Do they compile the comments at all to give stats?

4:14, We may do that this year when most judges have hired (mid-September). But haven't done so in the past. Thanks for the good idea.

My biggest issue: my school (like most) is extremely reluctant to give me control of professors' recommendations. This means that for me to apply to a clerkship, I need to go back to my school, have two or three professors write/update letters of recommendation, and then tell the school to send them to such and such Judge, while I submit a separate package. This makes what could be an easy process incredibly awkward.

Do attorneys at current firms need to do the whole song and dance, or will a letter + transcript + writing sample + "references upon request" do the trick?

5:25:

I think resume, transcript, and writing sample, along with a list of references and phone numbers, work for attorneys applying to most clerkships. Now, if you're trying to get to certain judges, you'll need your feeder professor to write, call, email, whatever their buddy-friend-the-Judge to get you your feeder spot.

You need a section for federal administrative law judges.

One of my classmates had a cool clerkship with a federal judge named Roy Pearson. But I don't know how to tell whether he has hired yet.

I am in the top 5% of my school and my career office is pushing me hard to apply for clerkships, which I am reluctantly in the process of preparing for. I am a summer associate at a BigLaw NY firm and plan to do corporate law. Is there any reason or advantage for me to pursue clerking?

6:50: Yes, it is possibly the best and most interesting legal job you'll ever have. (No kidding. And yes, it is very depressing when you realize you're having this experience at the start of your career, when you didn't know enough to fully appreciate it.)

6:50:

As a fellow former clerk (D. N.J.) I feel really quite sorry for you.

Get a life... soon.

The post consisted of a link to two MSM articles and a firm bio. I don't see what is objectionable about that.

If you don't like ATL's tabloid nature or Lat's editorial judgment, then don't read the blog.

At least have the guts to email Lat, instead of conducting pathetic guerrilla warfare in the comments.

10:28 -- Something tells me that if you were Daniel Weiser's wife or child you wouldn't be dismissing this as just "a link to two MSM articles and a firm bio." Now, I'm not Daniel Weiser's wife or child, honestly, I've never even met them, nor even heard of them before today, but this is truly objectionable. Poking fun at drunk SAs who do stupid things (while zealously gaurding their identities) is one thing, shaming a dead man's name and leaving a tortured future to his wife and children is quite another. If you can't see that, then it's time you get off the internet and start engaging in some serisous introspective thought.

And, for what it's worth, I did send Lat an email before I started with the "guerilla warfare" in the comments. I gave him several hours to respond to it before I decided that something else needed to be done. If you'd like to read the email, I've copied it below:

================================================================================
David,

I love your site. I read it regularly (more often than I'd like to admit actually) and thoroughly enjoy the sense of humor you bring to the legal world. I applaud your efforts to bring some lightheartedness to an otherwise very serious community and admire your ability to do it in a manner that is generally very respectful of the people involved. Being the editor of such a popular and widely-read blog, you could, if you so desired, ruin many reputations of otherwise unsuspecting lawyers. Oftentimes the parties involved probably deserve to have their reputations shattered, yet fortunately you've always approached these situations with tact and elegance, which combined with your charming wit makes for a delightful and enjoyable read.

It is in that light that I ask you to remove the "Daniel Weiser, R.I.P." thread. I am glad to see that you have already disabled further posting to the article, but would ask that you go a step further and remove the post entirely. I know it will likely create a little bit of a stir among some of your more vocal readers, but I assure you such readers constitute only a small percentage of your blog's expansive and dedicated fan base.

Leaving the thread on your website could inflict serious and long-lasting emotional trauma on the surviving members of Mr. Weiser's family -- especially his young children. I am in no way related to the Weiser family -- before today I had never met, nor even heard of them. I am just a thoughtful person concerned about the kind of lasting impact this kind of publicity could have on the future life's of his innocent (and I'm sure very promising) children. I trust you had no intention of harming the Weiser family or anything similar. So, let's just chalk this one up to a momentary lapse of judgment and remedy the mistake while you still can.

Thank you very much for considering my request,

===============================================================================

It's public record. You don't think there is local news and internet coverage on it.

E-mail the news stations and tell them not to run the story either.

The local news and internet coverage on it is actually respectable, it's just reporting the death of a prominent member of the community. The reporting on this site about it, however, is just sick. If all Lat wanted to do was report on the death of a prominent member of the legal community he'd remove ALL the disgusting posts from the thread and just leave it as a news item. Instead, he's chosen to ruin this man's name and hurt his wife and children. Super-classy move if you ask me...

I understand where you are coming from. At the same time this is a tabloid blog. He didn't make this up nor did he insinuate anything.

If a lawyer was eaten by a shark and people started a huge thread making fun of him etc. you would have no problem with it.

What about a heroin overdose?

Disabling comments or censoring which topics can and cannot be discussed defeats the purpose of the site.

I agree that certain comments might be tacky, but I definitely think this can be avoided by 'averting the eyes.' Something tells me that those grieving aren't logging on to ATL on a daily basis to check out the latest offensive comments.

maybe not today, but the beauty of google is that this shit lasts forever. you don't think there's a reasonable chance that his children, now too young to know anything about this, will one day wonder how their father died and might resort to googling?

9:08, once the kids are old enough to learn about the birds and the bees, they will figure things out.

Do not blame the reader comments on a single blog for their loss of innocence. Other sources reported on this before ATL did. Anyone with half a brain can figure out what happened based on the two news articles that ATL linked to.

Asphyxiation is simply a medical term for suffocation. There are many ways to asphyxiate - choking on food is among the most common. The man was alone; he likely choked. I do not see why this blog allows Mr. Weiser's name, and more importantly, his family, to be exposed to such vile and baseless speculation about the nature of his death. Please delete the previous posts and let his poor family be.