Kagan Says She'll 'Take Into Account' Whether Judges Follow New Clerk Hiring Plan
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan recently threw her support behind a hiring plan developed by the Ad Hoc Committee on Law Clerk Hiring—a committee which includes Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Sidney Thomas.
May 07, 2018 at 01:45 PM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan (2015). Credit: Diego M. Radzinschi / ALM
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan recently threw her support behind the new law clerk hiring plan by saying she will “take into account” in her own hiring whether judges and law schools comply with the new process.
Kagan described the chaos surrounding the former hiring process and her support for the two-year pilot plan during remarks April 30 at the annual meeting of the 7th Circuit Bar Association and Judicial Conference of the Seventh Circuit in Chicago. Her comments were confirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court's public information office.
Trevor Morrison, dean of New York University School of Law, called the justice's support “tremendously significant.” He added, “I think it's likely to be influential that a member of the Supreme Court would express support in the way Justice Kagan has.”
Kagan's message for her own chambers is likely to be heard coast to coast. In her nearly eight years on the high court, Kagan has hired clerks largely from the D.C. Circuit but also from the Fourth, Sixth and Ninth Circuits and from judges across the ideological spectrum.
A former Harvard Law School dean and professor, Kagan is in a position to understand the effect on students of the former hiring process in which first-year students faced pressure to make clerkship commitments and law professors make recommendations “on less and less information,” Morrison said.
The new hiring plan is the product of the Ad Hoc Committee on Law Clerk Hiring, whose members are Chief Judges Merrick Garland of the D.C. Circuit; Robert Katzmann of the Second Circuit; Sidney Thomas of the Ninth Circuit and Diane Wood of the Seventh Circuit. The plan is similar to one that was discontinued in 2014 because of lack of support. The new plan, according to the four judges, has garnered “substantial support” among federal judges.
The plan, announced in February, provides that, starting with students who entered law school in 2017, the application and hiring process will not begin until after a law student's second year. Judges will not seek or accept formal or informal clerkship applications, seek or accept formal or informal recommendations, conduct formal or informal interviews, or make formal or informal offers before June 17, 2019.
For students who entered law school in 2017, the starting date will be June 17, 2019. For those who enter in 2018, the starting date will be June 15, 2020.
Under the plan, a judge who makes a clerkship offer will keep it open for at least 48 hours, during which time the applicant will be free to interview with other judges. This is a two-year pilot plan that participating judges will reconsider after June 2020.
Morrison said the four chief judges deserve “a great deal of credit” for the plan. Each of their circuit courts, he added, has made a public statement of intent to operate within the plan.
Morrison and Yale Law School Dean Heather Gerken spearheaded a letter in September endorsing efforts to move the clerkship hiring to a date after the completion of students' second year. The letter was signed by more than 100 law school deans.
The deans' concerns about the hiring process over the last several years included:
—Clerkship decisions that are based solely on the first year pose difficulties of laying foundations of a legal education and encouraging exploration.
—Accelerated hiring places at a disadvantage students who are first in their families to go to college, first-generation professionals, or simply those in need of some time to master the art of lawyering. “Students without professional networks may arrive not knowing what a clerkship is, let alone how to attain one,” the deans said.
—The accelerated hiring prevents law schools from providing judges “with the information they need to make wise hiring choices.”
Gerken told The National Law Journal in December that the competition for clerks under the current plan “has had a dramatic effect on our pedagogy. It makes the first year more important than it should be. Some students need a longer runway. The late bloomers don't get a fair shot.”
Elena Kagan speaks with NYU Law School Dean Trevor Morrison in 2016. Credit: Rick Kopstein/ ALM
The next two months are key to seeing whether judges will refrain from some interviewing and hiring, Morrison said. “The issue is ripe right now,” he added.
Although he believes there is increasing support for the new plan, Morrison said it would not be fair to say that every chief judge has announced his or her circuit intends to follow it.
“At the end of the day, these hiring decisions aren't done at the circuit-level or trial court-level but at the judge-level,” Morrison said. He said he hoped statements of support from influential judges, such as Kagan, will have an impact.
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDog Gone It, Target: Provider of Retailer's Mascot Dog Sues Over Contract Cancellation
4 minute readRead the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome,' DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
3 minute readOpenAI, NYTimes Counsel Quarrel Over Erased OpenAI Training Data
Meta Seeks Declaratory Judgment in VR Eyewear Tech Patent Infringement Case
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250