Law students seeking clerkships often lack transparent information about judges and their respective work environments. Recognised as a “gold star” in the legal profession, judicial clerkships are seen as significant springboards for careers in government, academia, law firms, and even subsequent judgeships. Despite their pivotal nature, prospective law clerks routinely find the application process inscrutable and opaque.
Unfortunately, many law schools tend to prioritize their relationships with the judiciary over their commitment to students. This ethical conflict often results in a system resistant to transparency, standardization, and reform. The issue becomes more complex when we dig into how students gather information about judges and whether there is enough candid information available to them.
The clerkships whisper network – a covert & secrete pipeline of information in which clerks “whisper” about mistreatments – is one way in which law students try to navigate the application process. However, this method is fraught with its own challenges: not every potential clerk has access to these “whispers” and those who do often trivialize the risk of mistreatment or assume they can take it.
Law schools, in their messaging around clerkships, often paint an excessively rosy picture, leading students to misjudge potential situations and walk into hostile work environments unprotected. Unfortunately, this fosters the whisper network and perpetuates a cycle of workplace mistreatment.
Even the commonly advised practice of doing one’s research before applying falls short. Existing resources such as Google, The Robing Room, The Almanac of the Federal Judiciary, and anonymous T-14 blogs are insufficient. The situation is compounded by the fact that most post-clerkship surveys returned to law schools are overwhelmingly positive, leaving prospective applicants without an objective view of the actual conditions.
In an effort to tackle these complexities, a Centralized Clerkships Database was created, aiming to democratize data about judges and promote information sharing across law schools. Despite pushback from some faculty members and deans, who seem resistant to concrete evidence of judge misbehaviour, this database might be a potential solution towards transparency
Law schools must recognize their historical role in perpetuating these issues. Direct action to balance the interests of student welfare versus those of maintaining relationships with the judiciary is needed more than ever. Students deserve a transparent understanding of the clerkships they apply for, and it’s time law schools let go of gatekeeping habits and served their primary stakeholders — the students.
Written by Aliza Shatzman, the President, and Founder of the Legal Accountability Project. Reach out to her via email at Aliza.Shatzman@legalaccountabilityproject.org.