Welcome to the CRCL 2013 Ames Moot Court Semi-Finals Liveblog!

Tonight’s judges are:

The Honorable Ed Carnes (11th Circuit)
The Honorable Paul Engelmayer (Southern District of New York)
The Honorable Peter J. Rubin (Massachusetts State Appeals Court)

[JC = Judge Carnes; JE = Judge Engelmayer; JR = Judge Rubin]

(for coverage of the first night, please click here)

 

April 4, 2013 - 08:19:20 pm by Lindsey Kaley

peace out girl scouts.

April 4, 2013 - 08:18:52 pm by Andrew Mamo

Thanks for playing along with the CRCL Live Blog!

Check back in next fall for the 2013 Ames Finals!

April 4, 2013 - 08:18:16 pm by Andrew Mamo

we have been released

April 4, 2013 - 08:17:57 pm by Lindsey Kaley

MOTLEY KREW WINS

April 4, 2013 - 08:17:46 pm by Andrew Mamo

And the Constance Baker Motley team WINS

April 4, 2013 - 08:17:36 pm by Lindsey Kaley

Aman GEORGE is BEST ORALIST. many claps!

April 4, 2013 - 08:17:24 pm by Hallie Pope

Everyone should be proud.  EVERYONE.

April 4, 2013 - 08:17:21 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JR: let me read aloud from the program that all of you have of the ppl’s names on the teams.

April 4, 2013 - 08:17:07 pm by Hallie Pope

Who just won?  Oh wait, no, the judge is just saying everyone’s names and making people clap.

April 4, 2013 - 08:16:36 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JR to all of us plebs: guess what, other members of the teams did lots of great work. it’s a lot of work. what have you lazy asses been doing?

April 4, 2013 - 08:16:12 pm by Andrew Mamo

now JC will mumble the best oralist’s name and we will miss it

April 4, 2013 - 08:16:04 pm by Lindsey Kaley

Judges to oralists: good job not doing this all the time, we know it’s tough

April 4, 2013 - 08:15:23 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JR: ORAL ARGUMENT IS THE BOMB DIGGITY WE ALL LOVE IT. NATURAL HIGH

April 4, 2013 - 08:15:08 pm by Andrew Mamo

JR: being nervous at oral argument is *fun*

April 4, 2013 - 08:14:45 pm by Lindsey Kaley

the oralists taking the comments and waiting for the result

April 4, 2013 - 08:14:19 pm by Hallie Pope

JR:  ”You’re each like yourselves.”  Deep, man.

April 4, 2013 - 08:13:22 pm by Hallie Pope

JE is giving the oralists a play-by-play of their own arguments.  Meanwhile, the oralists are doing an admirable job of looking engaged while undoubtedly screaming in their heads.

April 4, 2013 - 08:13:15 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: good concession, didn’t need to stand your ground. (yea, they know, that’s why they conceded it, most likely)

April 4, 2013 - 08:12:16 pm by Lindsey Kaley

“i think when JC made the point… or maybe JR…” yes, let’s take some time to figure this out.

April 4, 2013 - 08:12:03 pm by Andrew Mamo

he is beautiful, obviously.

April 4, 2013 - 08:11:52 pm by Lindsey Kaley

oh no he turned around hostile questions beautifully

April 4, 2013 - 08:11:39 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE things AG is beautiful?

April 4, 2013 - 08:10:59 pm by Lindsey Kaley

can you imagine how much it must suck to be the oralists right now? they’re not going to remember these comments. they just want to know! who is the winner! who is the ultimate champion in this battle of wit?

April 4, 2013 - 08:10:55 pm by Hallie Pope

Someone needs to tell JE that it’s “kudos”

April 4, 2013 - 08:10:34 pm by Andrew Mamo

The Best Oralist is:     Judge Engelmayer

April 4, 2013 - 08:10:07 pm by Andrew Mamo

Someone needs to break in with a question

April 4, 2013 - 08:09:58 pm by Lindsey Kaley

all I can hear is “kew-dos”… sorry…

April 4, 2013 - 08:09:17 pm by Hallie Pope

JE:  KEWDOS

April 4, 2013 - 08:08:58 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE is talking like this is a real case that could get appealed. i’m concerned he doesn’t know this is made up.

April 4, 2013 - 08:08:31 pm by Hallie Pope

JR is glancing towards the door like he wants to escape

April 4, 2013 - 08:08:15 pm by Andrew Mamo

I don’t want one, so I’ll be snarky for you

April 4, 2013 - 08:07:39 pm by Lindsey Kaley

btw, JE, ummm, i’d love a SDNY clerkship so please don’t hate me/read this…

April 4, 2013 - 08:07:38 pm by Andrew Mamo

Oh, right, the time limits are set by *them*

April 4, 2013 - 08:07:19 pm by Hallie Pope

JE unironically talks about oralists “prattling on for half an hour”

April 4, 2013 - 08:07:11 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE gives them tips about prepping for oral arguments. think of the tough questions. TOO LATE! OH NO! can we get a redo now that they have this advice?

April 4, 2013 - 08:07:11 pm by Andrew Mamo

I’m sorry, judges, your time is up.

April 4, 2013 - 08:06:55 pm by Hallie Pope

But again, the Appellants won Best Briefs.  So that’s exciting.

April 4, 2013 - 08:06:40 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: “you thought long and hard about this.”

April 4, 2013 - 08:06:10 pm by Hallie Pope

We’re essentially being held hostage by the judges.

