Having Judges Name on Your Resume Forum

[Anonymous User]

Question as I send apps. To what extent would clerking for a republican judge/apointee with controversial decisions reflect poorly/effect my career. My plan is do biglaw, but I want to work in Democratic politics and would like to work for firms which are, at least nominally, "progressive." Would clerking for a state/federal judge who is clearly Republican have any negative connotations or effects?

[Anonymous User]

Unless it's one of those super partisan culture warrior type republican judges like Matthew Kacsmaryk (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_J._Kacsmaryk) or James Ho (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_C._Ho), then it probably won't matter for a Democratic political career down the line. And even a super partisan culture warrior type probably won't matter for BigLaw. Many firms love to pretend that they're "progressive," but at the end of the day their primary purpose is to help corporations make and hold onto their money, with some cosmetic gestures toward diversity and social justice through non-threatening pro bono.

[Anonymous User]

You’ll be fine - the really crazy ones that might raise eyebrows in liberal circles (if at all) aren’t going to hire liberals/non-Fed Soc clerks anyways. And besides, Dana Remus (Biden’s former White House Counsel) was an Alito clerk.

[Anonymous User]

What about the ones that aren't crazy but wrote an opinion about a potentially contentious topic. Say abortion, transgender rights, etc. which is front on page on a wikipedia page. Although perhaps I am overthinking this.

[Anonymous User]

Biglaw firms aren't going to care at all, no matter how ostensibly progressive they are. No one holds a clerk to their judge's opinions, and all judges deal with something controversial at some point.

I can't comment on Democratic politics but I'd be surprised if it had any material impact. Lawyers understand why you'd clerk for such a judge, and non-lawyers don't usually even understand what a clerkship is. What you do in the political arena post-clerkship will generally be more important for any political opportunities.

I agree with the person who said that the types of judges who might leave a bad impression are judge who won't hire you without the kind of conservative bona fides it doesn't sound like you'd have.

[Anonymous User]

The one thing you *might* have a problem with is trying to get a job at a progressive advocacy org in the legal space because they might know who your judge is and might care. But that's a pretty narrow slice of the legal market and basically not part of the political market.

[lavarman84]

The one thing you *might* have a problem with is trying to get a job at a progressive advocacy org in the legal space because they might know who your judge is and might care. But that's a pretty narrow slice of the legal market and basically not part of the political market.

Eh, even then, it depends on the judge. If you clerk for somebody who has a reputation as a real culture warrior, yeah, it'll make it a lot harder. If you clerk for a respected or run of the mill Republican, no big deal, especially if you have other things on your resume that make clear what your beliefs are.

[Anonymous User]

The one thing you *might* have a problem with is trying to get a job at a progressive advocacy org in the legal space because they might know who your judge is and might care. But that's a pretty narrow slice of the legal market and basically not part of the political market.

Eh, even then, it depends on the judge. If you clerk for somebody who has a reputation as a real culture warrior, yeah, it'll make it a lot harder. If you clerk for a respected or run of the mill Republican, no big deal, especially if you have other things on your resume that make clear what your beliefs are.

But sometimes it sort of feels like even "normal" opinions that go one way get people super fired up. See for instance Sutton's opinion on the hormones for children ban in Tennessee. For the record I'm not applying (and do not have a shot with) Sutton, but I was thinking of something like that.

[Anonymous User]

You’ll be fine - the really crazy ones that might raise eyebrows in liberal circles (if at all) aren’t going to hire liberals/non-Fed Soc clerks anyways. And besides, Dana Remus (Biden’s former White House Counsel) was an Alito clerk.

This is the correct answer. If you are at all concerned about this, then trust me you have nothing to worry about. The few judges who might actually cause concerns would never have hired you. They vet well.

[Anonymous User]

The one thing you *might* have a problem with is trying to get a job at a progressive advocacy org in the legal space because they might know who your judge is and might care. But that's a pretty narrow slice of the legal market and basically not part of the political market.

