Talk:Law clerk

Law High‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Occupations (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupations, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.OccupationsWikipedia:WikiProject OccupationsTemplate:WikiProject OccupationsOccupations articles

Ideological persuasion

I interviewed with many judges and clerked at the state level and never knew anyone who even came close to being asked what their idealogical persuasion was. In fact, most judges go out of their way to keep their true political/persoanl views a complete mystery. The old edit was way to general and just plain inaccurate. The USSC does it, from what I've heard, but that's all I've ever heard. I'll trust you that it happened at some state supreme court, so I can compromise with "some." AFethke 16:14, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

I interviewed with a judge on the Florida Supreme Court whose first question was "do you have any qulams about the death penalty." I did, and the rest of the interview was perfunctory. I suppose it depends in part how you define "ideological persuasion". -- BD2412 ^talk 16:32, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

We are what we know I guess. I suppose, but the fact is that the death penalty was (is) law in Florida, so if you were opposed to it, then that judge might have felt that you might not be entirely objective (just playing devil's advocate). I interviewed all over Maine at various levels and clerked for 4 judges at the state level. There is no death penalty here so that never came up and my judges did a great job keeping their personal views to themselves. I could honestly say that I have NO idea where ANY of them stood. Very professional. AFethke 18:52, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

My experience may have been atypical - the judge had recently been appointed straight from private practice to the state Supreme Court. -- BD2412 ^talk 19:32, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

Anyone have any experience that could shed some light on whether and how the United States Supreme Court gets law clerks with matching political persuasions as the justices?AFethke 14:12, August 4, 2005 (UTC)

For the answer to the above question, please see the new book, Sorcerers' Apprentices, by Ward and Weiden.

Delaware Court of Chancery

I'm confused as to why the Delaware Court of Chancery is singled out from every other court in the country save for D.C. and N.Y. Federal Courts. What about N.Y. Court of Appeals? 7th Circuit?

If you read the paragraph, the thirteen federal circuits are already mentioned (that would include the 7th Circuit). The Delaware Court of Chancery is well-known for its work in corporate law. So many corporations are Delaware corporations that even if their principal places of business are elsewhere, they will consent to Delaware's jurisdiction since it was the place where they were chartered and its courts have a reputation for competence in resolving corporate disputes. --Coolcaesar 06:26, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The claim that the European Court of Justice's language is French is probably wrong, even if the court is based in a french-speaking city. Please, remove that claim or provide a reference.

I suppose there's something wrong about this page. The only words I can visualize are "I love god" (and who cares?), but if I try to edit this page the full text of a serious article appears in the box. What does it mean?

Ok. The problem's gone. Sorry.

Canada

In the "Canada" section of this site, I'm not convinced that the Courts of Appeal for BC, Ontario and Quebec are necessarily the three most prestigious clerkships. First of all, the term 'prestigious' is pretty subjective, and probably doesn't fit. Secondly, a clerkship at the Federal Court of Appeal is just as, if not more, prestigious than any provincial CA. Finally, since Canada is bijural, clerking at the Quebec CA isn't all that helpful if you want to practice outside of the country. That comment should probably be removed or edited substantially. DuRuffio (talk) 22:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nomenclature

Why on Earth is this career labeled as "Law Clerk", not to be confused with "Court Clerk". In every way, it seems it should be the other way around! These "Law Clerk" examples here, along with any "law clerk" job I've found that requires a law degree, are all part of the court system only. Meanwhile, hundreds of schools throughout North America offer a Law Clerk diploma, which is more like a secretary. Up here in Canada, a law clerk is definitely not someone with a law degree; the only exceptions I've found has been, surprise surprise, in the examples found here. Clerkships are certainly for law students and graduates, but those holding a law clerkship are not law clerks. I work at the Canadian equivalent of a State Bar Association—in other words, the lawyers who regulate the legal profession, and undoubtedly the experts on the legal occupation—and we employ hundreds of law clerks who have diplomas from colleges.

Unless someone can come up with a concrete source that shows that THIS is what a law clerk is, and not the career a "law clerk" diploma aims toward, I'll be doing some extreme editing. The source must show that these clerks can also hold this title outside the court system, and must be RECENT and VERY TRUSTWORTHY; after all, it has to refute and override the literally millions of websites etc.—the American Bar Association included—that say otherwise. In the meantime, I am inserting a "disputed" template.

