2021-2022 Judicial Clerkships Handbook
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
U.S. Judicial Branch 192 U.S
U.S. G OVERNMENT IN N EBRASKA 191 U.S. JUDICIAL BRANCH 192 U.S. G OVERNMENT IN NEBRASKA U.S. JUDICIAL BRANCH1 U.S. SUPREME COURT U.S. Supreme Court Building: 1 First St. N.E., Washington, D.C. 20543, phone (202) 479-3000 Chief Justice of the United States: John G. Roberts, Jr. Article III, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution provides that “the judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.” The Supreme Court is composed of the chief justice of the United States and such number of associate justices as may be fi xed by Congress. The current number of associate justices is eight. The U.S. president nominates justices, and appointments are made with the advice and consent of the Senate. Article III, Section 1, further provides that “the Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offi ces during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Offi ce.” A justice may retire at age 70 after serving for 10 years as a federal judge or at age 65 after serving 15 years. The term of the court begins, by law, the fi rst Monday in October of each year and continues as long as the business before the court requires, usually until the end of June. Six members constitute a quorum. The court hears about 7,000 cases during a term. -
In Chambers: Effective Writing Tips for the Judicial Interns and Law Clerks
IN CHAMBERS: EFFECTIVE WRITING TIPS FOR THE JUDICIAL INTERNS AND LAW CLERKS © 2017 The Writing Center at GULC. All Rights Reserved.1 Working for and with a judge can be an exciting but intimidating challenge. In many respects, law school is great preparation, and many of the skills you have learned will be invaluable. However, many challenges you will face in chambers can seem quite foreign at first, and there is surprisingly little guidance out there on how to address them. This handout is intended to fill some of those gaps. A lot of the guidance contained in this handout will, like so many things in law, vary depending on facts and circumstances. For example, this handout is intended to be useful both for full-time clerks as well as summer interns and school-term externs. Of course, the roles of each of these positions differs in some respect, so keep that in mind as you read. In addition, as is elaborated further later on, every judge is different. No matter what, respect his or her wishes at all times and never take anything contained herein or elsewhere as advice to the contrary. This handout assumes you have received an assignment from your supervisor in chambers and that you are having a hard time with next steps. The goal is not so much to tell you how to write it (there is simply too much variation out there for that), but, instead, to provide some guidance as to what types of questions you can ask and what next steps might look like. -
Federal Criminal Litigation in 20/20 Vision Susan Herman
Brooklyn Law School BrooklynWorks Faculty Scholarship 2009 Federal Criminal Litigation in 20/20 Vision Susan Herman Follow this and additional works at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/faculty Part of the Criminal Law Commons, and the Litigation Commons Recommended Citation 13 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 461 (2009) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by BrooklynWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of BrooklynWorks. FEDERAL CRIMINAL LITIGATION IN 20/20 VISION by Susan N. Herman* In this Article, the author examines three snapshots of the history of criminal litigation in the federal courts, from the years 1968, 1988, and 2008, with a view to predicting the future course of federal criminal adjudication. The author examines three different aspects offederal criminal litigation at these different points in time: 1) the volume and nature offederal criminal cases, 2) constitutional criminal procedure rules, and 3) federal sentencing, highlighting trends and substantial changes in each of those areas. Throughout the Article, the author notes the ways in which the future of federal criminal litigation greatly depends upon the politics of the future, includingpotential nominations to thefederal judiciary by President Barack Obama. I. IN T RO D U CT IO N ................................................................................ 461 II. CRIM INAL ADJUDICATION .............................................................. 462 III. CONSTITUTIONAL CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ............................... 467 IV. SE N T EN C IN G ...................................................................................... 469 V. C O N C LU SIO N ..................................................................................... 471 I. INTRODUCTION This Article was adapted from a speech given at the 40th anniversary celebration of the Federal Judicial Center, hosted by Lewis & Clark Law School in September, 2008, to congratulate the Federal Judicial Center on forty years of excellent work. -
