It is pretty clear that Chandrachud wrote the Ayodhya judgement (compare the style of writing this judgement with his judgement in the Vodafone Tax case when he was in the Bombay High Court). The decision was not signed by anyone, and he used the famous Brown v Board of Education as his model. That probably is his Harvard training. Also, compare the Akhil Sibal polish withthat of his contemporaries. It does make a difference.
In areas like Capital Markets and B&F it kinda is important for a lawyer to have some Indian experience before moving on to a US firm. Specially CM if you've worked on 144A during your time in India.
I think that it does. Look at the thought process of the three Harvard LLM's -- R. Nariman, D. Chandrachud and Pinky Anand. They have a very methodical way of approaching each case. I have not seen that way of thinking in others.
Indian law firms do not care about LLMs. However, for people who have done their LLB from a lesser known place, a foreign LLM can open tier one law firm doors.
Does completion of an LLM (from universities in the US / EU) have a major value add from a role / level in a law firm and salary perspective in Indian law firms? How easy / hard is it to get placed with law firms abroad if you do have 4+ years work ex?
When threatened with his future/legacy (son's future judgeships in Bombay HC) he can write Judgements like OpIndia/BJP Propaganda (Ayodhya Judgement)
Other than that, he talks mostly woke to get media attention and a few claps.
Be like Dr. Chandrachud, Wokeness when it helps your career, unwoke when situation requires.
Also, compare the Akhil Sibal polish withthat of his contemporaries. It does make a difference.
Nariman and Chandrachud's finesse is the result of two generations of legal heritage.
Also, quoting methodical-rational thinking Harvard LLMs - like Rajiv Luthra?
How easy / hard is it to get placed with law firms abroad if you do have 4+ years work ex?