Hello, and welcome to CRCL’s live coverage of the final round of the 2013 Ames Moot Court competition!
Our judges for this evening are: the Honorable Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court; the Honorable Ilana Diamond Rovner, of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit; and the Honorable Merrick B. Garland, of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
October 23, 2013 - 09:55:21 pm by Katherine Walecka
RBG: “The court will adjourn to the recess. To the reception.”
October 23, 2013 - 09:54:56 pm by Katherine Walecka
Garland: “The level of argument here was better than in the D.C. circuit.”
RBG: “And I’ll second that.”
October 23, 2013 - 09:54:40 pm by Katherine Walecka
RBG: “I cannot avoid saying how deeply touched I was by the choice of the name for the petitioner.
And Constance Baker Motley was a woman I knew well and much admired.
The reception is waiting so I will ask my colleagues, first J. Rovner and then J. Garland to make some very brief remarks.”
October 23, 2013 - 09:52:52 pm by Andrew Mamo
Good night everyone, and thanks for tuning in to the Harvard CRCL live coverage of Ames! See you next time.
October 23, 2013 - 09:52:26 pm by Andrew Mamo
And we’re adjourned.
October 23, 2013 - 09:51:56 pm by Andrew Mamo
Amazingly, the judges remain brief with their commentary. Ginsburg makes a touching comment about the team name of the petitioners
October 23, 2013 - 09:50:32 pm by Andrew Mamo
The respondents are the overall winners.
October 23, 2013 - 09:50:27 pm by Vikram Shah
Best oralist goes to Andrew Rohrbach.
October 23, 2013 - 09:49:54 pm by Andrew Mamo
And the best oralist is Andrew Rohrbach
October 23, 2013 - 09:48:09 pm by Katherine Walecka
“I will announce the divided decision about the best brief. 2 of us have decided that Respondent’s brief is the best brief. And our next chore is to decide the best oralist.”
October 23, 2013 - 09:48:04 pm by Eric Rice
Best brief decision is divided 2-1 in favor of respondent.
October 23, 2013 - 09:47:36 pm by Andrew Mamo
Bush is not the decider — Ginsburg apparently is
October 23, 2013 - 09:47:28 pm by Katherine Walecka
“I think that everyone in this room will agree that we have been treated to some exceptional advocacy.”– RBG
October 23, 2013 - 09:46:45 pm by Andrew Mamo
And the judges (human or not) are back in the room
October 23, 2013 - 09:46:29 pm by Vikram Shah
The judges enter.
October 23, 2013 - 09:46:07 pm by Eric Rice
Aaaaand we’re back!
October 23, 2013 - 09:27:50 pm by Robin Lipp
Live investigative journalism! You read it here first.
October 23, 2013 - 09:25:56 pm by Katherine Walecka
An anonymous tipster informs us that:
“[F]or what it’s worth, the Ginsburg Memorial team actually picked their name before knowing she would judge. They asked Minow whether she would be judging because they didn’t want to pick it if she would be. Minow ok’d it. They feel totally bad about it now and considered changing it!”
October 23, 2013 - 09:22:01 pm by Robin Lipp
October 23, 2013 - 09:21:23 pm by Eric Rice
Brief recess before the decision is announced.
October 23, 2013 - 09:21:09 pm by Vikram Shah
Argument ends. Tonight’s winner: Judge Rovner’s hair.
October 23, 2013 - 09:21:07 pm by Eric Rice
Argument has ended.
October 23, 2013 - 09:20:03 pm by Eric Rice
Garland says that unless an error effects substantial rights the Court must disregard it
October 23, 2013 - 09:19:38 pm by Michael Athy
Petitioner Rebut Arg:
1) Ames Circuit not split in right to choice counsel in deportation hearing –> should result in pro se reversal
2) Other Circuits do not apply certain analysis which is relevant to this case.
October 23, 2013 - 09:19:14 pm by David Hanyok
Any thoughts on who’s going to win? Who’s the best oralist? Personally I think Judge Ilana Diamond Rovner stole the show, but she’s not eligible to win…
October 23, 2013 - 09:19:09 pm by Eric Rice
Petitioner claims better half of the circuit split
October 23, 2013 - 09:19:02 pm by JacobAlderdice
Petitioner: Respondents wrong about the Ames Circuit being wrong about the circuit split. The weight is on our side.
October 23, 2013 - 09:17:53 pm by Michael Athy
Round of applause for Respondents.
