OR maybe he tried to and they continued to display the integrity which got them fired in the first place. You do recall they all kept their mouths shut until some idiot at Justice smeared their professional job performances. I understood that, because no law firm or corporation wants to hire anyone who publicly criticizes their last employer.
This signing bonus sure ups the ante at all the mega law firms - I bet tricky Ricky Santorum will now be demanding at least that much.
Just last week this Wall Street Journal article discussed "phat" signing bonuses for USSC clerks.
I believe that lawyers who clerk for federal district and appeals courts get about $15,000 signing bonuses. The new hires also get credit for the years spent clerking as if they had been with the law firm for that amount of time, in terms of their base salaries.
I have repeatedly pointed out in my posts on DU that any Bush appointee, or high level civil servant who takes the fall/voluntarily "resigns" and is then shoulders blame/responsibility for a Bush admin. screwup, is bribed into so doing by private sector jobs with lobbying/law firms, at many times their govt. salaries AND with (I believe I used these words) fat signing bonuses.
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2007/03/12/that-phat-200000-su... /
Posted by Peter Lattman
Corporate law firms pay Supreme Court law clerks $200,000 signing bonuses. That’s on top of a first-year’s starting salary of $145,000 to $160,000. “Which adds up to an awful lot of Pottery Barn sectional furniture for someone who is, on average, 26 years old and just two years out of school,” writes Slate’s Dahlia Lithwick in an essay that’s critical of the big bonuses thrown at these trophy hires.
Walter Dellinger, head of the appellate practice at O’Melveny, tells Lithwick that while not all of his best associates were Supreme Court clerks, “there’s a very strong overlap with extraordinary talent.” He adds: “One of the least appreciated things in the practice of law, is lawyering that rates even above truly excellent lawyering.” Sidley’s Carter Phillips confesses that he came up with the idea of law-clerk bonuses back in the 80s. “I’ll take the heat for creating this system,” he says. “But I was never the market leader for driving it up.”
Maybe there’s nothing wrong here, suggests Lithwick. After all, it’s a free market. And the bonuses could be used to pay off loans and then give lawyers the freedom to go into teaching or public service, she says.
But noting that a first-year associate who clerked on the Supreme Court will earn more than their former boss, “it’s hard to dispute the justices’ claim that the opportunity cost of staying on the bench has become almost impossible to ignore.” She quotes Justice Kennedy’s testimony before the Senate last month: “Something is wrong when a judge’s law clerk, just one or two years out of law school, has a salary greater than that of the judge or justice he or she served the year before.”