As I approach my 35th anniversary practicing law, I would tell young people to pursue every avenue of interest without worrying if it fits their pre-conceived career path. The truth is that for most people that path will change as they move through law school and the early stages of their career. For the few that are laser-focused on a clerkship and then partner-track jobs at Biglaw or teaching at a top law school, I suppose your advice is right, but seems foolish for this young person to not pursue this because of its potential affect on their future employment.
I largely agree with you. I’ve seen so many people’s careers take unexpected twists and turns—including my own!
I just don’t want law students to fall into any “traps for the unwary.” Perhaps a better example is extremely vigorous pro-Palestine advocacy, maybe through controversial organizations like Students for Justice in Palestine. If students want to join SJP, that’s their prerogative—but they should do so with an understanding of the possible professional consequences.
Yes, the point I was trying to make was people’s paths do take unexpected turns, and in fact yours came to mind when I commented! We live in highly polarized times alas and vigorous pro-Palestinian advocacy is probably a better example of something that could adversely impact a career path.
Biden appointed at least one circuit judge who was a Fed Soc member, Anthony Johnstone. It did not win him any GOP support in the Senate - only Susan COllins voted to confirm him.
I do note (from the Wikipedia link you posted) that he belonged to both FedSoc and the American Constitution Society (ACS), FedSoc’s counterpart on the left. So he probably did join “for the debates.”
One thing I meant to add: the “leave it off your résumé” point doesn’t really work when you’re applying for a DOJ job as a political appointee or seeking a federal judgeship.
During the vetting process, you’re expected to share everything—and I mean EVERYTHING. It’s not like going through on-campus interviewing with Biglaw firms as a law student.
This is a thoughtful examination of the issue, Mr. Lat, for which I commend you. I have not a single quibble with any of your observations.
I would only add this: Some people are extroverted by nature and crave participation in organizations of like-minded folk. Some are introverted and find those prospects painful.
I'm in the latter category (despite being a trial lawyer, and yes, there's no small irony in that). My extroverted besty during and after judicial clerkships, the best man at my wedding in fact, was a charter member of the Federalist Society and urged me to join when he did.
I politely declined, and since then I've considered myself generally aligned with Fed Soc views and goals, and generally supportive of the organization, and indeed, particularly appreciative of the work its extroverted and committed members have done. But I don't have a membership card or appear on any membership rolls. I've never attended any luncheons or meetings or weekend getaways.
That hasn't stopped me, from time to time as events inspired me, from publicly opining (through my own now-mostly-dormant blog, or as a commenter elsewhere) on topics of interest to Fed Soc members.
As someone who wrestled with similar issues ("what membership/internships should I list on a resume") I much appreciate David's take here, and largely affirm it. As he says, you can always not list a membership/involvement on your resume. And Fed Soc itself has all kinds of great opportunities. After all, you're advised to keep a resume to one page, so it's not suspicious that you'd leave something off. At bottom, these questions are very specific to what job you are applying to, and what stage of the hiring process. Listing something on a resume that's going to be one of a zillion in a stack for OCI is very different than your membership coming up in a second-round interview when you've already established an "I'm not psychotic" vibe with the interviewer.
I'll add that as something who has gone down this road (although years ago when things weren't *quite* as politically charged) I'd be happy to talk to "Faint-hearted FedSoc-er" if they'd like to reach out to me (asanders@ij.org). And same goes for any other of David's readers with similar quandaries.
Another factor to consider is the culture of the Federalist Society chapter at the school. Some (a minority of chapters, in all likelihood) seem to delight in “triggering” or “trolling” the libs, while others make a concerted effort to hold events that will appeal to students across the political spectrum. There will be far less of a threat of ostracism and “cancellation” within the law school community if the school’s chapter falls into the latter category.
I consider myself moderately liberal and have strong opinions on social and political issues. However, I don’t place too much weight on someone being a member of Fed Soc. On either side of the spectrum, I find it off-putting when people are rude or confrontational. Ultimately, someone should join an organization if it interests them, and if they find it’s not a good fit, they can always leave. Personally, if I saw a Fed Soc event that seemed intriguing, I would still attend, even knowing that many participants might hold differing views.