October 23, 2013 - 09:17:51 pm by Eric Rice
Time for rebuttal
October 23, 2013 - 09:17:46 pm by Jenya Parkman
Respondent admits that he is a law student. Will this decision also be appealed because it was argued by a law student? Prejudice within a prejudice.
October 23, 2013 - 09:15:47 pm by Eric Rice
Bowie says that a Georgetown Law Center clinic has a success rate twice that of the average lawyer.
October 23, 2013 - 09:15:33 pm by rjlamorte
Respondent is highlighting the success of law students representing clients.
October 23, 2013 - 09:14:46 pm by David Hanyok
Court should not presume that law students provide worse representation. Hurray!
October 23, 2013 - 09:14:46 pm by Andrew Mamo
Lesson: read the New York Times
October 23, 2013 - 09:14:31 pm by rjlamorte
Respondent is conceding a lot of points to the Court.
October 23, 2013 - 09:14:10 pm by Jenya Parkman
Ginsburg is just not impressed by Garland’s human beings jokes.
October 23, 2013 - 09:14:02 pm by Eric Rice
Judge Garland not willing to concede that he might be a human being, doubtful that Justice Ginsburg would either.
October 23, 2013 - 09:13:28 pm by rjlamorte
Garland: making an argument well might have changed what result got deference.
October 23, 2013 - 09:13:22 pm by JacobAlderdice
The bench pressing the Government on the unknown alternatives. What arguments could real lawyers have made? How persuaded could the judges have been?
October 23, 2013 - 09:13:15 pm by David Hanyok
WHO IS THE ALIEN???
October 23, 2013 - 09:12:27 pm by Jenya Parkman
Garland: Isn’t there a difference between making arguments and marking arguments well?
October 23, 2013 - 09:11:38 pm by Eric Rice
Ginsburg thinks the consequences of having the “wrong” layer are unquantifiable.
October 23, 2013 - 09:10:29 pm by rjlamorte
Respondent: If asked, attorney would have said she had permission to represent Mr. Jimenez.
October 23, 2013 - 09:10:24 pm by Eric Rice
Rovner totally dismissive of idea that requiring IJ to verify immigrant’s consent to having the law student representative as a lawyer would be overly costly.
October 23, 2013 - 09:10:17 pm by Vikram Shah
Rovner: You’re wringing your hands about the costs of a rule that would require automatic reversal when the petitioner is represented by someone not of her choice. But how much would it cost for an immigration judge to take 30 seconds to ask whether this is the lawyer of her choice?
October 23, 2013 - 09:09:03 pm by Jenya Parkman
jokes jokes jokes about youth not being an immutable characteristic.
October 23, 2013 - 09:08:01 pm by Jenya Parkman
By the way, the under bet on “number of mysterious reasons heard” would have won for the previous oralist. None were allowed by this fiery bench.
October 23, 2013 - 09:07:45 pm by JacobAlderdice
Judge Rovner and Judge Garland: isn’t not having the lawyer of your choice and violation of the statute a reversible error?
October 23, 2013 - 09:07:36 pm by David Hanyok
Judges are confused why oralist is making concessions he doesn’t have to.
October 23, 2013 - 09:07:07 pm by rjlamorte
Rovner: should IJ have to confirm that there is agreement to be represented by “callow youth”?
Respondent: “as a callow youth myself, yes.”
October 23, 2013 - 09:06:18 pm by David Hanyok
Would still have to show prejudice if the attorney had been disbarred before representing the client. Pretty harsh.
October 23, 2013 - 09:06:00 pm by rjlamorte
Rovner: is the right to competent counsel not counsel of your choosing?
Respondent: No. We agree with petitioners.
October 23, 2013 - 09:03:52 pm by Katherine Walecka
RBG: But in Acosta, the court found that the taxi drivers were part of an immutable group. Was the court wrong in Acosta?
Respondent says that the court was not wrong in Acosta. Conservative move.
October 23, 2013 - 09:01:47 pm by rjlamorte
As we get to our last oralist, any thoughts on why none of the oralists are women?
October 23, 2013 - 09:00:39 pm by David Hanyok
Tall oralist needs a taller microphone.
October 23, 2013 - 09:00:34 pm by JacobAlderdice
Bowie defending the harmless error rule
October 23, 2013 - 09:00:33 pm by Jenya Parkman
Second respondent Nikolas Bowie is now presenting on the counsel issue.
