How Much Does SCOTUS Matter? Forum

[Anonymous User]

I graduated from HYS; am finishing up my appellate clerkship and did my district clerkship already. I have a job lined up at the boutique litigation firm I wanted to go to, and my current goal is to make partner in boutique lit (not appellate), or maybe move in-house if I can handle the hours after a few years.

Both judges are semi-feeders (the circuit more than the district). However, I don't want to move to DC (my partner is committed to the west coast and we just got a place together and that's where my clerkship/boutique job both are).

Now, obviously SCOTUS is the most prestigious of any of all the prizes and I feel like I *should* be gunning for it. But I am tired of applying for things, I am liberal and right now there are fewer liberal justices, I know I have maybe a 5-8% chance of SCOTUS and don't want to beg all my judges and professors to go to bat for me when the likeliest outcome is failure, and I just want to be with my partner and focus on my work.

Is this just the tiredness talking and am I making a big mistake in not applying? I feel like there's no value to half-assing it, I either need to line up all the recommenders and things, or I can just skip it. How much is the value worth to my specific career plan, which doesn't involve appellate?

[Anonymous User]

I get that in a lot of circles there’s an expectation that people should strive for every brass ring they have any possible shot of grabbing, but, I mean, the vast vast VAST majority of lawyers, even incredibly successful ones, don’t clerk for SCOTUS. Is there some door you think will be closed to you without SCOTUS on your resume? (Like are all the partners at your lit boutique ex-SCOTUS clerks?)

[Anonymous User]

OP here. No, not all the partners at the boutique clerked for SCOTUS (not true of any boutique I know of -- at least with more than like 4-5 partners). I know there are some doors that might be closed (or if not closed, materially more difficult, such as certain appellate/government jobs), but I honestly just want to try to do generic lit and try to make partner.

That said, SCOTUS does seem to help with making partner, bringing in business, etc.

[lavarman84]

It's a hell of a gold star, but if you're not looking to do appellate and your odds are pretty low, I think you're justified in passing. Plus, I imagine it's a very frustrating experience for liberals.

[Anonymous User]

Does it matter for certain niche goals? Yes. Does it matter a lot? Maybe. Does it matter, in a general, existential sense? No.

Sounds like you've achieved a lot in life and already done what most lawyers won't: go to HYS, clerk for a federal district judge, clerk for a federal COA, go to a top law firm afterwards. If you've done all of that while also arriving at a place of peace in your personal life, screw the brass rings and enjoy the ride. You've made it!

FWIW, and maybe this reassures you, but I came to a similar conclusion. Although I have less brass rings than you, it has took a lot of blood, sweat, and tears to get my COA clerkship from my T20 and I simply want to do good work and enjoy life from here on out. Who cares if I don't go to a feeder district judge after? No one. Only me. So why do it? I felt the same with law firms. I'll probably go back to my 2L firm because I'm tired and, like you, I'm sick of applying for things and I don't want to volunteer myself for 2400 hours of hell at a more "prestigious" boutique.

[Anonymous User]

I opted out for similar reasons. Long odds given the current Court, exciting job offer and feel ready for private practice, settling down elsewhere with spouse and didn’t want to move again—basically the same story. Nobody makes you apply and chances are you’ll have the same result either way.

[Antetrust]

Seems very strange to me that you're asking if you should pursue something you clearly aren't interested in. Do things because you want to do them.

[Anonymous User]

I graduated from HYS; am finishing up my appellate clerkship and did my district clerkship already. I have a job lined up at the boutique litigation firm I wanted to go to, and my current goal is to make partner in boutique lit (not appellate), or maybe move in-house if I can handle the hours after a few years.

Both judges are semi-feeders (the circuit more than the district). However, I don't want to move to DC (my partner is committed to the west coast and we just got a place together and that's where my clerkship/boutique job both are).

Now, obviously SCOTUS is the most prestigious of any of all the prizes and I feel like I *should* be gunning for it. But I am tired of applying for things, I am liberal and right now there are fewer liberal justices, I know I have maybe a 5-8% chance of SCOTUS and don't want to beg all my judges and professors to go to bat for me when the likeliest outcome is failure, and I just want to be with my partner and focus on my work.

Is this just the tiredness talking and am I making a big mistake in not applying? I feel like there's no value to half-assing it, I either need to line up all the recommenders and things, or I can just skip it. How much is the value worth to my specific career plan, which doesn't involve appellate?

Isn't the application process pretty easy at this point though? Did you ever talk to your judges about applying to SCOTUS?

[Anonymous User]

I'm not going to play armchair psychologist here (well ok, I will maybe a little). You're reasoning of why you shouldn't do it seems to me to come from a place that you are afraid you will put yourself out there and get rejected. I do this all the time where I tell myself ah the odds are unlikely so I might as well not try. It seems like this is something you would be interested in and it really is not a TON of work at this point. I would talk to your judges about it and recommenders about it. And, if it does not working out, no sweat off your back, you're still in a great position. The nature of semi-feeding is that not all the clerks that are recommended clerk on SCOTUS.

