Biglaw recruiting has been on an unsustainable trajectory for years. Timelines have crept earlier and earlier, exploding offers have become routine, and law students are increasingly asked to make career-defining decisions before they’ve had a meaningful chance to understand the profession.
Susman Godfrey has decided to take a different approach.
For its 2027 2L summer class, the elite trial firm is abandoning the accelerated playbook. Applications will remain open through June 30, 2026, and the firm will not review any submissions until after that deadline. No early reads, no informal pre-screening, and no pressure to apply before students are ready. And notably, no exploding offers. In an era defined by precruiting panic, that’s not just different — that’s borderline radical.
The move is a direct response to what Susman sees as a misalignment between current Biglaw hiring trends and how law students develop.
“We’ve watched the recruiting timeline compress year after year, and at a certain point we had to ask ourselves: who does this really serve?” said partner Nick Spear, co-chair of the firm’s employment committee. “Law students are being asked to make career-defining decisions with only one semester of grades and almost no exposure to practice.”
That model, he noted, may be workable for firms hiring at scale. It doesn’t work here.
“Susman Godfrey is a trial firm,” Spear said. “We need people who have demonstrated sustained academic excellence and who have a genuine interest in courtroom work. You simply can’t evaluate that based on a partial record.”
Instead, the firm has designed a process that allows students to complete their first year, assess their interests, and apply with a full academic record. Under this model, all candidates are evaluated on the same timeline, with complete 1L grades, and, critically, without the pressure that has come to define the current recruiting cycle.
“It’s about both fairness to students and better hiring outcomes for our firm, and they are inseparable,” said Hunter Vance, partner and co-chair of the firm’s employment committee. “Asking 1Ls to make career-altering decisions while juggling exams and adapting to the pressure of law school is just asking for poor matches. That doesn’t help law students. And it doesn’t work for Susman Godfrey.”
As Vance explained, the firm is focused on “finding the superstars who want to be real trial lawyers—not just litigators.” He went on, noting, “We need the time and information to properly evaluate students, just like the students need the time and information to properly evaluate firms.”
If eliminating exploding offers wasn’t bold enough, Susman is also embracing something that borders on heresy in Biglaw: encouraging students to split their summers. “I speak from experience,” Vance said. “I split-summered at Susman Godfrey and the quality of the work and close relationships with my future colleagues sealed the deal.”
Susman is approaching its new hiring model with confidence — the firm “loves” betting on itself. “Our summer associate experience has always been unique because we treat our summer associates just like our associates. We integrate them into our trial teams and give them real substantive work that we actually intend to use,” Vance said. “We are confident that we offer a summer program unlike any other.”
There is, of course, risk in stepping outside the prevailing Biglaw recruiting cycle. While Susman waits until July, competitors may secure commitments from top candidates months in advance. The firm, however, is comfortable with that tradeoff.
“Susman Godfrey is not afraid of the competition because we offer an unmatched opportunity,” Vance said, citing top-of-market compensation, a defined path to equity partnership, and early stand-up experience in litigation. “We want students to comparison shop, and we’re willing to bet that we’ll come out on top.”
Whether this approach signals a broader shift in Biglaw recruiting remains to be seen. “Honestly, we don’t know,” Spear said. “What we do know is that the current system does not work.” Susman has built an alternative — at least for itself.
For now, the firm is focused on aligning its hiring process with both its institutional needs and the realities facing law students.
“If other firms see our model and adopt something similar, that would be a great outcome for law students,” Spear said. “But Susman Godfrey never minds doing things its own way.”
If Susman’s new model proves successful, it may do more than reshape one firm’s recruiting strategy. It could challenge the assumption that Biglaw’s accelerated recruiting cycle was the correct course, rather than a dynamic in need of correction. It’s a bold bet — and one that could leave the rest of Biglaw with some explaining to do.
Staci Zaretsky is the managing editor of Above the Law, where she’s worked since 2011. She’d love to hear from you, so please feel free to email her with any tips, questions, comments, or critiques. You can follow her on Bluesky, X/Twitter, and Threads, or connect with her on LinkedIn.
The post Exclusive: Susman Godfrey Rejects Biglaw’s Broken Recruiting Model — And Isn’t Looking Back appeared first on Above the Law.