It’s typical for attorneys to cycle into and out of government and private practice when there’s a change of administration, especially if there’s a change of political party in the White House. More than 44,000 licensed attorneys serve in the federal government, according to March 2024 data from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management. Most are career lawyers, not political appointees. New administrations tend to want their “own” people and existing government lawyers may find themselves less aligned if there’s a shift in political philosophy.
There’s a huge difference in priorities and style between the Biden and Trump administrations, including a major divergence in what they want from their lawyers. Consequently, with this change of administration, government lawyers expect thorough housecleaning including budget cuts and job eliminations. For example, the Department of Education alone, which Trump claims he would try to abolish, employs nearly 600 lawyers. Thus, in addition to the political appointees who typically depart during a changeover in presidential administrations, even rank-and-file civil servants across virtually all agencies who thought they’d retire in government, now are exploring private practice.
Many lawyers didn’t even wait for election results. In the second half of 2024, movement accelerated with a steady flow of government attorneys transitioning to law firms’ antitrust, white-collar defense, public policy, and litigation practices at the partner, counsel, and associate levels.
Is it too late?
Attorneys hitting the job market after the election, especially after the inauguration, are late to the game. Many government lawyers view year three of a presidential term as the ideal time to make the move back to the private sector. It’s the “sweet spot” between the time necessary to gain a depth of experience and the best opportunity to apply it for immediate client impact. Attorneys who move in the third year of a presidential administration often secure better positions with more prestigious firms and higher guaranteed compensation than attorneys who join the crowd rushing out the door at the end of a term.
Senior lawyers leaving the Biden administration may have a relatively easy time finding jobs at companies and large law firms but the path for more junior lawyers with narrow specialties may find it more difficult. Not all types of expertise garnered in government legal jobs easily translate to the private sector. Those who lead a government enforcement division, for example, may have smoother access to an outside legal job than a mid-level lawyer focused on niche policy work. Furthermore, in addition to being up against lateral candidates from the private sector, more junior government lawyers may be competing directly with their own superiors for the same limited opportunities. Now, with so many government lawyers in job search mode, the market could become oversaturated.
Where can they go?
Nonetheless, lawyers leaving the government might have more success landing at law firms than at legal departments, where competition for openings always is especially fierce—for everyone, not just former government lawyers—and are limited in number. Companies seek candidates whose government experience aligns directly with their business requirements. They want lawyers with well-honed leadership skills, experience managing large teams, and high emotional intelligence in addition to business acumen and significant substantive experience that fills a strategic need.
Lawyers leaving the government also could consider opportunities in a non-profit organization or a trade association. While these jobs can be gratifying, the compensation typically is lower than in most private law firms or companies. Lawyers interested in these jobs usually need strong specific industry expertise just as with commercial enterprises. Many former government lawyers look for jobs in academia as a tenure- or non-tenure track professor, or as a lawyer in a university legal department which, again, may have more limited financial or growth potential.
What about simply “boomeranging?”
In 2024, several government lawyers returned or boomeranged to their prior law firms or to firms where they had ties, such as with former colleagues or clients who moved there while the job seeker was in government service. Boomeranging makes sense in many cases since lawyers coming out of government usually aren’t able to start generating significant business in the near term. In those cases, it’s in their best interest to return to firms where they’re well known by their former colleagues and their client and network connections are deeply embedded.
Returning isn’t always a given, however, particularly after long stints in the government. Their prior firms may have dissolved or merged, their closest colleagues may have retired or moved to other firms, and their clients may have dispersed. In that case, they may need to look elsewhere. Even if their previous firms are laying out the welcome mat, another firm may provide a more compelling platform, have a stronger history of success with former government attorneys, offer more compensation, present a better title, or promise more powerful leadership opportunities. Therefore, lawyers leaving government service should consider all options before going for the easy exit.
What’s their selling proposition?
Law firms are gearing up for changes in practice that may result from a new political agenda from the White House. Partners say they expect certain practices to benefit from Trump’s regulatory agenda, such as international trade, antitrust, tax and national security. At the same time, some areas may see a slowdown, such as FDA, environmental, and renewable practices. Lateral lawyer hiring in affected practice areas will reflect these changes.
Former government lawyers can be attractive lateral hires since government service provides front line experience far sooner than any other career path. The higher lawyers rise in government—whether federal, state or local—the richer, deeper, and more valuable their knowledge, experience, relationships, and contacts can become. Those with leadership titles, immediately transferable private sector skills, and past experience working in a law firm have the best odds. Firms typically look for meaningful substantive expertise, strong networks, and marquee names.
