Law Graduates ‘Stacking’ Clerkships, Limiting Opportunities for Peers: Study

Judicial clerkship “stacking” — where law graduates complete two, three or even four coveted clerkships with sitting judges before entering legal practice — is increasingly reducing the number of clerkships available to other aspiring lawyers, according to a new study by three law professors.

The trend is particularly disadvantaging graduates of non-elite law schools who lack access to insider hiring information, first-generation lawyers, and those who cannot afford to postpone higher-paid employment for several years, the researchers found.

“The federal judicial clerkship has evolved from a brief detour into a mini-career,” the study, titled Stacking the Deck, said.

Judicial clerkships are highly sought-after one-year positions in which graduates work under the mentorship of a judge. They significantly enhance a young lawyer’s credentials, opening doors to prestigious roles in law firms, academia and government.

The pay is relatively modest, with most federal clerks earning about $65,000. However, many law firms offer former clerks bonuses of $100,000 or more, rising to as much as $500,000 for clerks of the US Supreme Court.

Despite the prospect of such bonuses, lower-income graduates may be unable to afford delaying better-paid legal jobs while undertaking multiple clerkships, the researchers concluded.

Clerkship stacking originated at the Supreme Court and spread to federal district and appellate courts during the 1990s before expanding rapidly over the past 15 years, according to Vanderbilt law professor Tracey George, who interviewed more than 130 judges with co-authors Mitu Gulati of the University of Virginia School of Law and Albert Yoon of the University of Toronto.

Their earlier research found that while some Supreme Court clerks in the 1980s were hired directly from law school, today’s Supreme Court clerks arrive with more than two prior clerkships on average.

Comparable data are not available for federal district and appellate court clerks, George said. However, judges reported that stacking has “increased substantially” over the past decade, according to the study.

Information gaps among both judges and students, along with the ease of submitting online applications to multiple judges, are fuelling the trend, the researchers found. Judges are inundated with applications, and a prior clerkship serves as a strong signal of a candidate’s suitability.

Students often know little about the judges to whom they apply. However, they have more information than ever before about “feeder judges” — those with the strongest record of sending clerks to the Supreme Court — and may target those positions accordingly.

Faced with large numbers of highly qualified candidates, judges frequently make offers several years in advance. Applicants often accept because they fear not receiving another offer, the study found. Many then seek to “backfill” with more immediate clerkships, further extending their clerkship careers.

“The credential that was once available to a first-generation lawyer who caught a judge’s attention is increasingly reserved for those who arrive at law school already knowing how the game is played,” the study said.

 For any enquiries or information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call us on +971 52 644 3004. Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.