DOJ exit opportunities

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, are you targeting Fraud? It's great experience, but the travel is honestly harder than most BigLaw jobs would be. I can't imagine starting there straight out of school with two kids under five.

OP here. I'm targeting a section (not necessarily in Crim division) that I understand has travel requirements equivalent to some units in Crim Fraud. I have heard that even within fraud it varies--healthcare fraud is supposed to be brutal but maybe financial or FCPA are just above average? But in general yes, I understand it to be a substantial amount of travel.

[Anonymous]

Parent of two small children, the government endures, BigLaws do implode at a statistically significant rate. If they like you now, for real, they'll like you after two years in DOJ. Oh, and seeing your children while they grow...pretty cool. Fine to meet them twice a year at firm outings if that's your thing though. Just pick good child caregivers.

[Anonymous]

If money is or will be an issue at all, I would do biglaw. You should never expect that you’ll get the biglaw option again -- maybe you will after 2-3 yrs in DOJ, maybe you’ll come in as partner or counsel when you’re senior, or maybe the market will change again and they’ll be totally opposed to laterals. I’m not suggesting that it’s an easy feat to get into DOJ later, but people do it; you already know what it takes so you can be tailoring your experience and networking as a junior associate while making 160k+ and building up a good amount of savings/paying down loans etc. Also, if you have 2 small kids and are targeting a section like crim fraud, it may be easier on your life and family to do biglaw. Biglaw juniors don’t travel that much and certainly not constantly. I’m a biglaw senior now and I didn’t consider the junior years to be that hard - it was a lot of volume of work but other than that, nothing over the top difficult about it; and you didn’t have to navigate the politics, which leaves open plenty of time to be doing the types of resume building things that’ll look good for DOJ later.

[Anonymous]

DOJ spouse with small kids, I believe in a fairly high travel section (weeks without any travel at all are unusual). The travel is definitely tough, and does seem to drive people out. But I'm very sure my spouse has been happier at DOJ due to the control over his work and the opportunity for real trial experience. I also just mentioned this thread to him and confirmed my impression that this schedule has been easier on the family than firm life would have been.

[Anonymous]

Once you are in DOJ, it isn't too difficult to jump to other government jobs if the hours/travel seems unmanageable. Same is not true from a firm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:23:33 is correct. I've done both big law and DOJ. Go to BigLaw now while you can. The reverse only happens if you have a particular specialty to sell back or are a big political player . . and the firm wants you back. The norm is to go BigLaw, hopefully make partner . . . then do a few years at an agency . . . and sometimes the firm will take you back. With the financial market being what it is, I would definitely go BigLaw and hang out there as long as you can. And save your pennies. Once you leave, you may never get back in.

How common is it for someone to make partner in biglaw and then leave for an agency? I have seen people who get to be seniors and feel like partnership is unattainable and then leave to get subject matter expertise; some come back in as partners and many don't. If you already make partner, what's the draw to leave professionally or monetarily? Or are you seeing partners leave for lifestyle/stability? Just curious.

I made that move. I was not a large rain maker, so I was never going to get the million dollar a year salary. I saved and invested during my rise and now use income from my portfolio to supplement my government salary. I left for life style reasons. I'm a GS-15, so I still make decent money. I may make 50% less than at my firm, but I have increased my time with my family by more than 50%. For me, the trade off is worth it.

[Anonymous]

I did a clerkship, 5 years at BigLaw, became an AUSA, and just moved to Main Justice. DOJ Honors was not on my radar screen coming out of law school because I wanted to make money and wanted to make partner. Then I spent five years at a firm and saw that life didn't get better once you make partner. The partners I worked for were still traveling all the time, still never saw their kids, and had the added pressure of bringing in new business. I was lucky to be able to make the jump to being a federal prosecutor. It is the most fun legal job in the world, IMO. I make a pittance and still work pretty hard, but I have so much more control over my life and cases than I would even as a junior partner in BigLaw. You definitely can make the jump from BigLaw to DOJ, but it is not as easy as some PPs make it seem. Every time the USAO or my component now has an opening, we get literally hundreds of resumes from senior associates and, yes, junior partners from all the fancy firms. A few of them get hired, but many, many more do not.

OP, I can't tell you what you should do. Only you can weigh the unique set of factors that go into your decision. I would, however, focus on what job you want to do right now, instead of what you hope to be doing down the road because what you want down the road has a way of changing when you actually get down that road. You seem well-informed and savvy, and if you work hard and smartly and make good connections wherever you can, I think you'll be able to do what you want regardless of what your first job out of school is.