“Inside” experience provides opportunities to gain subject matter knowledge of the policies underlying a variety of statutes and regulations, as well as procedural expertise in dealing with agencies and their respective compliance frameworks and forum and procedural rules, as well as access to the “right” people. Direct involvement in landmark disputes can develop extensive knowledge of the underlying law, policy, and political sensitivities. Lawyers with this expertise can be of tremendous value to private companies who, in any aspect of their business, are subject to such regulation as well as to the law firms who advise them.
What about portable business?
When public-service lawyers look to reenter private practice, where they land often depends on how much revenue they can generate in the near term. Those who held a law firm partner position before entering government service left their practice and clients behind. If they wished to return to private practice in the future, they would have no immediately portable book of business, which usually is the key to securing a top law firm partner role. However, while the cost of leaving private practice can be high, government experience can “supercharge” a lawyer’s practice and ability to develop a client following in the private sector later on.
Candidates from government legal jobs must think about their skills in business terms. They should ask themselves what they can bring to a firm’s or company’s bottom line. It’s essential for these candidates to write a strong business plan describing their network/contacts (naming names, if possible) and skills, and substantively discussing current issues within their practice area. Most importantly, the business plan should outline how, with the backing of a law firm, they can use their unique background to generate significant revenue within their first years in private practice. The best business plans are tailored to the specific firm and opportunity being sought. These business plans are critical job search tools, especially for senior candidates, as they can determine whether or not a candidate is hired, their title, and compensation.
Are there ethics restrictions?
Law firms seeking to hire lawyers from the government and the candidates themselves face important ethical procedures and restrictions.
Law firms must set up ethics screens on some matters and ensure that laterals from the government aren’t compensated for certain matters. Profitability projections must account for the hands-off period required by the lawyer’s prior agency for a period of time. Firms also must consider how long a government candidate will be restricted from handling certain matters or advising clients on cases before their agency, which can vary in years. If a former government attorney is hired as an equity partner, the firm must ensure that the attorney isn’t sharing in fees generated from a client matter involving the government during the time the lawyer was in government. Some firms subtract the fees generated from applicable government matters when computing an equity partner’s profit share, while others arrange a contract partnership or fixed salary for a period of time.
Candidates must talk with their agency’s ethics official before taking any steps in a job search. (For a list of questions for job seekers to ask the official, see https://www.law.com/americanlawyer/2019/08/15/navigating-the-ethical-maze-when-moving-from-government-to-private-practice.) The search itself may impact when or if a candidate’s recusal is triggered from a case they may be working on or overseeing at their agency. They also must consider any potential conflicts of interest arising from mere employment discussions with law firms representing parties in their cases which also might require recusal. Note that there can be considerable differences in how certain agencies interpret and apply what can and cannot be permitted before requiring a recusal, so guidance from the ethics official is essential.
Although conversations with the ethics official are completely confidential, a candidate’s colleagues can become aware of the search because they’re seeing those recusals. Nevertheless, candidates must follow the rules set out in https://www.justice.gov/jmd/leaving-government. Sometimes, if the candidate is at a high enough level, they will leave their agency before even conferring with a recruiter or beginning their search so as not to hobble the agency with numerous recusals.
Can a legal recruiter help?
For ethics reasons, a recruiter can help by making blind introductions to potential employers where lawyers leaving the government are unable to reach out directly. In a single-blind inquiry, which is most common, the recruiter presents a description of the candidate’s background without identifying information, evading ethical issues by keeping the lawyer’s identity anonymous, while also protecting the candidate’s confidentiality. A double-blind inquiry is the most conservative approach. In this situation, the recruiter presents an anonymous description of the candidate’s background to firms that match the job-seeker’s criteria, but the recruiter doesn’t tell the candidate which firms are being contacted.
In both cases, once a law firm expresses interest and the recruiter informs the candidate, ethical disclosure/recusal obligations may be triggered, depending on the circumstances. The benefit of blind inquiries is that they allow law firms to make an initial determination of interest in learning more about the candidate, while completely protecting the lawyer’s identity and confidentiality. A downside is that law firms may not take blind inquiries as seriously as compared to fully open submissions.
In any event, a good recruiter can provide valuable market information and guidance throughout the candidate’s government to private practice job search process. This can be a huge advantage, especially with so many government lawyers currently active in the market.