Eh, even then, it depends on the judge. If you clerk for somebody who has a reputation as a real culture warrior, yeah, it'll make it a lot harder. If you clerk for a respected or run of the mill Republican, no big deal, especially if you have other things on your resume that make clear what your beliefs are.

But sometimes it sort of feels like even "normal" opinions that go one way get people super fired up. See for instance Sutton's opinion on the hormones for children ban in Tennessee. For the record I'm not applying (and do not have a shot with) Sutton, but I was thinking of something like that.

If you're that concerned, then just don't apply to those judges. It absolutely wouldn't be an issue for biglaw, and I still don't think it would be an issue for getting involved in Democratic politics generally; it would probably put you out of the running for a job at a trans-rights org, but it doesn't sound like that's what you want to do anyway.

[Anonymous User]

Thank you all. This is very helpful.

[lavarman84]

The one thing you *might* have a problem with is trying to get a job at a progressive advocacy org in the legal space because they might know who your judge is and might care. But that's a pretty narrow slice of the legal market and basically not part of the political market.

Eh, even then, it depends on the judge. If you clerk for somebody who has a reputation as a real culture warrior, yeah, it'll make it a lot harder. If you clerk for a respected or run of the mill Republican, no big deal, especially if you have other things on your resume that make clear what your beliefs are.

But sometimes it sort of feels like even "normal" opinions that go one way get people super fired up. See for instance Sutton's opinion on the hormones for children ban in Tennessee. For the record I'm not applying (and do not have a shot with) Sutton, but I was thinking of something like that.

Yeah, that's a possibility. And while I have a lot of respect for Sutton, I would push back on the idea that it was a normal opinion. Multiple Trump appointees on the district courts (correctly in my view) struck down gender-affirming care bans. Unfortunately, Sutton's deeply disappointing decision completely changed the trajectory of the issue. So yes, there's a risk that even a normie Republican does that. That said, the odds aren't that high.

[Anonymous User]

The one thing you *might* have a problem with is trying to get a job at a progressive advocacy org in the legal space because they might know who your judge is and might care. But that's a pretty narrow slice of the legal market and basically not part of the political market.

Eh, even then, it depends on the judge. If you clerk for somebody who has a reputation as a real culture warrior, yeah, it'll make it a lot harder. If you clerk for a respected or run of the mill Republican, no big deal, especially if you have other things on your resume that make clear what your beliefs are.

But sometimes it sort of feels like even "normal" opinions that go one way get people super fired up. See for instance Sutton's opinion on the hormones for children ban in Tennessee. For the record I'm not applying (and do not have a shot with) Sutton, but I was thinking of something like that.

Yeah, that's a possibility. And while I have a lot of respect for Sutton, I would push back on the idea that it was a normal opinion. Multiple Trump appointees on the district courts (correctly in my view) struck down gender-affirming care bans. Unfortunately, Sutton's deeply disappointing decision completely changed the trajectory of the issue. So yes, there's a risk that even a normie Republican does that. That said, the odds aren't that high.

Yes as to being dissapointing for Sutton but as to how that reflects on a liberal clerk for Sutton?

[lavarman84]

The one thing you *might* have a problem with is trying to get a job at a progressive advocacy org in the legal space because they might know who your judge is and might care. But that's a pretty narrow slice of the legal market and basically not part of the political market.

Eh, even then, it depends on the judge. If you clerk for somebody who has a reputation as a real culture warrior, yeah, it'll make it a lot harder. If you clerk for a respected or run of the mill Republican, no big deal, especially if you have other things on your resume that make clear what your beliefs are.

But sometimes it sort of feels like even "normal" opinions that go one way get people super fired up. See for instance Sutton's opinion on the hormones for children ban in Tennessee. For the record I'm not applying (and do not have a shot with) Sutton, but I was thinking of something like that.

Yeah, that's a possibility. And while I have a lot of respect for Sutton, I would push back on the idea that it was a normal opinion. Multiple Trump appointees on the district courts (correctly in my view) struck down gender-affirming care bans. Unfortunately, Sutton's deeply disappointing decision completely changed the trajectory of the issue. So yes, there's a risk that even a normie Republican does that. That said, the odds aren't that high.