October 23, 2013 - 09:00:13 pm by Eric Rice
Final oralist, Niko Bowie, steps up
October 23, 2013 - 08:59:55 pm by Vikram Shah
Garland: So we want wealthy Guatemalans to come to the US but not gang members?
October 23, 2013 - 08:59:49 pm by JacobAlderdice
Debate between Government and Judge Garland about whether we want wealthy Guatemalans.
October 23, 2013 - 08:58:49 pm by Eric Rice
Garland wonders about the difference between gangs and guerrillas.
October 23, 2013 - 08:58:01 pm by JacobAlderdice
Government: The Board can’t let in every single group in society that suffers persecution. Too much persecution!
October 23, 2013 - 08:57:42 pm by Eric Rice
Government denies that the Board worries about opening the proverbial flood gates when considering individual cases.
October 23, 2013 - 08:57:13 pm by Chris Havasy
Rovner: Lets say it like it really is. Do we base eligibility on whether it would propose a floodgates problem?
October 23, 2013 - 08:56:50 pm by JacobAlderdice
Possible title for Judge Rovner TV Show: “Let’s Say It Like It Really Is”
October 23, 2013 - 08:56:41 pm by Katherine Walecka
Respondent doesn’t think that joining the group is an immutable characteristic.
October 23, 2013 - 08:56:13 pm by Eric Rice
Gov’t: Under these facts, the Board found that members of this group (young men being recruited into MS-13) are not persecuted more than others and that has not been contested.
This seems doubtful, no?
October 23, 2013 - 08:55:54 pm by Katherine Walecka
RBG: You have forthrightly acknowledged that there has been a change in the guideline[ . . .] why should we go on to the question of the social group?
October 23, 2013 - 08:55:15 pm by JacobAlderdice
October 23, 2013 - 08:55:10 pm by rjlamorte
Rovner: Who is society for the purpose of visibility? The gang?
October 23, 2013 - 08:54:59 pm by JacobAlderdice
Government says the BIA opinion might not have been so clear, but it should be given difference on its visibility definition.
October 23, 2013 - 08:54:37 pm by Chris Havasy
Rovner: When you on the board says a group must be visible to society, what do we mean by society? Why isn’t visibility to the gang sufficient for the social disability standard?
October 23, 2013 - 08:54:12 pm by rjlamorte
Court is hammering home idea that remand to the BIA for a definition of “visibility” might better.
October 23, 2013 - 08:54:10 pm by Eric Rice
Gov’t: In each case the BIA looks to non-visible factors to determine social visibility, so we think the social salience standard is the appropriate one.
October 23, 2013 - 08:52:21 pm by David Hanyok
Someone give Rovner a t.v. show!! She could make wayyyyy more money as the next Judge Judy than she does on the bench.
October 23, 2013 - 08:52:12 pm by Jenya Parkman
Rovner is wondering why the petitioners are defending such a cruel position. So cruel!
October 23, 2013 - 08:51:42 pm by Katherine Walecka
Rovner just called respondent “Cruel!” and then grinned.
October 23, 2013 - 08:51:24 pm by Chris Havasy
Rovner: If you’re not defending a literal understanding of social disability, then shouldn’t we take that off of the table? Remand this to the board to apply the social disability standard without relying on the petitioner’s ability to slip into invisibility?
October 23, 2013 - 08:49:49 pm by Katherine Walecka
Groups whose conduct is open and notorious are more likely to be seen as a group. Respondent is citing C.A.
October 23, 2013 - 08:49:15 pm by Michael Athy
Government jokingly concedes women are a social group.
October 23, 2013 - 08:49:14 pm by Chris Havasy
Rovner: Would a land owner or former member of the national police have a disability?
October 23, 2013 - 08:49:12 pm by JacobAlderdice
Justice Ginsburg, Judge Garland and Respondent all in on joke about women certainly being an identifiable social group. Justice McKinnon not present to question how we identify gender.
October 23, 2013 - 08:48:54 pm by Katherine Walecka
Respondent is not thinking about denial of education as being any different from persecution.
October 23, 2013 - 08:48:46 pm by Michael Athy
Court: Are women forced into arranged marriages a socially visible group??
Respondent: Likely in some societies women forced into arranged marriages are a social group but in other societies those in arranged marriages are not defined as a social group.
October 23, 2013 - 08:48:15 pm by Katherine Walecka
Respondent thinks that girls are a visible social group.
