Mock Court Program
From this point in the course onward, the syllabus becomes quite complicated. Read it carefully now so that you can ask questions if you have them. Some past students in this course have made some very bad mistakes by not reading this part of the syllabus closely. Read it now and carefully.
The Approach. Case work is the best way to study the law. We'll spend the rest of the term engaged in Mock Court proceedings. On Thursday, April 21, Mock Court will convene for the first time. Most days we will argue two cases per day back-to-back. The Mock Court will hear all oral arguments for the day's cases and then spend the remaining time deliberating. As counsel before the Mock Court, you must plan your arguments to fit the time limits. Petitioner gets six minutes and may reserve up to ninety seconds of that time for rebuttal. Respondent also gets six minutes, but may only use it in one presentation. During conference, counsel may remain, but they must not be noticeable in any way or they will be thrown out of the room and penalized in grade. Note that we hear cases in the same chronological order as the Real Court. That will skew some of our results. Insofar as counsel can remind the Mock Court of the contemporary situation, it will be a good idea to do so.
THREE WARNINGS:
(1) Cases will be heard and briefs and opinions will be due the first class after Long Weekend. Deal with it.
(2) Look ahead to all your cases, so you can plan your personal workload. The schedule is not symmetrical and you may go periods without much to hand in, only to find yourself crushed for a few days. It is possible you will need to submit briefs on back-to-back days, though it shouldn't happen to any student more than once. It is also possible that you have a brief due the day of an oral argument. Plan now, because everyone does the same amount of work for the entire course, and so no leniency will be granted. Each of you will prepare briefs for and argue five cases, write three per curiam opinions, and write two dissenting opinions.
(3) If for any reason you will miss a class, it is your responsibility to inform me well in advance, so that I can help arrange a swap or a substitute for you if it is necessary to do so. You must do all written work on of the day due if you will miss a class when you have deadline for written work. The casework schedule is intricate and will not long endure if absences mount up. Try to schedule your trips to colleges, etc., so that they do not conflict with our work here. In any case, failure of early notification will cost you a heavy grade penalty.
Please read the following schedule carefully. There may be an error that only you will pick up. It is not an error if you find that you are doing more than one thing on a given day. For help deciphering the important due dates below, there is a tutorial online here.
| # | Day/Date | Case | Counsel Assigned |
Per
Curiam Assigned |
Briefs
Due by 10 p.m. |
Opinions
Due in class |
1 |
Thu.,
4/24 |
Schenck v. U.S. 249 U.S. 47 (1919) III |
A v. N |
D |
DEJK |
None |
Near v. Minnesota 283 U.S. 697 (1931) III |
G v. H |
K |
||||
2 |
Tue.,
4/29 |
Missouri v. Canada 305 U.S. 337 (1938) I |
B v. M |
A |
FIMN |
None |
Smith v. Allwright 321 U.S. 649 (1944) I |
C v. L |
N |
||||
3 |
Thu.,
5/1 |
Morgan v. Virginia 328 U.S. 373 (1946) I |
D v. K |
G | ABLK |
DK |
Yates v. U.S. 354 U.S. 298 (1957) III |
E v. J |
H |
||||
4 |
Fri.,
5/2 |
Roth v. U.S. 354 U.S. 476 (1957) III |
F vs. I |
M |
CDIJ |
AN |
Gomillion v. Lightfoot 364 U.S. 339 (1960) I |
M vs. N |
B |
||||
5 |
Tue.,
5/6 |
Mapp v. Ohio 367 U.S. 643 (1961) II |
L vs. A |
C |
EFGH |
GH |
Baker v. Carr 369 U.S. 186 (1962) IV |
K vs. B |
L |
||||
6 |
Thu., 5/8 |
Engel v. Vitale 370 U.S. 421 (1962) III |
J vs. C |
I |
KLMN |
BM
|
Gideon v. Wainwright 372 U.S. 335(1963) II |
I vs. D |
F |
||||
7 |
Fri.,
5/9 |
New York Times v. Sullivan 376 U.S. 254 (1964) III |
H vs. E |
J |
ABIJ |
CL |
Griffin v. Board of Education 377 U.S. 218 (1964) I |
G vs. F |
E |
||||
8 |
Mon.,
5/12 |
Escobedo v. Illinois 378 U.S. 478 (1964) II |
M vs. L |
K |
CDGH |
IF |
Griswold v. Connecticut 381 U.S. 479 (1965) III |
N vs. K |
D |
||||
9 |
Tue.,
5/13 |
Memoirs v. Massachusetts 383 U.S. 413 (1966) III |
A vs. J |
N |
EFKL |
EJ |
Cohen v. California 403 U.S. 15 (1971) III |
B vs. I |
A |
||||
10 |
Thu.,
5/15 |
Lemon v. Kurtzman 403 U.S. 602 (1971) III |
C vs. H |
G |
IJMN |
DK |
New York Times v. U.S. 403 U.S. 713 (1971) III |
D vs. G |
H |
||||
11 |
Fri.,
5/16 |
U.S. v. Caldwell 408 U.S. 665 (1972) II |
E vs. F |
M |
ABGH |
AN
|
Roe v. Wade 410 U.S. 113 (1973) III |
K vs. L |
B |
||||
12 |
Mon.,
5/19 |
Milliken v. Bradley 418 U.S. 717 (1974) I |
J vs. M |
C |
CDEF |
GH
|
Gregg v. Georgia 428 U.S. 153 (1977) II |
I vs. N |
L |
||||
13 |
Tue.,
5/20 |
Regents v. Bakke 438 U.S. 265 (1978) I |
H vs. A |
I |
IJKL |
BM |
| Board of Education v. Pico 457 U.S. 853 (1982) III |
G vs. B | F |
||||
14 |
Thu.,
5/22 |
Lynch v. Donnelly 465 U.S. 668 (1984) III |
F vs. C |
E | GHMN |
CL |
Texas v. Johnson 491 U.S. 397 (1989) III |
E vs. D |
J |
||||
15 |
Fri.,
5/23 |
Lee v. Weisman 505 U.S. 577 (1992) III |
K vs. J |
None |
ABEF; Super Bowl lawyers |
IF |
Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. Hialeah 508 U.S. 520 (1993) III |
L vs. I |
None |
||||
16 |
Tue.,
5/27 |
Reno v. ACLU |
M vs. H |
None |
CD |
EJ |
National Endowment
for the Arts v. Finley |
N vs. G |
None |
||||
17 |
Thu.,
5/29 |
Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition 535 U.S. 234 (2002) III |
A vs. F |
None |
None |
None |
Lawrence v. Texas 539 U.S. 558 (2003) III |