[Anonymous]

I would go to the big law firm. It's seems a no-brainer to me, and if the firm is well-known and somewhat prestigious, you will have that on your resume for the rest of your life.

As some prior posters noted, having a DOJ background is not always viewed as impressive, and unfairly or not, there is a notion that the work of prosecutors is somewhat routine and you max out those advocacy skills after a few years.

I think it's a no-brainer.

[Anonymous]

It sounds like you are looking at two positions that will take you from your kids. In that case, go to big law. At least you can afford good childcare and the support you need. Litigating units at DOJ work much harder than many law firms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would go to the big law firm. It's seems a no-brainer to me, and if the firm is well-known and somewhat prestigious, you will have that on your resume for the rest of your life.

As some prior posters noted, having a DOJ background is not always viewed as impressive, and unfairly or not, there is a notion that the work of prosecutors is somewhat routine and you max out those advocacy skills after a few years.

I think it's a no-brainer.

I don't mean this sarcastically -- do you work at a big firm? there seems to be a pretty consistent theme in this thread of people thinking that whatever they did for themselves is generally the most sensible choice in life. A few people have said they did both, which offers a more balanced perspective. What would be really interesting are people who chose one but are willing to say they wish they had done the other. Seems like the people who have done both almost all say that DOJ is better.

Seems to boil down to money vs. professional satisfaction. In terms of the average experience, Biglaw delivers on the former and DOJ the latter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would go to the big law firm. It's seems a no-brainer to me, and if the firm is well-known and somewhat prestigious, you will have that on your resume for the rest of your life.

As some prior posters noted, having a DOJ background is not always viewed as impressive, and unfairly or not, there is a notion that the work of prosecutors is somewhat routine and you max out those advocacy skills after a few years.

I think it's a no-brainer.

op here. why am I putting prestigious things on my resume? I think three decades of that is enough, and I'm ready to decide what to do with my life and close some of those doors that professors and grandparents are always telling you to keep open. I respect that apparently some senior biglaw folks do not hold DOJ experience in the highest regard, but that seems component-specific and I would probably self-select (now and in the future) away from any place that, for whatever reason, had a lot of people that viewed DOJ trial section experience as a negative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would go to the big law firm. It's seems a no-brainer to me, and if the firm is well-known and somewhat prestigious, you will have that on your resume for the rest of your life.

As some prior posters noted, having a DOJ background is not always viewed as impressive, and unfairly or not, there is a notion that the work of prosecutors is somewhat routine and you max out those advocacy skills after a few years.

I think it's a no-brainer.

op here. why am I putting prestigious things on my resume? I think three decades of that is enough, and I'm ready to decide what to do with my life and close some of those doors that professors and grandparents are always telling you to keep open. I respect that apparently some senior biglaw folks do not hold DOJ experience in the highest regard, but that seems component-specific and I would probably self-select (now and in the future) away from any place that, for whatever reason, had a lot of people that viewed DOJ trial section experience as a negative.

I started at BigLaw and moved to DoJ. There have been people in my section who started here at DoJ and moved to Biglaw. There are also people who have moved back and forth. Both can be done, and there are lots of variables like expertise, timing and the economy. One thing I can say about this supposed Biglaw types not viewing DoJ as impressive - I think it is more that they know attorneys with substantial DoJ experience are not going to take a lot of BS from BigLaw partners. It was amazing to see after I left BigLaw just how reverential some of the associates at my former firm act about the partners. I suppose I did as well when I worked there. But now, they are just some man or woman on the street, or maybe some party across the table in negotiations. But they don't run my life anymore, and I would have a hard time returning and taking their sh!t

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I did a clerkship, 5 years at BigLaw, became an AUSA, and just moved to Main Justice. DOJ Honors was not on my radar screen coming out of law school because I wanted to make money and wanted to make partner. Then I spent five years at a firm and saw that life didn't get better once you make partner. The partners I worked for were still traveling all the time, still never saw their kids, and had the added pressure of bringing in new business. I was lucky to be able to make the jump to being a federal prosecutor. It is the most fun legal job in the world, IMO. I make a pittance and still work pretty hard, but I have so much more control over my life and cases than I would even as a junior partner in BigLaw. You definitely can make the jump from BigLaw to DOJ, but it is not as easy as some PPs make it seem. Every time the USAO or my component now has an opening, we get literally hundreds of resumes from senior associates and, yes, junior partners from all the fancy firms. A few of them get hired, but many, many more do not.