October 23, 2013 - 08:48:11 pm by David Hanyok
Women are a group! He admitted it!
October 23, 2013 - 08:48:06 pm by JacobAlderdice
Trivia tidbit: Judge Rovner herself immigrated into the United States as an infant. Her family left Latvia on the last regularly scheduled ship in the buildup to the Holocaust.
October 23, 2013 - 08:48:02 pm by Katherine Walecka
October 23, 2013 - 08:47:59 pm by Katherine Walecka
RBG says what about not having education above early elementary.
October 23, 2013 - 08:47:37 pm by Katherine Walecka
RBG wants to know if girls subject to genital mutilation qualify for protection as a group. Respondent says yes.
October 23, 2013 - 08:47:12 pm by Katherine Walecka
Respondent defines the group as having an immutable characteristic, definable boundaries, and whether the group is thought of as a group by society
Sounds not unlike the ways to identify a cancerous mole: (uneven color, irregular boundaries, and unusual size).
October 23, 2013 - 08:46:08 pm by Jenya Parkman
The line for number of mysterious reasons we’ll hear is 1.5. Taking bets.
October 23, 2013 - 08:45:49 pm by rjlamorte
Judge Garland: You believe there was a change in policy?
October 23, 2013 - 08:45:21 pm by Katherine Walecka
RBG’s first question to respondent: “What society are we talking about? The local community?”
October 23, 2013 - 08:45:09 pm by Jenya Parkman
Ginsburg: What is the relevant society?
Respondent: Courts have said that it is the country, but the Agency will elaborate over course of making decisions.
October 23, 2013 - 08:45:07 pm by Robin Lipp
There are three mysterious reasons lurking somewhere, but no chance to get to them
October 23, 2013 - 08:44:58 pm by Katherine Walecka
RBG: “Next time he [Jimenez] has no right [to counsel]. And we remand. And that’s okay?”
Ashwin says that it is, and that in that case, the analysis would be very different.
October 23, 2013 - 08:44:52 pm by Michael Athy
RGB: Must be perceived by society to be a social group but who determines what the judging society is? Local communities?
October 23, 2013 - 08:43:05 pm by rjlamorte
And now to the respondents!
October 23, 2013 - 08:42:44 pm by Jenya Parkman
Respondent Andrew Rohrbach is arguing the social visibility issue.
October 23, 2013 - 08:42:10 pm by Michael Athy
Round of applause for petitioners.
October 23, 2013 - 08:42:07 pm by JacobAlderdice
Judges have moved from pressing Petitioner on his harmless error precedent interpretations to pressing Petitioner on whether there was anything that a different lawyer could have done.
October 23, 2013 - 08:42:00 pm by David Hanyok
Merrick winks at the fourth wall again, referring to Phatak as a “real lawyer.”
October 23, 2013 - 08:41:54 pm by Vikram Shah
Justice Garland: You’re the real lawyer of Mr. Jiminez’s choice. If we reject every argument you’ve thought of, why should we think another lawyer of his choice with make any other good ones?
October 23, 2013 - 08:41:16 pm by Robin Lipp
Garland: “now we have a real lawyer, right?” (laughter)
October 23, 2013 - 08:40:38 pm by Michael Athy
The Justices push petitioner on what relief would do. A new trial? What if he doesn’t get a pro bono lawyer on retrial?
October 23, 2013 - 08:39:45 pm by Michael Athy
October 23, 2013 - 08:38:56 pm by Katherine Walecka
RBG says “Isn’t structural error shrinking and shrinking?”
October 23, 2013 - 08:38:54 pm by Michael Athy
October 23, 2013 - 08:38:39 pm by Katherine Walecka
Ashwin cites Gonzalez-Lopez on the definition of structural errors.
October 23, 2013 - 08:38:39 pm by David Hanyok
Let’s get our crack Westlaw research team on that Merrick-Phatak disagreement, CR-CL.
October 23, 2013 - 08:38:16 pm by Katherine Walecka
Clinical students everywhere should feel cozy. RBG thinks they are able counsel. Or at least is willing to posit it.
October 23, 2013 - 08:37:45 pm by David Hanyok
October 23, 2013 - 08:37:05 pm by Michael Athy
October 23, 2013 - 08:37:00 pm by Katherine Walecka
Both of J. Garland’s daughters go to Yale for undergrad, so the ribbing is affectionate.