Yes as to being dissapointing for Sutton but as to how that reflects on a liberal clerk for Sutton?

My perspective is that it's unlikely to matter. But part of that is if you're a liberal clerking for Sutton, you're a superstar. Good shot you clerk on SCOTUS. Even if you don't, you can do basically anything you want.

[Anonymous User]

The one thing you *might* have a problem with is trying to get a job at a progressive advocacy org in the legal space because they might know who your judge is and might care. But that's a pretty narrow slice of the legal market and basically not part of the political market.

Eh, even then, it depends on the judge. If you clerk for somebody who has a reputation as a real culture warrior, yeah, it'll make it a lot harder. If you clerk for a respected or run of the mill Republican, no big deal, especially if you have other things on your resume that make clear what your beliefs are.

But sometimes it sort of feels like even "normal" opinions that go one way get people super fired up. See for instance Sutton's opinion on the hormones for children ban in Tennessee. For the record I'm not applying (and do not have a shot with) Sutton, but I was thinking of something like that.

Yeah, that's a possibility. And while I have a lot of respect for Sutton, I would push back on the idea that it was a normal opinion. Multiple Trump appointees on the district courts (correctly in my view) struck down gender-affirming care bans. Unfortunately, Sutton's deeply disappointing decision completely changed the trajectory of the issue. So yes, there's a risk that even a normie Republican does that. That said, the odds aren't that high.

Yes as to being dissapointing for Sutton but as to how that reflects on a liberal clerk for Sutton?

My perspective is that it's unlikely to matter. But part of that is if you're a liberal clerking for Sutton, you're a superstar. Good shot you clerk on SCOTUS. Even if you don't, you can do basically anything you want.

Even the conservatives clerking for Sutton are superstars. Sutton doesn't lower his hiring standards for anyone. So no, having Sutton's name on your resume will never hurt you. Just look at Leah Litman

[Anonymous User]

I've heard Menashi on CA2's name is a red flag for NYC Big Law firms.

[Anonymous User]

I've heard Menashi on CA2's name is a red flag for NYC Big Law firms.

Really in what way?

[Anonymous User]

The one thing you *might* have a problem with is trying to get a job at a progressive advocacy org in the legal space because they might know who your judge is and might care. But that's a pretty narrow slice of the legal market and basically not part of the political market.

Eh, even then, it depends on the judge. If you clerk for somebody who has a reputation as a real culture warrior, yeah, it'll make it a lot harder. If you clerk for a respected or run of the mill Republican, no big deal, especially if you have other things on your resume that make clear what your beliefs are.

But sometimes it sort of feels like even "normal" opinions that go one way get people super fired up. See for instance Sutton's opinion on the hormones for children ban in Tennessee. For the record I'm not applying (and do not have a shot with) Sutton, but I was thinking of something like that.

Yeah, that's a possibility. And while I have a lot of respect for Sutton, I would push back on the idea that it was a normal opinion. Multiple Trump appointees on the district courts (correctly in my view) struck down gender-affirming care bans. Unfortunately, Sutton's deeply disappointing decision completely changed the trajectory of the issue. So yes, there's a risk that even a normie Republican does that. That said, the odds aren't that high.

Yes as to being dissapointing for Sutton but as to how that reflects on a liberal clerk for Sutton?

My perspective is that it's unlikely to matter. But part of that is if you're a liberal clerking for Sutton, you're a superstar. Good shot you clerk on SCOTUS. Even if you don't, you can do basically anything you want.

Even the conservatives clerking for Sutton are superstars. Sutton doesn't lower his hiring standards for anyone. So no, having Sutton's name on your resume will never hurt you. Just look at Leah Litman

Sutton is an especially odd judge to single out as someone liberals should avoid for career reasons. He's well known for hiring liberal clerks (including radical progressives like Leah Litman) and over the past few terms alone he's sent two clerks to Kagan and a Bristow fellow to Prelogar. He's also personally beloved by many prominent liberals, and has taught classes with the likes of Justice Goodwin Liu and Niko Bowie. There are valid reasons committed progressive may not want to counterclerk. But if my only goal was advancing professionally in liberal circles, I would take Sutton over all but a few liberal superfeeders - especially with the current composition of SCOTUS.