Anecdotal List of Public Interest Judges Compiled by the Harvard
Anecdotal List of Public Interest Judges as of 11/3/17 Compiled by the Harvard Law School Office of Career Services and Office of Public Interest Advising. CONFIDENTIAL - for HLS Applicants Only Type Cir Dist City State Judge Last Judge First Notes Circuit 01 Boston MA Barron David OLC Circuit 01 Concord NH Howard Jeffrey Circuit 01 Portland ME Lipez Kermit Circuit 01 Boston MA Lynch Sandra Worked at Harvard Legal Aid Bureau; started career in legal aid and Circuit 01 Providence RI Thompson O. Rogeree family law Circuit 02 New Haven CT Carney Susan Former Yale and Peace Corps GC Has partnered with Judge Katzmann on immigration representation Circuit 02 New York NY Chin Denny project Circuit 02 New York NY Katzmann Robert Circuit 02 New York NY Livingston Debra AUSA Worked as cooperating attorney with ACLU and New York Civil Circuit 02 New York NY Lynch Gerard Liberties Union Circuit 02 New York NY Parker Barrington Circuit 02 Syracuse NY Pooler Rosemary Circuit 02 New York NY Sack Robert Circuit 02 New York NY Straub Chester Circuit 02 Geneseo NY Wesley Richard Circuit 03 Newark NJ Trump Barry Maryanne Circuit 03 Newark NJ Chagares Michael Circuit 03 Newark NJ Fuentes Julio Circuit 03 Newark NJ Greenaway Joseph Circuit 03 Philadelphia PA Krause Cheryl AUSA Circuit 03 Philadelphia PA McKee Theodore Circuit 03 Philadelphia PA Rendell Marjorie Circuit 03 Philadelphia PA Restrepo Luis Felipe ACLU National Prison Project; Former Federal Public Defender Circuit 03 Scranton PA Vanaskie Thomas Circuit 04 Raleigh NC Duncan Allyson Circuit 04 Richmond -
Master of Laws
APPLYING FOR & FINANCING YOUR LLM MASTER OF LAWS APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS APPLICATION CHECKLIST Admission to the LLM program is highly For applications to be considered, they must include the following: competitive. To be admitted to the program, ALL APPLICANTS INTERNATIONAL APPLICANTS applicants must possess the following: • Application & Application Fee – apply • Applicants with Foreign Credentials - For electronically via LLM.LSAC.ORG, and pay applicants whose native language is not • A Juris Doctor (JD) degree from an ABA-accredited non-refundable application fee of $75 English and who do not posses a degree from law school or an equivalent degree (a Bachelor of Laws • Official Transcripts: all undergraduate and a college or university whose primary language or LL.B.) from a law school outside the United States. graduate level degrees of instruction is English, current TOEFL or IELTS • Official Law School or Equivalent Transcripts scores showing sufficient proficiency in the • For non-lawyers interested in the LLM in Intellectual • For non-lawyer IP professionals: proof of English language is required. The George Mason Property (IP) Law: a Bachelor’s degree and a Master’s minimum of four years professional experience University Scalia Law School Institution code degree in another field, accompanied by a minimum in an IP-related field is 5827. of four years work experience in IP may be accepted in • 500-Word Statement of Purpose • TOEFL: Minimum of 90 in the iBT test lieu of a law degree. IP trainees and Patent Examiners • Resume (100 or above highly preferred) OR (including Bengoshi) with four or more years of • Letters of Recommendation (2 required) • IELTS: Minimum of 6.5 (7.5 or above experience in IP are welcome to apply. -
Clerk and Justice: the Ties That Bind John Paul Stevens and Wiley B
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by OpenCommons at University of Connecticut University of Connecticut OpenCommons@UConn Connecticut Law Review School of Law 2008 Clerk and Justice: The Ties That Bind John Paul Stevens and Wiley B. Rutledge Laura Krugman Ray Follow this and additional works at: https://opencommons.uconn.edu/law_review Recommended Citation Ray, Laura Krugman, "Clerk and Justice: The Ties That Bind John Paul Stevens and Wiley B. Rutledge" (2008). Connecticut Law Review. 5. https://opencommons.uconn.edu/law_review/5 CONNECTICUT LAW REVIEW VOLUME 41 NOVEMBER 2008 NUMBER 1 Article Clerk and Justice: The Ties That Bind John Paul Stevens and Wiley B. Rutledge LAURA KRUGMAN RAY Justice John Paul Stevens, now starting his thirty-third full term on the Supreme Court, served as law clerk to Justice Wiley B. Rutledge during the Court’s 1947 Term. That experience has informed both elements of Stevens’s jurisprudence and aspects of his approach to his institutional role. Like Rutledge, Stevens has written powerful opinions on issues of individual rights, the Establishment Clause, and the reach of executive power in wartime. Stevens has also, like Rutledge, been a frequent author of dissents and concurrences, choosing to express his divergences from the majority rather than to vote in silence. Within his chambers, Stevens has in many ways adopted his own clerkship experience in preference to current models. Unlike the practices of most of his colleagues, Stevens hires fewer clerks, writes his own first drafts, and shares certiorari decisionmaking with his clerks. -
