5 Page assignment

POSC 375: Legal Brief to accompany Moot Court Spring 2018

Due Tuesday May 8 regardless of your oral argument date Hard Copy IN CLASS & Turn-it-in BOTH SECTIONS at start of respective class times

Page Length: 5-6 pages - DOUBLE SPACED

You will prepare a legal brief on the same side for which you will conduct the oral argument. This brief should contain much of the same elements as your oral argument. The format is listed below. You are expected to write this in FULL essay format with full paragraphs and sentences NOT BULLETED POINTS – grammar counts! You will break your paragraphs up by headings. You MUST use at least 7 of the cases included in the hypothetical as support. To do this you can DISTINGUISH the case from ours or use it to show why it should be controlling.

A successful brief will use the cases fluidly as needed. In some papers it would make sense to do this chronologically to set up what the Court has said about certain issues and types of law, in others it would not make sense since the law has changed. A paper that simply summarizes each case without providing analysis of how or why they help your case will not earn a passing grade. A paper that simply tries to persuade the court that the law is/not constitutional without showing how other laws are relevant will not earn a passing grade. Main Argument: The heading will actually be your main argument but should NOT include the words “Main Argument”

Your first heading should be your main argument – write out in full sentence. Eg: The FAIR Education Act is a constitutional act of Congress authorized under its federal powers and does not violate the 5th Amendment to the United States Constitution. Eg: Proposition 417 is unconstitutional because it poses an undue burden on a woman’s right to secure a legal abortion. Then in FULL essay paragraph form continue the main argument with support – the supporting sentences for the main argument should be the 2-3 roadmap points you will use in your oral argument. You must also include the standard of review. BRIEFLY follow the argument with an introduction of the case of your client.

Roadmap Point #1:

Your next paragraph will begin your argument and the header should be your first roadmap point written out in full sentence. You will need to address the standard of review and how the law does/does not satisfy it and why. Remember legal argumentation is reason through analogy so you will need to show how other laws that you argue are similar have satisfied or failed the standard. Continue the argument with support from the case law. This should NOT simply be separate paragraphs discussing each case – this should synthesize the case law that satisfies your argument

Roadmap Points #2-3 etc …

Follow the structure as above for remaining roadmap points. Be sure to include any additional standards of review. if there are more than one.

Conclusion

The header should recap the main argument and supporting sentences should recap the roadmap points – use different language than in your introduction. Finally tell the court what you would like it to do – E.G. The law is unconstitutional as it strips the Constitutionally protected rights of women (undocumented students) and therefore this court should overturn the lower court and strike down the law.

POSC 375: Legal Brief to accompany Moot Court Spring 2018

Due Tuesday May 8 regardless of your oral argument date Hard Copy IN CLASS & Turn-it-in BOTH SECTIONS at start of respective class times

Page Length: 5-6 pages - DOUBLE SPACED

Include a reference page for any books you used (not included in word count) AND a separate list of cases

NOTE on references: If you read the case from Rossum & Tarr please cite “as cited in Rossum in Tarr” EG: Plyer v. Doe 457 U.S. 202 (1982) as cited in Rossum and Tarr

Example for a legal brief AGAINST the constitutionality of the Affordable Health Care Act

• (Main Argument) The Affordable Health Care Act is unconstitutional as it falls outside the scope of the powers granted to Congress under Article I, Section 8 (Main Argument)

o Supporting sentences – (your road map in your oral argument) Health is not a commercial activity (Road map point 1 - Thesis sentence on your strongest issue).

Support with case law (eg: In Wickard v. Filburn (1942) this Court interpreted commerce to mean an activity that extends intrastate which substantially affects the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce.

Even if health were commercial in nature, it is subject to state police power regulation and NOT federal intervention. (Roadmap point #2 - thesis sentence on the next strongest issue)

Provide support with case law

Conclusion summarizing why your client will prevail on all issues.