B vs. E |
None |
||||
18 |
Fri.,
5/30 |
District of Columbia v. Heller 000 U.S. 07-290 (2008) III |
C vs. D | None |
None |
None |
19 |
Tue., 5/27 |
Super Bowl
Case: |
TBA |
TBA |
None |
None |
Notes on the Schedule:
1) This is the key to the counsel assignments above:
| A | Ms. Corbett | E | Mr. Judd | I | Ms. Pal | M | Ms. Wallace | |||
| B | Mr. Cuomo | F | Ms. King | J | Mr. Polur | N | Ms. Wu | |||
| C | Ms. Hills | G | Mr. Newhouse | K | Ms. Saha | |||||
| D | Mr. Holmes | H | Mr. Olcott | L | Mr. Valente |
The letters also identify the "Justice" who will write the opinion of the Court. Unlike what happens in the Real Court, our per curiam will be written by the assigned Justice no matter how she or he voted. See the column "Opinions Due" for the class in which the per curiam is due. An opinion must not exceed one page in length, giving the correct citation for the case and the Mock Court's vote. Otherwise the opinion must mimic the way the Real Court writes. You can here.
2) Citations are to "U.S. Reports," which you can translate from the L.Ed and S.C. Reports we have in our Library or, even better, access online at the FindLaw.com database (see below). Do not overlook The New York Times, which is a splendid resource on those cases after 1960 or so.
3) The roman numerals following the citations indicate the type of case. Key: I = civil rights; II = rights of the accused; III = civil liberties; IV = other (political issues, states' rights, etc.)
4) Legal briefs, comprised of only one side of one sheet, must be submitted at least two class days before the case is to be argued, as per the schedule above. Be careful here: submit a copy to me and one to the opposing lawyer in class on the day the brief is due. You may send it as a Microsoft Word document via e-mail attachment if submitted by the deadline. You must be prepared to distribute a photocopy to each member of the class on the day your case is to be argued, so that all can read them before the oral argument. Late briefs will be severely penalized. You may have to write opinions and prepare other cases during this time, too, so plan your work carefully.
5) In addition to the assigned per curiam opinions, each student must write at least two additional opinions in a case where he or she dissents. You may not write a dissent in a case when you are assigned the per curiam. Don't wait here: if you dissent in an early case, write the dissenting opinion then, because you may be trapped later on if you delay. Dissents are due the same day as the per curiam in the case. Late dissents will not be accepted. A model of a dissenting opinion is available online by clicking here.
6) Near the end of the term, the class will select the four best lawyers and I will select the best opinion writer to argue the "Super Bowl case." Presuming all work is completed in good faith, the super bowlers will earn grades of "A+" or "A" for these cases and opinions. Any student may dissent for extra credit.
7) The first eight briefs are due in class #16. Thereafter, all briefs will be due as assigned above; copies must be available in DropBox to opponents at 10 p.m. on the date due and to all in the class on the day of oral argument.
8) Each student has five cases to prepare and argue and two per curiam opinions and two dissents to write this term. The written work will be short but demanding. Grades for Mock Court work will be awarded as follows: (a) to "counsel" for research, analysis--i.e., how well arguments were tied to the Constitution, statutes, needs of the people in changing times, common sense, and whatever else is applicable--clarity, quality of written and oral work, and whether you were able to keep the Mock Court consistent with the Real Court or were able to "reverse" history; and (b) to "justices" for quality and especially clarity of writing, since millions of Americans must be able to understand what you say the law is, and analysis in deliberations and opinions. In both roles, you are to seek verisimilitude: pretend that it is the day the case was heard by the Real Court, and that you know only what was known then. You may, of course, make reasonable speculations about the future, but you may not know it.
9) Be cooperative with the others in this class. Most of you will use online resources, but the Andrew Mellon Library's law collection may still be of use. Sometimes several students will need the same volume of the Reports, so don't walk away from the reference section with a book causing a panicky search. If anyone is uncooperative, I will take disciplinary action. Don't ever rip a page out of the Reports. One student did so some years ago; a relentless investigation uncovered the culprit, who was expelled.
10) Lawyers may help each other in the research and in understanding the cases. There are two limits: (a) no student must exploit another, and no student must allow himself to be exploited; and (b) once writing has begun, all consultation must stop. If you do get help from other students, write a note that tells me about it and staple it to the brief. If you are graceful in this matter, both will be rewarded, but anything dishonest will be punished.
Internet Database of U.S. Supreme Court Opinions
FindLaw's searchable database of the Supreme Court decisions since 1893 (U.S. Supreme Court Decisions: U.S. Reports 150-, 1893-). Browsable by year and U.S. Reports volume number and searchable by citation, case title and full text.
Browsing
Citation Search
Title Search
Full-Text Search
![]()
This syllabus copyright © 1999-2014 Ned Gallagher. All rights reserved.
Last revised:
May 9, 2014