As I approach my 35th anniversary practicing law, I would tell young people to pursue every avenue of interest without worrying if it fits their pre-conceived career path. The truth is that for most people that path will change as they move through law school and the early stages of their career. For the few that are laser-focused on a clerkship and then partner-track jobs at Biglaw or teaching at a top law school, I suppose your advice is right, but seems foolish for this young person to not pursue this because of its potential affect on their future employment.
I largely agree with you. I’ve seen so many people’s careers take unexpected twists and turns—including my own!
I just don’t want law students to fall into any “traps for the unwary.” Perhaps a better example is extremely vigorous pro-Palestine advocacy, maybe through controversial organizations like Students for Justice in Palestine. If students want to join SJP, that’s their prerogative—but they should do so with an understanding of the possible professional consequences.
Yes, the point I was trying to make was people’s paths do take unexpected turns, and in fact yours came to mind when I commented! We live in highly polarized times alas and vigorous pro-Palestinian advocacy is probably a better example of something that could adversely impact a career path.
Biden appointed at least one circuit judge who was a Fed Soc member, Anthony Johnstone. It did not win him any GOP support in the Senate - only Susan COllins voted to confirm him.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Johnstone
I'm just pointing this out as a fun fact, not to question your advice in this post.
https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1181/vote_118_1_00101.htm
Oh wow, interesting—I did not know that!
I do note (from the Wikipedia link you posted) that he belonged to both FedSoc and the American Constitution Society (ACS), FedSoc’s counterpart on the left. So he probably did join “for the debates.”
One thing I meant to add: the “leave it off your résumé” point doesn’t really work when you’re applying for a DOJ job as a political appointee or seeking a federal judgeship.
During the vetting process, you’re expected to share everything—and I mean EVERYTHING. It’s not like going through on-campus interviewing with Biglaw firms as a law student.
This is a thoughtful examination of the issue, Mr. Lat, for which I commend you. I have not a single quibble with any of your observations.
I would only add this: Some people are extroverted by nature and crave participation in organizations of like-minded folk. Some are introverted and find those prospects painful.
I'm in the latter category (despite being a trial lawyer, and yes, there's no small irony in that). My extroverted besty during and after judicial clerkships, the best man at my wedding in fact, was a charter member of the Federalist Society and urged me to join when he did.
I politely declined, and since then I've considered myself generally aligned with Fed Soc views and goals, and generally supportive of the organization, and indeed, particularly appreciative of the work its extroverted and committed members have done. But I don't have a membership card or appear on any membership rolls. I've never attended any luncheons or meetings or weekend getaways.
That hasn't stopped me, from time to time as events inspired me, from publicly opining (through my own now-mostly-dormant blog, or as a commenter elsewhere) on topics of interest to Fed Soc members.
As someone who wrestled with similar issues ("what membership/internships should I list on a resume") I much appreciate David's take here, and largely affirm it. As he says, you can always not list a membership/involvement on your resume. And Fed Soc itself has all kinds of great opportunities. After all, you're advised to keep a resume to one page, so it's not suspicious that you'd leave something off. At bottom, these questions are very specific to what job you are applying to, and what stage of the hiring process. Listing something on a resume that's going to be one of a zillion in a stack for OCI is very different than your membership coming up in a second-round interview when you've already established an "I'm not psychotic" vibe with the interviewer.
I'll add that as something who has gone down this road (although years ago when things weren't *quite* as politically charged) I'd be happy to talk to "Faint-hearted FedSoc-er" if they'd like to reach out to me (asanders@ij.org). And same goes for any other of David's readers with similar quandaries.
Another factor to consider is the culture of the Federalist Society chapter at the school. Some (a minority of chapters, in all likelihood) seem to delight in “triggering” or “trolling” the libs, while others make a concerted effort to hold events that will appeal to students across the political spectrum. There will be far less of a threat of ostracism and “cancellation” within the law school community if the school’s chapter falls into the latter category.
I consider myself moderately liberal and have strong opinions on social and political issues. However, I don’t place too much weight on someone being a member of Fed Soc. On either side of the spectrum, I find it off-putting when people are rude or confrontational. Ultimately, someone should join an organization if it interests them, and if they find it’s not a good fit, they can always leave. Personally, if I saw a Fed Soc event that seemed intriguing, I would still attend, even knowing that many participants might hold differing views.