Joint Public Health and Law Programs
JOINT PUBLIC HEALTH AND LAW tuition rate and fees are charged for semesters when no Law School courses are taken, including summer sessions. PROGRAMS Visit the Hirsh Program website (http://publichealth.gwu.edu/ Program Contact: J. Teitelbaum programs/joint-jdllm-mphcertificate/) for additional information. The Milken Institute of School of Public Health (SPH), through its Hirsh Health Law and Policy Program, cooperates with the REQUIREMENTS Law School to offer public health and law students multiple programs that foster an interdisciplinary approach to the study MPH requirements in the joint degree programs of health policy, health law, public health, and health care. The course of study for the standalone MPH degree, in one of Available joint programs include the master of public health several focus areas, (http://publichealth.gwu.edu/node/766/) (http://bulletin.gwu.edu/public-health/#graduatetext) (MPH) consists of 45 credits, including a supervised practicum. In the and juris doctor (https://www.law.gwu.edu/juris-doctor/) (JD); dual degree programs with the Law School, the Milken Institute MPH and master of laws (https://www.law.gwu.edu/master- School of Public Health (GWSPH) accepts 8 Law School credits of-laws/) (LLM); and JD or LLM and SPH certificate in various toward completion of the MPH degree. Therefore, Juris doctor subject areas. LLM students may be enrolled in either the (JD) and master of laws (LLM) students in the dual program general or environmental law program at the Law School. complete only 37 credits of coursework through GWSPH to obtain an MPH degree. Application of credits between programs Depending upon the focus area in which a JD student chooses For the JD/MPH, 8 JD credits are applied toward the MPH and to study, as a rule, the joint degree can be earned in three- up to 12 MPH credits may be applied toward the JD. -
Lessons Learned from Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
LESSONS LEARNED FROM JUSTICE RUTH BADER GINSBURG Amanda L. Tyler* INTRODUCTION Serving as a law clerk for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in the Supreme Court’s October Term 1999 was one of the single greatest privileges and honors of my life. As a trailblazer who opened up opportunities for women, she was a personal hero. How many people get to say that they worked for their hero? Justice Ginsburg was defined by her brilliance, her dedication to public service, her resilience, and her unwavering devotion to taking up the Founders’ calling, set out in the Preamble to our Constitution, to make ours a “more perfect Union.”1 She was a profoundly dedicated public servant in no small measure because she appreciated just how important her role was in ensuring that our Constitution belongs to everyone. Whether as an advocate or a Justice, she tirelessly fought to dismantle discrimination and more generally to open opportunities for every person to live up to their full human potential. Without question, she left this world a better place than she found it, and we are all the beneficiaries. As an advocate, Ruth Bader Ginsburg challenged our society to liber- ate all persons from the gender-based stereotypes that held them back. As a federal judge for forty years—twenty-seven of them on the Supreme Court—she continued and expanded upon that work, even when it meant in dissent calling out her colleagues for improperly walking back earlier gains or halting future progress.2 In total, she wrote over 700 opinions on the D.C. -
AFRA AFSHARIPOUR University of California, Davis, School of Law
AFRA AFSHARIPOUR University of California, Davis, School of Law 400 Mrak Hall Drive, Davis, California 95616 (530) 754-0111 (work) • [email protected] _________________________________________________________________________________________ ACADEMIC APPOINTMENTS UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, DAVIS, SCHOOL OF LAW Davis, CA Senior Associate Dean for Academic Affairs July 2018-present Professor of Law (Acting Professor of Law July 2007-June 2012) July 2007-present Courses: Business Associations, Mergers and Acquisitions, Startups & Venture Capital, Corporate Governance, Antitrust, Business Planning Research: Comparative Corporate Law, Corporate Governance, Mergers and Acquisitions, Securities Regulation, Transactional Law RESEARCH AND VISITING POSITIONS CHINA UNIVERSITY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE AND LAW (CUPL) Beijing, China Visiting Scholar – Legal Experts Forum May 2019 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY, SCHOOL OF LAW Berkeley, CA Visiting Fellow, Berkeley Center for Law, Business and the Economy (BCLBE) August 2016-May 2017 NATIONAL CHIAO-TUNG UNIVERSITY Hsinchu City, Taiwan Visiting Scholar January 2017 NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY Bangalore, India Visiting Scholar June 2010 OTHER PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE DAVIS POLK & WARDWELL New York, NY and Menlo Park, CA Associate Summer 1998, October 2000-July 2007 Corporate: Advised clients on domestic and cross border mergers and acquisitions, public and private securities offerings, corporate governance and compliance matters, and bank regulatory matters. Pro Bono: Awarded State Bar -