[Anonymous User]

Eh, even then, it depends on the judge. If you clerk for somebody who has a reputation as a real culture warrior, yeah, it'll make it a lot harder. If you clerk for a respected or run of the mill Republican, no big deal, especially if you have other things on your resume that make clear what your beliefs are.

But sometimes it sort of feels like even "normal" opinions that go one way get people super fired up. See for instance Sutton's opinion on the hormones for children ban in Tennessee. For the record I'm not applying (and do not have a shot with) Sutton, but I was thinking of something like that.

Yeah, that's a possibility. And while I have a lot of respect for Sutton, I would push back on the idea that it was a normal opinion. Multiple Trump appointees on the district courts (correctly in my view) struck down gender-affirming care bans. Unfortunately, Sutton's deeply disappointing decision completely changed the trajectory of the issue. So yes, there's a risk that even a normie Republican does that. That said, the odds aren't that high.

Yes as to being dissapointing for Sutton but as to how that reflects on a liberal clerk for Sutton?

My perspective is that it's unlikely to matter. But part of that is if you're a liberal clerking for Sutton, you're a superstar. Good shot you clerk on SCOTUS. Even if you don't, you can do basically anything you want.

Even the conservatives clerking for Sutton are superstars. Sutton doesn't lower his hiring standards for anyone. So no, having Sutton's name on your resume will never hurt you. Just look at Leah Litman

Sutton is an especially odd judge to single out as someone liberals should avoid for career reasons. He's well known for hiring liberal clerks (including radical progressives like Leah Litman) and over the past few terms alone he's sent two clerks to Kagan and a Bristow fellow to Prelogar. He's also personally beloved by many prominent liberals, and has taught classes with the likes of Justice Goodwin Liu and Niko Bowie. There are valid reasons committed progressive may not want to counterclerk. But if my only goal was advancing professionally in liberal circles, I would take Sutton over all but a few liberal superfeeders - especially with the current composition of SCOTUS.

Question is aimed for someone politically like Sutton but who is not a feeder and as professionally accomplished

[Anonymous User]

I've heard Menashi on CA2's name is a red flag for NYC Big Law firms.

Really in what way?

That smells like a troll post to me. I've heard nothing like this.

[Anonymous User]

It’s fair to say Menashi is not the most popular guy on CA2 but I can’t imagine to the degree that his name would actually hurt on a resume. He does have a strong preference for ideology over grades, which is unique on CA2, but I think his clerks’ apps are stronger than they would have been had they not had the clerkship.

[Anonymous User]

Yeah, the post smells like someone who dislikes Menashi (understandable) wishcasting that onto the hiring practices of NYC biglaw.

[lavarman84]

Question is aimed for someone politically like Sutton but who is not a feeder and as professionally accomplished

My take is that it won't hurt the liberal clerks. They can probably even spin it to their benefit.

[Anonymous User]

Question is aimed for someone politically like Sutton but who is not a feeder and as professionally accomplished

My take is that it won't hurt the liberal clerks. They can probably even spin it to their benefit.

Agreed. I'd add that, while much of Sutton's reputation comes from his skill as a jurist and as a writer, his personal relationships have also paid dividends for him. Look for judges who make serious efforts to befriend and mentor people across the political aisle.

[Anonymous User]

Question is aimed for someone politically like Sutton but who is not a feeder and as professionally accomplished

My take is that it won't hurt the liberal clerks. They can probably even spin it to their benefit.

Agreed. I'd add that, while much of Sutton's reputation comes from his skill as a jurist and as a writer, his personal relationships have also paid dividends for him. Look for judges who make serious efforts to befriend and mentor people across the political aisle.

Does anyone have a sense for what proportion of Sutton's recent hires are conservative vs liberal anyway?