Toby’s blog

Can’t get security clearance? Don’t bother applying for these jobs…

For those students interested in pursuing legal careers within the Government, a National Security Summer Jobs panel was held a few weeks ago by several 2Ls and 3Ls who had completed internships in New York, Washington, DC, and Virginia.

Erik Swabb kicked off the panel’s remarks. He interned with the Counterterrorism Section at DOJ. “Though unpaid, I was able to deal with substantive legal issues… and was given broad exposure to the National Security System.” Though a highly positive experience, Swabb was merely the first of most panelists to warn that feedback from agency attorneys can be difficult to obtain.

Megan Gaffney agreed and expanded upon Swabb’s account—she was also at DOJ but in the National Security Unit. “I also was dealt amazingly substantive work and really felt like I was contributing to the Division within my small group… but, the attorneys are indeed swamped with work.” Gaffney and Swabb insisted that interns be proactive in order to get the most out of their internships. “The attorneys, if nothing else, wanted me to be interested in my work,” said Gaffney.

Foremost of many students’ concerns was the need for security clearances. The panelists urged students interested in agency jobs to get the ball rolling early if for no other reason that to facilitate the start date of one’s job and to be able to participate in more highly classified assignment. As some of the earliest positions available to 1Ls, National Security internships will make offers this winter that are contingent upon successful completion of a security clearance.

Nervous? Don’t be. “The concern of passing a clearance for past drug usage or extensive travels abroad are not reasons enough not to apply,” said Daniel Adams, who interned at Defense in the Office of the General Counsel. “Be honest and up front, and they’ll be more forgiving than if you lie.”

I recently wrote about a new summer fellowship program designed to allow students to get serious writing experience. (See earlier blog entry here) The program provides for “workshopping” of the articles with classmates and faculty members. Recently I sat in on one of these workshops and was quite literally blown away by the level of discussion.

The workshop started at noon and the presenting student, Clifford Chen, was standing by the podium gathering his thoughts. I had read his draft, entitled “Delegating to the President: Unique Problems in Nondelegation,” before attending. In short, the article talks about the implications of Congress delegating powers of regulation directly to the President, as opposed to delegating to agency heads or cabinet secretaries.

By 12:05, students and faculty had filed in and filled their plates with free sandwiches and cookies. I counted 11 faculty members, a group which included quite a few leading administrative law scholars (Dean Kagan among them). They had all read the article, too, and took additional notes while Clifford presented his work. Then Professor Jack Goldsmith kicked off the discussion by calling on Professor Dan Meltzer, who asked Clifford, “Does it even matter whether Congress delegates to the president directly? If it delegates to an agency head isn’t that the same thing as delegation to the president?”

Professor John Manning then weighed in on the structure of the paper, suggesting that Clifford should state his frame of analysis at the beginning. He also gave the student the name of a scholar who had written on the subject as a future research item. Almost every faculty member in the room contributed suggestions and guidance to the discussion, and I know that many of them had more feedback to give off line.

Wow. So here’s the score: one student with a rough draft and eleven faculty members coaching, critiquing and nudging. I’d say Mr. Chen is ready to hit the job market running.