How Not to Succeed in Law School
Essays How Not to Succeed in Law School James D. Gordon HIIt I. SHOULD You Go TO LAW SCHOOL? Would you like to help the less fortunate? Would you like to see liberty and justice for all? Do you want to vindicate the rights of the oppressed? If so, you should join the Peace Corps. The last thing you should do is attend law school. People basically hate lawyers, and with good reason. That's why you'll rarely escape from a dinner party without hearing at least one lawyer joke. Indeed, literature reveals that people have always hated lawyers. Samuel Coleridge wrote in The Devil's Thoughts: He saw a Lawyer killing a Viper On a dunghill hard by his own stable; t Professor of Law, Brigham Young University Law School. B.A. 1977, Brigham Young University; J.D. 1980, Boalt Hall School of Law, University of California, Berkeley. Just for the record (in case I am ever nominated for ajudicial appointment), I don't believe a word of this Essay. And if I do, I'm only being tentative. And if I'm not, I promise to let my colleagues dissuade me from my position shortly before the Senate confirmation hearings begin. After all, I watched the Bork hearings, too. I extend apologies and thanks to Dave Barry, Eliot A. Butler, Linda Bytof, Johnny Carson, Steven Chidester, Jesse H. Choper, Michael Cohen, Paul Duke, Vaughn J. Featherstone, J. Clifton Fleming, Jr., Frederick Mark Gedicks, Bruce C. Hafen, Carl S. Hawkins, Gregory Husisian, Brian C. Johnson, Edward L. Kimball, Jay Leno, Hans A. -
Code of Conduct for Staff Attorneys and Law Clerks Canon 1
NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS CODE OF CONDUCT FOR STAFF ATTORNEYS AND LAW CLERKS CANON 1 A STAFF ATTORNEY OR LAW CLERK SHOULD CONDUCT HIMSELF OR HERSELF IN A MANNER AS TO UPHOLD AND PROMOTE THE INTEGRITY AND INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society. A staff attorney or law clerk should observe, and should impart to anyone under his or her supervision, high standards of conduct so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary may be preserved and his or her office may reflect a devotion to serving the public. The provisions of this Code should be construed and applied to further those objectives. CANON 2 A STAFF ATTORNEY OR LAW CLERK SHOULD AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY IN ALL HIS OR HER ACTIVITIES A staff attorney or law clerk should not engage in any activities that would put into question the propriety of his or her conduct in carrying out the duties of his or her employment. He or she should not allow his or her family, social, or other relationships to influence his or her judgment or the performance of the duties of his or her employment. He or she should not lend the prestige of his or her position to advance the private interests of others; he or she should not convey the impression that he or she is in the position to influence the Court or any judge, nor permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence him or her. -
2019-2020 Linn Inn Handbook V2.Pdf
Contains Confidential Information. Do Not Distribute. The Richard Linn American Inn of Court 2019-2020 Membership Handbook www.linninn.org © 2019 Richard Linn American Inn of Court. All Rights Reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS Message From The President ..................................................................................... 1 Meeting Dates and Logistics ...................................................................................... 3 Member Responsibilities ........................................................................................... 6 Officers and Administrators ....................................................................................... 8 2019-2020 Program Schedule .................................................................................... 9 The Richard Linn American Inn of Court ...............................................................10 2019-2020 Membership & Dues Form ...............................................................10 Origins of the Mark T. Banner Scholarship .........................................................16 Diversity ...................................................................................................................17 Background ..............................................................................................................19 The American Inns of Court .................................................................................19 The Richard Linn American Inn of Court ............................................................22