This tweet is unavailable
2/ To be clear, I have no idea whether #MerrickGarland played any role in the hiring of his daughter. My reference to his "feeding" simply refers to the tendency of folks associated with him (like his former clerks) to land #SCOTUS clerkships.
19
47
4
440
3/ As others have noted, if Merrick Garland is still attorney general when Jessie Garland is clerking for #SCOTUS, she'll probably have to recuse from any Court cases involving @TheJusticeDept (which is a lot of cases) — not work on them, discuss them, etc.
12
78
7
502
4/ Just based on her law school (@YaleLawSch) and her prior clerkships for two well-respected lower-court judges on prominent courts (1st Cir. and S.D.N.Y.), Jessie Garland certainly fits the profile of a #SCOTUS clerk.
9
24
4
352
This tweet is unavailable
6/ As noted by @FelixSalmon, law firms pay hefty signing bonuses for #SCOTUS clerks after they finish their clerkships. The going rate for these hiring bonuses is expected to hit $450,000 soon (if it hasn't already). bit.ly/3zd0nwb

8:28 PM · Jul 19, 2021

21
71
14
353
7/ From Patricia McCabe, the Public Information Officer at #SCOTUS: "Justice Kagan hired Jessica Garland as a law clerk in early July 2020, before President Biden’s election and Attorney General Garland’s appointment, to serve as a law clerk in 2022-2023."
6
34
10
146
8/ Patricia McCabe's statement on behalf of #SCOTUS, continued: "In light of the potential for actual or apparent conflicts of interest, Jessica Garland will not serve as a law clerk for Justice Kagan while Attorney General Garland remains in office."
8
75
23
301
9/ Please note that tweets 7 and 8 in this thread were just added at 6:08 p.m. today, after I heard from the Public Information Office of #SCOTUS. Tweets 7 and 8 were NOT posted yesterday with the rest of the thread; we did not know this info until just now.
3
5
0
110
10/ This very important update (a) puts Jessica Garland's hiring in proper context and (b) addresses the ethical concerns. Alas, because of the way info gets disseminated over Twitter, far more people will see the original news than this update. Sigh....
13
26
3
198
11/ I hate deleting tweets. I find that it's generally self-serving—people trying to make themselves look better by erasing their mistakes. But I just deleted the first tweet in this thread. It was going viral, but without the critical update.
1
0
1
26
12/ The reason I deleted my tweet is so that it won't show up on other people's feeds when subtweeted. (I had no idea that it had made it to, for example, Donald Trump Jr.'s feed; thanks to @rockinrobintil for the heads up on that.)
4
1
0
23
13/ To show that I'm not trying to erase my mistake or hide the ball, though, I'm pasting below my original, very unfortunate tweet—for which I apologize. The error was inadvertent on my part, but still unfortunate.
4
0
0
20
15/ In that now-deleted tweet, I noted one possible argument for why #SCOTUS clerkships run in some families—"genetics"—which has been mistakenly read by some as my argument or point of view.
2
0
1
2
16/ For anyone who's interested, I have written a much more detailed explanation (and apology) for this whole Merrick Garland/Jessica Garland/Justice Elena Kagan situation, in this post at Original Jurisdiction: bit.ly/3zmJGyk #SCOTUS
1
2
1
5