[Anonymous User]

Biglaw partner. Unless you want to work in the SG's office, OLC, or a tiny handful of ultra-selective DC appellate groups (all of which involve living in DC), there is no job your credentials would not make you competitive for. It sounds like you have great grades from one of HYS and a 9th Circuit clerkship with a semi-feeder, which will make you plenty competitive for any firm on the west coast. I am sure that clerking on SCOTUS would be a very rewarding and life-changing experience, and your credentials are such that you should apply if you really want it. But it doesn't sound like you really want it, so I would work on planting roots on the west coast and starting what sounds like a great career.

[Anonymous User]

Seems very strange to me that you're asking if you should pursue something you clearly aren't interested in. Do things because you want to do them.

To be fair, when it comes to SCOTUS, it can also often be this thing where people apply because they can. They have the credentials and people who will advocate for them, and they therefore have a nonzero chance. For some, that's all it takes to try.

[Anonymous User]

Seems very strange to me that you're asking if you should pursue something you clearly aren't interested in. Do things because you want to do them.

To be fair, when it comes to SCOTUS, it can also often be this thing where people apply because they can. They have the credentials and people who will advocate for them, and they therefore have a nonzero chance. For some, that's all it takes to try.

Sure, but I think it's absolutely worth pushing back on that. Because you can do something doesn't mean you have to try, even if it's something a lot of other people want.

[Anonymous User]

Striving for SCOTUS and failing can have consequences as well. Famously, Peter Thiel did everything right but didn't quite make it to SCOTUS. Afterwards, he kind of broke. Of course, he founded and sold Paypal and ended up quite rich. He's also a seemingly-miserable misanthrope. He now pitches his failure to get the clerkship as something great that happened to him. Unclear . . .

[Anonymous User]

Striving for SCOTUS and failing can have consequences as well. Famously, Peter Thiel did everything right but didn't quite make it to SCOTUS. Afterwards, he kind of broke. Of course, he founded and sold Paypal and ended up quite rich. He's also a seemingly-miserable misanthrope. He now pitches his failure to get the clerkship as something great that happened to him. Unclear . . .

That sounds like a Peter Thiel problem, not a not getting SCOTUS problem.

[throwawayt14]

Striving for SCOTUS and failing can have consequences as well. Famously, Peter Thiel did everything right but didn't quite make it to SCOTUS. Afterwards, he kind of broke. Of course, he founded and sold Paypal and ended up quite rich. He's also a seemingly-miserable misanthrope. He now pitches his failure to get the clerkship as something great that happened to him. Unclear . . .

Well instead of staying in law, he became a billionaire? Obviously, it was great for him.

[Anonymous User]

How much do SCOTUS/heavy feeder clerkships matter for DC appellate groups? For instance, would someone with semi-feeders (like OP) still be competitive for most DC appellate groups?

[Anonymous User]

Striving for SCOTUS and failing can have consequences as well. Famously, Peter Thiel did everything right but didn't quite make it to SCOTUS. Afterwards, he kind of broke. Of course, he founded and sold Paypal and ended up quite rich. He's also a seemingly-miserable misanthrope. He now pitches his failure to get the clerkship as something great that happened to him. Unclear . . .

Interesting thread tarnished only by this really stupid take

[Anonymous User]

How much do SCOTUS/heavy feeder clerkships matter for DC appellate groups? For instance, would someone with semi-feeders (like OP) still be competitive for most DC appellate groups?

OP here. It didn't matter to me. I applied to a few DC appellate places in addition to west coast places (DC was the one other location my partner and I considered relocating to), and it wasn't a barrier to getting offers.

[Anonymous User]

How much do SCOTUS/heavy feeder clerkships matter for DC appellate groups? For instance, would someone with semi-feeders (like OP) still be competitive for most DC appellate groups?

I feel like they matter to the extent that the semi-feeders tend to be more connected with the elite appellate groups. To the extent a semi-feeder is not connected with the DC appellate group scene I'm unsure how much that matters against a non-feeder also not connected with the DC appellate group scene. I guess if your interviewer is in the know, the semi-feeder looks better but I'm unsure really how much better.

[Anonymous User]

Biglaw partner. Unless you want to work in the SG's office, OLC, or a tiny handful of ultra-selective DC appellate groups (all of which involve living in DC), there is no job your credentials would not make you competitive for. It sounds like you have great grades from one of HYS and a 9th Circuit clerkship with a semi-feeder, which will make you plenty competitive for any firm on the west coast. I am sure that clerking on SCOTUS would be a very rewarding and life-changing experience, and your credentials are such that you should apply if you really want it. But it doesn't sound like you really want it, so I would work on planting roots on the west coast and starting what sounds like a great career.

Former SCOTUS clerk. Second this, except you'd be a credible OLC applicant regardless, and even OSG hires COA clerks with the right connections (cc: living in DC). From my experience SCOTUS is neither necessary nor sufficient. To your original question: After the term the main benefits are the connections and the flexibility to pivot years later as your interests and goals evolve. (But see the necessary/sufficient point.) There are plenty of reasons not to apply, but no shame in asking recommenders to help. Or in asking them what they think about all this.