The Bench: Second Circuit Court of Appeals Judges Guido Calabresi and Sonia Sotomayor flank U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. as they questioned the competitors.
February 9, 2006 -- In one of the most memorable academic events in recent GW Law history, Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court John G. Roberts, Jr. and Second Circuit Court of Appeals Judges Guido Calabresi and Sonia Sotomayor heard arguments today in the final round of the 2005-06 Van Vleck Constitutional Law Moot Court Competition. Students Peter Farrell and Jason Gould argued for the Petitioner and Dennis D'Angelo and Chris Dougherty for the Respondent. All four of the competitors are third-year students.
The fictitious case, The United States v. Richard Stevens, focused on three First Amendment issues that raised novel applications of traditional free speech. The problem for the competition was written by David Belczyk, a third-year student at the Law School, with the assistance of fellow third-year student V. David Zvenyach and under the supervision of Professors Thomas Colby and Ira C. Lupu. Read a summary of the problem.
Each team had 30 minutes to present its argument, with each oralist given 15 minutes to speak. The crowd of nearly 1,500 students, faculty, alumni, and guests were kept on the edge of their seats by what Van Vleck faculty supervisor Professor Amanda Tyler called a “hot bench,” meaning the three justices were very interactive with the competitors and continuously posed questions to each student. All four competitors demonstrated a high level of preparation and skill as they fielded multiple questions from the three judges throughout their arguments.
Chief Justice Roberts said that one role of a judge during oral argument is to "play devil's advocate."
After deliberation, the Chief Justice announced that the team arguing for the Petitioner, Peter Farrell and Jason Gould, had won the competition. Jason Gould was chosen for both Best Brief and Best Oralist.
In his remarks before the decision was announced, the Chief Justice congratulated the teams for the quality of their work, and praised the entire GW moot court organization for its skill in coordinating and executing the competition. Judge Calabresi addressed the "frequently asked question” of whether oral arguments really matter in a court’s decision, saying that oral argument helps refine the decision, perhaps leading the court to take either a broader or more narrow view than it would have based on the briefs alone. Judge Sotomayor was generous in her praise for the competitors, and added that she was “heartened” by the “love and respect for the profession” demonstrated by everyone involved in the competition.
While the justices deliberated, Law School Dean Frederick M. Lawrence and University President Stephen Joel Trachtenberg greeted a number of recent moot court winners and finalists on stage and presented them with plaques commemorating their accomplishments. List of award recipients.
http://www.law.gwu.edu/Hidden+Content/Print+Friendly+Interface.htm?GUID={7D5F3849-548F-44E0-9349-4B0FE29CA227}
© 2005 The George Washington University Law School