Skittleys (talk) 18:18, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have never even heard of a "Law clerk" diploma. Here is a link to the page outlining the "Federal Law Clerk Hiring Plan for 2008, and another for Testimonials from Law Clerks, both of which clearly indicate that "Law Clerk" is the title of a position, and that only law school graduates are considered for such a position. Perhaps Canada uses different nomenclature or a different system altogether, but in the U.S. there are literally thousands of law clerks matching the description of this article. bd2412 T 18:28, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with BD2412. Actually, Skittleys is way off the deep end on this issue. A simple Google search (using the site: prefix to limit the search to abanet.org) reveals dozens of Web pages on the American Bar Association Web site which use "law clerk" in the sense reflected in the current version of this article (as in a law school graduate holding a J.D. who spends a year or two working for a judge). Examples include: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]. In fact, Rule 1.12(b) of the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct (which have been adopted in 48 out of 50 U.S. states) specifically states that "A lawyer serving as a law clerk to a judge or other adjudicative officer may negotiate for employment with a party or lawyer involved in a matter in which the clerk is participating personally and substantially, but only after the lawyer has notified the judge or other adjudicative officer."[7]

In fact, just run a search on Google for the phrase "law clerk to the Honorable" by clicking this link and you'll see tens of thousands of lawyer profiles which indicate that the lawyer served as a law clerk to this or that judge.--Coolcaesar (talk) 04:13, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In parliamentary circles in Canada, the term law clerk refers to the chief legal counsel to the legislative body. The Senate, the House of Commons and Saskatchewan have a "Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel", Alberta has a "Law Clerk and Director of Interparliamentary Relations", British Columbia has a "Law Clerk and Clerk Assistant" and Newfoundland and Labrador, the Northwest Territories and Nunavut have a "Law Clerk". Nova Scotia's Chief Legislative Counsel "shall perform all the duties performed by the Law Clerk prior to the fifth day of April, 1941". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hebbgd (talk • contribs) 17:49, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed your edit and moved the sentence to the Canada section. I also removed your reference because I couldn't see how it was verifiable. That leaves the sentence unsourced. I prefer to leave it in, though, so I'll marked it as unsourced. Given some of your quotes above, could you find and add a source for the assertion?--Bbb23 (talk) 18:06, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

10%?

I took out this reference: It has been shown that roughly 10% of law students become law clerks.^[1]

This link doesn't work and the note can't possibly be true. Only 10% of Georgetown University Law (a T14 school) students clerk: http://www.bcgsearch.com/pdf/BCG_Law_Schoool_Guide_2007.pdf How could 10% of all law students clerk, assuming there is any correlation between clerking and school rankings? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.64.16.199 (talk) 15:55, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, that claim sounds absurd - even considering state court clerks. bd2412 T 16:20, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Best-Legal-Aid.com, http://www.best-legal-aid.com/Judicial%20Clerkships.htm

History section

Based on a stray reference in an Acheson biography (he was a clerk for Brandeis), I've added a "history" section, since I didn't see anything on how the use of recent law grads came about. I hope those more knowledgeable than I will add to it! --Thus Blogged Anderson (talk) 18:14, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brazil

There are two passages in the section regarding Brazil which are not only vague, but also outright inaccurate and tendentious.

The one that reads "It is required that applicants for law clerk positions have experience and expertise with procedural law and also share the judge's ideological orientation" is wrong because those informal requirements are not homogeneous, and in practice such appointments are seldom based on a great variety of other factors (even exchange of favors!) Thus, I strongly recommend that such statement be removed from the section.

The other passage of which I recommend removal is the one stating that "Working as a law clerk is considered to be a prestigious occupation within the legal field and opens up vast career opportunities.". In my experience, clerkship is often seen as a mid-range legal career. Moreover, there is (even objectively) no observable relation between work as a clerk and career opportunities, not even to speak of "vast"! As a matter of fact, generally these positions are occupied by aspirant judges (a position which is occupied through public selection, based on a battery of exams). If not removed, at the very least a restriction to clerkships at the higher courts should be added, perhaps making a link between the previous statement regarding them. Withal, at least the WP:WEASEL, such as e. g. vast, should be removed from the section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FelipeBusnello (talk • contribs) 14:37, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Based on your complaints and the fact that the section (like many others) has been tagged as unsourced since February, I've removed the entire section. If someone wants to create a new section on Brazil, they will have to do so properly with sources.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:56, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Law clerk. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:59, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Best-Legal-Aid.com, http://www.best-legal-aid.com/Judicial%20Clerkships.htm

[1]