October 23, 2013 - 08:36:20 pm by Katherine Walecka
Ashwin: “I don’t think you need to worry too much about the system, your honor.”
Rovner: “You must be kidding!”
October 23, 2013 - 08:36:00 pm by Katherine Walecka
RBG: “You are talking about procedural rights as you compare these two people. Mr. Jimenez was represented, not by a counsel of his choice but by an able counsel.”
October 23, 2013 - 08:35:48 pm by Katherine Walecka
Ashwin thinks this court isn’t doing a constitutional analysis, so RBG’s point is excluded.
October 23, 2013 - 08:35:38 pm by Katherine Walecka
RBG: “44% of the people who appear before BIA are unrepresented. They have no right to counsel if they can’t pay or find one. They would be out of luck. But your client who is able to get a lawyer has this protection that he would never have if he was worse off?”
October 23, 2013 - 08:35:23 pm by Katherine Walecka
“Is there a right to counsel in immigration proceedings?” RBG wants to know. Ashwin P. evades the question.
October 23, 2013 - 08:35:16 pm by Michael Athy
RBG: Is there a right to counsel in immigration proceedings?
Respondent: Not every immigrant required under DP clause required counsel.
(44% of immigrants do not have counsel in deportation hearings)
October 23, 2013 - 08:35:08 pm by JacobAlderdice
Relevant trivia tidbit to all the Yale jokes: Judge Garland – Harvard undergrad, Harvard law school graduate.
October 23, 2013 - 08:34:57 pm by David Hanyok
Merrick and Clarence Thomas must own the same joke book.
October 23, 2013 - 08:31:29 pm by Jenya Parkman
Ginsburg: If no Constitutional right to counsel in immigration proceedings, how can petitioner be harmed by having student counsel? (44% of immigrants don’t have counsel in proceedings)
October 23, 2013 - 08:30:30 pm by JacobAlderdice
Trivia tidbit to spice up the current administrative law discussion: the gang that Jimenez fled in El Salvador is the Mara Salvatrucha, or MS-13, and it originated in Los Angeles in the 1980’s, set up by Salvadoran immigrants to protect themselves against other gangs. After being deported to their home country following arrests, they have established a stronger presence there. Thanks Wikipedia!
October 23, 2013 - 08:28:47 pm by Katherine Walecka
Rovner wants to know if snitches would be part of the group. Cedrone says yes.
Rovner asks if it applies to reporters. Cedrone says yes. CR-CL’s team of expert journalists heaves a relieved sigh.
October 23, 2013 - 08:28:35 pm by David Hanyok
Garland gets a little meta, says the Supreme Court has “changed a little bit” while gesturing to himself and RBG. A judge can wish, right?
October 23, 2013 - 08:28:20 pm by Michael Athy
Judge just referenced a 3rd prong he never allowed petitioner to state.
October 23, 2013 - 08:27:26 pm by Michael Athy
3 Arguments to be made (one of which cut off):
(1) Right to choose counsel in immigration proceeding is important procedural benefit;
(2) right to choose counsel a right pursuant to statute enacted by congress
October 23, 2013 - 08:26:31 pm by Michael Athy
Argument is that Jimenez does not need to show that denial of his right to counsel of his choice resulted in prejudice because when an agency contravenes its own rules there is a per se ground for reversal.
October 23, 2013 - 08:25:31 pm by Vikram Shah
Ashwin Phatak steps to the podium.
October 23, 2013 - 08:25:04 pm by JacobAlderdice
Petitioner responds to Judge Garland’s law school joke with his own law school joke: Maybe gunners should be persecuted.
October 23, 2013 - 08:24:33 pm by Robin Lipp
Would gunners and first year law students qualify as particular social groups? (Garland)
October 23, 2013 - 08:24:12 pm by David Hanyok
Garland with all the law school jokes!
October 23, 2013 - 08:22:50 pm by Katherine Walecka
In C.A. itself, it adopted a bunch of precedents that would be thrown out if there was no social visibility requirement?
October 23, 2013 - 08:22:01 pm by Katherine Walecka
RBG: Suppose the BIA had agreed with the EU? Would that have been arbitrary and capricious?
October 23, 2013 - 08:21:12 pm by Vikram Shah
Garland steps in. Administrative law. The Board has ruled that gang resisters are not refugees. Is that not reversible?
October 23, 2013 - 08:20:19 pm by Katherine Walecka
RBG: Was the result in Acosta exactly the result that was being sought by the government here?
