Jones Day objects to blogger's story on its 'trim, perky and adorable' hires
Six of Jones Day’s seven new SCOTUS clerk hires
Jones Day registered its disapproval when an American Lawyer blogger described its new Supreme Court law clerk hires as “trim, perky and adorable.”
Jones Day hired seven former Supreme Court clerks this year, bringing to bringing to 19 the firm’s total number of SCOTUS clerk hires in three years. The Careerist noted the hires in a story that began:
“Jones Day buys more expensive pets. Some law firms like to show off their posh offices or their collection of fine art. Jones Day, however, likes to trot out their U.S. Supreme Court clerks. And, my goodness, don’t they look perfect?
“In fact, when I saw the picture (above) of Jones Day’s latest acquisition—seven former Supreme Court law clerks—I thought it was an image purchased from one of those photo stock houses. Not only do they look trim, perky and adorable, they’re even a diverse bunch!”
The Careerist referred to a remark by one of the clerks, Sparkle Sooknanan, and commented on her name. “Is that name made for a reality show or what?” the Careerist wrote.
The Careerist concludes with this line: “Guess they just can’t get enough of each other. Wonder if they interbreed too.”
Jones Day’s hiring partner, Sharyl Reisman, fired off a note of protest, the Careerist reported in a column noted by Above the Law.
“Although we expect gossip and little news or factual information when we pick up a tabloid magazine, we expect more when we read articles sponsored by the American Lawyer,” Reisman wrote. Despite the American Lawyer’s promise of quality and integrity, the Careerist article “lacked quality, integrity, professionalism and judgment,” Reisman said.
“Rather than recognizing those clerks for who they are—some of the most extraordinary young lawyers in this country—the American Lawyer chose instead to demean and insult them as ‘trim, perky and adorable’ ‘pets.’ The American Lawyer takes its insensitivity further by making light of the group’s diversity. Deriding the name that a parent gave a child or the name she grew up with is not reporting; it is insulting and falls well below the standards you espouse. The American Lawyer’s sexual innuendo—‘wonder if they interbreed, too’—is certainly not worthy of print in an ALM publication that purports to hold itself to any standard of professional journalism.”
Above the Law prints Reisman’s full letter here.
The Careerist responded that, as a blog, the content “is intentionally pointed and saucy.”
“You mentioned that I demeaned and insulted these hires by calling them ‘trim, perky and adorable’ ‘pets.’ Well, what can I say? Believe me, there are far worst things to be called in the world. If any group can withstand a little ribbing and not be traumatized for life, I would put my money on this esteemed bunch,” the Careerist said.