OP, I can't tell you what you should do. Only you can weigh the unique set of factors that go into your decision. I would, however, focus on what job you want to do right now, instead of what you hope to be doing down the road because what you want down the road has a way of changing when you actually get down that road. You seem well-informed and savvy, and if you work hard and smartly and make good connections wherever you can, I think you'll be able to do what you want regardless of what your first job out of school is.

This. fourth years from the top tier firms in DC getting rejected on the regular.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, are you targeting Fraud? It's great experience, but the travel is honestly harder than most BigLaw jobs would be. I can't imagine starting there straight out of school with two kids under five.

OP here. I'm targeting a section (not necessarily in Crim division) that I understand has travel requirements equivalent to some units in Crim Fraud. I have heard that even within fraud it varies--healthcare fraud is supposed to be brutal but maybe financial or FCPA are just above average? But in general yes, I understand it to be a substantial amount of travel.

DOJ spouse back - no idea if you're looking for spouse perspective, but since it sounds like you care about the impact of this decision on your spouse/family I thought I'd chime in. Just wanted to speak to the pragmatic aspects of the travel issue, because it has been a significant factor for our family. First I'll say that the travel has been tough, but that I honestly think it's been better (for our family) than what I understand the firm alternative to be. Yes my husband is frequently out of town (sometimes for extended periods), but when he's in town he can generally be at home early enough to be helpful, and when he's gone I don't have to worry about him - to me that's a better balance than a job that has him sleeping at home but working hours where he couldn't get home for bedtime / otherwise help out with the kids. I'll also add that it's not the sheer volume of travel that has been so rough (at least for me - my husband may feel differently), but rather the unpredictability of it. I can't tell you the number of times I've gotten a call Tuesday afternoon about a 2 day trip starting the next morning, or the long planned for out of town trials that get continued and rescheduled at the last minute.

[Anonymous]

I think it's a no-brainer.

op here. why am I putting prestigious things on my resume? I think three decades of that is enough, and I'm ready to decide what to do with my life and close some of those doors that professors and grandparents are always telling you to keep open. I respect that apparently some senior biglaw folks do not hold DOJ experience in the highest regard, but that seems component-specific and I would probably self-select (now and in the future) away from any place that, for whatever reason, had a lot of people that viewed DOJ trial section experience as a negative.
OP, if you want to do DOJ, you should do DOJ. Just do not do DOJ because you think it will offer you the ability to eventually cash out. It may or may not, and I can tell you that as a general rule, the people who leave government and "cash out" tend to be superstars, not junior DOJ folks. A few other points:
-- Think seriously about the impact that much travel will have on your family. I am BigLaw midlevel litigator, and do almost no travel. The very few times I have traveled, for me, have been much worse than the average long hours required by BigLaw. For the average high workload, I can almost always make it home by a reasonable hour, see my kids, and then log back on to work more from home. This schedule is very very typical of BigLaw parents. On those nights where I cannot make it home before bedtime, it generally means I am working to some deadline, and with that out of the way have some leeway the very next morning, and can often take the next morning off and spend it with my children. But routine travel is different - you are simply not there a lot of the time. I would think carefully about whether you are ok with that - I love my job, but those few days where I miss bedtime are definitely the worst. I cannot imagine that being routine.
-- I don't think you are quite understanding why a BigLaw firm would not jump at the chance to hire a DOJ attorney. It is not so much that BigLaw does respect the DOJ experience, it is just that DOJ experience, no matter how great it was, may have limited applicability to what a large law firm actually does. For instance being lead counsel on a bunch of trials is awesome, but at a large law firm, that is generally not what associates are needed to do. Large law firms already have plenty of senior people with lots of trial experience, some of whom may have spent 20 years in government, or been judges themselves. Playing defense can be very different than playing offense like the government generally does, particularly if your client is in fact guilty of some wrongdoing. And the goals and concerns of private parties may be very different than the goals and concerns of the government - learning to anticipate and address those concerns is not something DOJ is going to teach you. And most fundamentally, a key part of private practice is developing relationships with clients- in government you will not be doing that. So while DOJ may provide great experience, BigLaw firms are going to be thinking of what they need associates to do, and that great experience may simply not be applicable. My firm is looking for a lateral right now, but we are recruiting from other firms, not the government. It is not because we don't respect government attys, but we are aware that government attys in our field do different work.