October 23, 2013 - 08:20:04 pm by Katherine Walecka
RBG: Sometimes it is helpful to look at what the court did, and not what it said. Don’t you agree?
October 23, 2013 - 08:19:12 pm by Robin Lipp
WiFi Network overloaded in Austin, we’re trying to get back.
October 23, 2013 - 08:18:46 pm by JacobAlderdice
Judge Rovner questioning whether persecution by a gang is only limited to the young men they’re recruiting – they go after everyone.
October 23, 2013 - 08:18:41 pm by Vikram Shah
Wondering about that fiery red lace accessory Justice Ginsburg is wearing with her robes? It’s called a jabot. Go ahead, work it into a sentence.
October 23, 2013 - 08:18:02 pm by JacobAlderdice
…for everyone else.
October 23, 2013 - 08:17:45 pm by JacobAlderdice
CRCL Blog appears to be down
October 23, 2013 - 08:13:51 pm by David Hanyok
Those glasses are fantastic. Wait, are they sunglasses? Blown away right now.
October 23, 2013 - 08:13:37 pm by Chris Havasy
Rovner: The concept of a particular social group is amorphous. Don’t you think that the Court should be given some wiggle room to modify the meaning of that term? Isn’t the Court trying to get to a practical problem regarding social groups? That’s what we seem to have here.
October 23, 2013 - 08:13:25 pm by Eric Rice
Petitioner argues that resistance to MS13 is an immutable characteristic because it is in the past and cannot be changed.
October 23, 2013 - 08:12:47 pm by Jenya Parkman
Ginsburg proposes that Acosta is helpful to respondents.
October 23, 2013 - 08:12:31 pm by Katherine Walecka
“Tell me what you think is a group that would qualify?”
October 23, 2013 - 08:12:12 pm by Katherine Walecka
Ginsburg contends that the group in Acosta was more cohesive than the group in Jimenez.
October 23, 2013 - 08:11:27 pm by Katherine Walecka
Ginsburg asks Cedrone what the holding of Acosta is.
October 23, 2013 - 08:10:58 pm by Katherine Walecka
“Let me stop you there. Because your brief cites Acosta as a case very favorable to you. What was the group in Acosta?”
October 23, 2013 - 08:10:37 pm by Chris Havasy
Rovner: In what sense is the social group requirement a new criterion?
October 23, 2013 - 08:09:32 pm by Katherine Walecka
“Please proceed,” says Ginsburg to Cedrone.
October 23, 2013 - 08:08:38 pm by Robin Lipp
CJ Ginsburg presiding
October 23, 2013 - 08:08:11 pm by Katherine Walecka
Oyez, oyez, oyez!
October 23, 2013 - 08:08:10 pm by Chris Havasy
Constance Baker Motley was the first African American woman to argue a case before the Supreme Court.
October 23, 2013 - 08:08:08 pm by Eric Rice
And we’re off . . .
October 23, 2013 - 08:07:56 pm by Eric Rice
Oyez Oyez Oyez
October 23, 2013 - 08:07:35 pm by David Hanyok
Does that mean we can’t give standing ovations each time RBG speaks?
October 23, 2013 - 08:07:14 pm by Katherine Walecka
The best kind of Associate is an Associate Justice.
October 23, 2013 - 08:07:05 pm by Robin Lipp
Once again, briefs are linked here http://www3.law.harvard.edu/orgs/bsa/final-round/
October 23, 2013 - 08:06:36 pm by David Hanyok
Semi-final round?? Meaning they TOTALLY KNEW that RBG was presiding??
October 23, 2013 - 08:05:49 pm by Robin Lipp
It’s beginning now!
October 23, 2013 - 08:00:49 pm by JacobAlderdice
There’s been some debate in the media about whether Justice Ginsburg should recuse herself from this case given that one team is the “Martin D. Ginsburg” team. We at CRCL support her decision to stay in.
October 23, 2013 - 08:00:35 pm by Robin Lipp
Emma Freeman crosses the screen for a fleeting moment
October 23, 2013 - 08:00:19 pm by Eric Rice
CRCL is questioning the ethics of using team names to pander to justices.
October 23, 2013 - 07:59:43 pm by David Hanyok
I know you guys are important and impressive but SIT DOWN ALREADY.
October 23, 2013 - 07:57:54 pm by Katherine Walecka
An Ames competitor leans in for a photo with Dean Minow.
