How to be a federal judge

June 2, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Some people learn by just jumping in and doing; others prefer to do their homework to prepare for a new experience. For these people, if becoming a federal judge is on your career aspirations list, then take a look at “Path to the Federal Bench.”

It’s been created by several legal groups, including the American Constitution Society, National Association of Women Judges, and the National Bar Association, with the goal of educating young attorneys and law students on the Article III federal judgeship process and diversifying the bench. They want students and new attorneys to be thinking ahead and begin preparing themselves to become a federal judge if that’s something they think they’d like to do in the future.

The 34-page guide gives insight on everything from how to become nominated to the Senate vote. It advises young lawyers to keep tabs on everything they’ve ever written that’s been published and warns them that the background checks will likely find anything they are trying to hide, so make sure to pay your taxes and don’t be a criminal.

The pamphlet, as it’s described by the authors, emphasizes that there is no one way to become a federal judge and provides biographies of recent federal judges to support that point. It also lists resources for those interested in learning more about becoming a federal judge.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. I need an experienced attorney to handle a breach of contract matter. Kindly respond for more details. Graham Young

  2. I thought the slurs were the least grave aspects of her misconduct, since they had nothing to do with her being on the bench. Why then do I suspect they were the focus? I find this a troubling trend. At least she was allowed to keep her law license.

  3. Section 6 of Article I of the Indiana Constitution is pretty clear and unequivocal: "Section 6. No money shall be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution."

  4. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  5. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

ADVERTISEMENT