and shows very very little respect for 1 amendment/free speech (and unlike usual "free speech" debate, this actually does involve state action and retaliation for speech). With so much focus on free speech issues at law schools, if this is report is true, from a sitting judge, it should be huge news.

This is bad behavior, but cmon its not a free speech violation. She can just explain this away saying it was necessary because I do not want the impartiality of my chambers questioned if that opinion plays a role in a case before me or some BS.

[Anonymous User]

Rumors that Gujarati either fired her clerk or her clerk quit because the clerkship was so rough.

I believe several have quit.

As I heard it, several have quit and one had their offer revoked at the last minute for completely unjustified reasons. Seems like a nightmare clerkship.

Offer revoked? How does that happen, I've honestly never heard of that. I assumed it maybe happened for the once in a blue moon clerk that like committed a crime or something, but just getting an offer revoked seems so foreign to me?

My understanding was that it was over something insane too. The prospective clerk intended to publish a student note or law review article criticizing some recent Supreme Court decision before starting the clerkship and gave the judge a heads-up. The judge revoked the prospective clerk's offer. (Heard this thirdhand--if someone knows more, please correct me).

If this is true-- revoking an offer for government employment because of speech (especially speech criticizing the government) is hugely problematic, and likely illegal (you can get into the weeds about whether a clerk is a policy making position, etc.). I know there is zero chance the clerk would sue (and no clue if they could given cause of action stuff), but this is shocking behavior from a judge and shows very very little respect for 1 amendment/free speech (and unlike usual "free speech" debate, this actually does involve state action and retaliation for speech). With so much focus on free speech issues at law schools, if this is report is true, from a sitting judge, it should be huge news.

This is bad behavior, but cmon its not a free speech violation. She can just explain this away saying it was necessary because I do not want the impartiality of my chambers questioned if that opinion plays a role in a case before me or some BS.

idk, this is clearly state action in response to speech critical of the government on a public issue. Of course she can try to "explain it away" as neccessary to protect impartiality, but she actually has to show that's true, and given that judges themselves are allowed to publish articles, and do publish articles frequently, it's a tough argument to say "prohibiting clerks from publishing is necessary to protect functioning of the judiciary." It just doesnt make sense in a world where the judge's themselves publish. Also, if she allows publishing generally, but not this article in particular (because it was critical of the supreme court, or because she disagreed with it), then she's in an even tougher place. Unless there is something special here-- like it commented on something in front of the judge right now-- I don't know why you are dismissing this so quickly. its not going to be litigated, obviously, but the free speech warriors (e.g. the one's that think judges themselves should have the right to go to private universities and not be shouted down) should be all over this

[Anonymous User]

idk, this is clearly state action in response to speech critical of the government on a public issue. Of course she can try to "explain it away" as neccessary to protect impartiality, but she actually has to show that's true, and given that judges themselves are allowed to publish articles, and do publish articles frequently, it's a tough argument to say "prohibiting clerks from publishing is necessary to protect functioning of the judiciary." It just doesnt make sense in a world where the judge's themselves publish. Also, if she allows publishing generally, but not this article in particular (because it was critical of the supreme court, or because she disagreed with it), then she's in an even tougher place. Unless there is something special here-- like it commented on something in front of the judge right now-- I don't know why you are dismissing this so quickly. its not going to be litigated, obviously, but the free speech warriors (e.g. the one's that think judges themselves should have the right to go to private universities and not be shouted down) should be all over this

Bruh. She could literally say it was because the article was so poorly written it made her question the clerk's ability to write at a high level.

Anyway, a judge acting like a psycho to a future clerk isn't a first amendment violation; it sounds like you just have some weird axe to grind about the recent protests though. To save some time, Gujarati is not a Fedsoc judge - she was a Schumer/Gillibrand deal pick.