October 23, 2013 - 07:57:32 pm by Robin Lipp
Teams and dean mulling on screen
October 23, 2013 - 07:56:00 pm by David Hanyok
Rumors that RBG will be wearing her RBG shirt under her robes this evening have so far not been confirmed.
October 23, 2013 - 07:55:34 pm by JacobAlderdice
Trivia Tidbit: Both Judge Rovner and Justice Ginsburg did their third year of last school at a different school. Justice Ginsburg went from Harvard to Columbia her third year, Judge Rovner went from Georgetown to the Chicago-Kent College of Law.
October 23, 2013 - 07:55:16 pm by David Hanyok
MORE CONFLICTING INFO: it turns out you CAN still buy the t-shirts here: http://unholyadventures.com/?page_id=298. ALSO: RBG herself has one, so of course you want one, too.
October 23, 2013 - 07:53:32 pm by Eric Rice
Dinner attendee says dinner was “delicious.”
October 23, 2013 - 07:53:02 pm by Chris Havasy
Conflicting reports have emerged regarding the speed at which dinner was served.
October 23, 2013 - 07:52:01 pm by Chris Havasy
Word on the street is that the dinner service was slow.
October 23, 2013 - 07:52:00 pm by David Hanyok
OH SHIT I forgot to wear my “I <3 RBG” t-shirt! (You can’t buy ’em anymore but you can admire them: https://www.booster.com/votingrights)
October 23, 2013 - 07:48:25 pm by Katherine Walecka
Relevant film: http://www.pbs.org/itvs/globalvoices/sentenced-home.html
Of course, the facts in the Ames case (http://www3.law.harvard.edu/orgs/bsa/files/2013/10/12-1888-Jimenez-v-1.-Holder-Revd.pdf) don’t include criminal activity on Jimenez’s part.
October 23, 2013 - 07:47:44 pm by rjlamorte
Looks like we will be underway soon.
October 23, 2013 - 07:45:15 pm by Eric Rice
Judge Rovner is a remarkable woman: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-11-25/features/ct-tribu-remarkable-rovner-20111125_1_latvia-nazis-ship
October 23, 2013 - 07:41:29 pm by rjlamorte
Teams and judges still not here. I’m putting money on their tardiness being caused by selfie taking with RBG. Any other guesses?
October 23, 2013 - 07:31:14 pm by rjlamorte
People are still milling about in the court room. No sign of our teams or judges.
October 23, 2013 - 07:23:13 pm by Robin Lipp
Lights dim in the overflow room
October 23, 2013 - 07:22:13 pm by Robin Lipp
The case is Jimenez v. Holder. The Supreme Court granted cert on two questions:
1. Whether an applicant for asylum claiming fear of persecution on account of his or her membership in a “particular social group” must show that the group has “social visibility.”
2. Whether an applicant for asylum denied the right to the counsel of his or her choosing in immigration proceedings must show that the denial resulted in actual prejudice in order to obtain relief.
October 23, 2013 - 07:17:41 pm by Robin Lipp
The teams are as follows:
Representing the petitioner, The Martin D. Ginsburg Memorial Team
Gerard Justin Cedrone (Oralist), Jeremy M. Feigenbaum, Caitlin Halpern, Wookie Kim, Ashwin Phatak (Oralist), and Jillian Sheridan Stonecipher.
Representing the respondent, The Constance Baker Motley Memorial Team
Nikolas Bowie(Oralist), Alison Deich, Dena Haibi, Lucas Issacharoff, Andrew Rohrbach(Oralist), and Kyle Wirshba.
October 23, 2013 - 07:14:27 pm by Robin Lipp
Projection screen is down; piped in music begins
October 23, 2013 - 07:11:47 pm by rjlamorte
I’ll be blogging from the court room. It’s starting to fill up! I’ll try to get some paparazzi shots of RBG once we get underway.
October 23, 2013 - 07:07:08 pm by Eric Rice
Welcome the Annual CRCL Live Blog. We would like to thank the BSA for so kindly organizing this event for the amusement of our followers.
October 23, 2013 - 07:06:03 pm by Robin Lipp
We’ll be getting started soon (7:30 is when the show begins) — we’re in the back of the overflow room in Austin East.
October 23, 2013 - 07:00:38 pm by rjlamorte
Welcome to the CR-CL Ames Moot Court Final LiveBlog! We’ll be getting started soon!