April 4, 2013 - 08:05:39 pm by Andrew Mamo

still waiting.

April 4, 2013 - 08:05:30 pm by Lindsey Kaley

omg they’re all going to talk about the oralists now. like. we JUST heard them argue.

April 4, 2013 - 08:05:07 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JC knows Adam Levine?

April 4, 2013 - 08:05:06 pm by Hallie Pope

(Yes he actually said “y’all)

April 4, 2013 - 08:04:56 pm by Andrew Mamo

JC’s lesson: don’t fight the hypo

April 4, 2013 - 08:04:52 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  Ya’ll didn’t fight the question.  Good job.

April 4, 2013 - 08:04:05 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JC telling a story about himself and his sleepy southern accent. true story. JR LAUGHS AWKWARDLY LOUDLY

April 4, 2013 - 08:03:23 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  I’m going to tell you some stories instead of announcing Best Oralist.

April 4, 2013 - 08:02:57 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JK APPELLANTS WON *BRIEFS*

April 4, 2013 - 08:02:50 pm by Andrew Mamo

Ok, we missed what just happened. Something about the appellants

 

April 4, 2013 - 08:02:41 pm by Lindsey Kaley

shoot we all just missed that. judges– DON’T MUMBLE

April 4, 2013 - 08:02:20 pm by Lindsey Kaley

Appellants won?

April 4, 2013 - 08:01:55 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JR: appellees use of electromagnetic waves and flashlights was useful

April 4, 2013 - 08:01:11 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JR: appellants made good use of the idea that the person accessing files has *demanded* something from inside the house– helped him to see the facts differently

April 4, 2013 - 07:59:56 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JR: highest caliber. both teams should be proud.

April 4, 2013 - 07:59:04 pm by Andrew Mamo

task for BSAs: create a body of binding caselaw in the District of Ames

April 4, 2013 - 07:59:03 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JR loves it when you cite cases that aren’t binding. don’t just make arguments about what the cases say!

April 4, 2013 - 07:58:10 pm by Lindsey Kaley

consistent theme of (both) arguments– most lawyers are not better than 2Ls @ HLS. (pats self on back)

April 4, 2013 - 07:57:54 pm by Andrew Mamo

JR agrees with his colleagues, these are outstanding briefs. Each team should just become a law firm

 

April 4, 2013 - 07:57:24 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: now talking to appellees (other comments were for appellants)– good job calling out appellants… command of doctrine with cordless phone useful…handled fact of simultaneous circuits well

April 4, 2013 - 07:55:00 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: breathtaking, got the point, well drawn-out, embrace of the tough standard… JE is not so succinct and clinical in his language as he likes in the briefs…

April 4, 2013 - 07:54:25 pm by Andrew Mamo

JE, district court judge, appreciates beating up on district courts

April 4, 2013 - 07:54:11 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: elegant…should have beat up DC earlier.

April 4, 2013 - 07:53:42 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: succinct, clear, subtly argued facts. test worked well and liked formulation for what Saman did to *extinguish* expectation of privacy.

April 4, 2013 - 07:52:50 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: good tone and approach. precocious.

April 4, 2013 - 07:52:26 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: really wants clinical, spare, analytic writing. not so into loose, language. or lips.

April 4, 2013 - 07:51:53 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: ppl in NYC are spectacular. yours are good too. you can stop now. kew-dos.

April 4, 2013 - 07:51:43 pm by Hallie Pope

JE:  Y’all are as good as the big city lawyers.

April 4, 2013 - 07:50:34 pm by Hallie Pope

JC sees briefs play out in his mind as cartoons.  Hope for more comic briefs like this one?  http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/faced_with_a_five-page_limit_lawyer_files_cartoon_amicus_brief_with_proper_

April 4, 2013 - 07:50:14 pm by Lindsey Kaley

now for the reply brief. JC describing the cartoons in his mind. Hallie Pope should take a note from JC’s imagination…

April 4, 2013 - 07:50:09 pm by Andrew Mamo

Just in case you forgot: JC teaches legal writing

April 4, 2013 - 07:49:03 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JC: here. let me read back your entire brief to you and give you a play-by-play of my thoughts on each sentence because why do this one-on-one? right?

April 4, 2013 - 07:48:55 pm by Andrew Mamo

Note to those filing briefs before JC: He likes alliteration

April 4, 2013 - 07:48:36 pm by Hallie Pope

JC = an avid alliteration appreciator

April 4, 2013 - 07:48:14 pm by Lindsey Kaley

Brave New World = scary. also good writing. scary good.

April 4, 2013 - 07:47:52 pm by Andrew Mamo

JC cites a cultural reference that no one understands

April 4, 2013 - 07:47:39 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  Let me remind you guys again that I’m old.

April 4, 2013 - 07:47:12 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  Vivid imagery like files “tucked away” in a computer are key

April 4, 2013 - 07:46:40 pm by Hallie Pope

JC seems to think briefs should be a bit more like poetry.  Can’t blame him, since he spends so much time reading them.

April 4, 2013 - 07:46:02 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  Content and style are interrelated.

April 4, 2013 - 07:45:25 pm by Andrew Mamo

but carnes loves these briefs

 

April 4, 2013 - 07:44:58 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  Most of my margin notes say “good point,” but there are some question marks…

April 4, 2013 - 07:44:34 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  Two things wrong with most legal briefs:  1) Style, and 2) content.  That just about covers everything.  Not so with these briefs though!

April 4, 2013 - 07:44:26 pm by Andrew Mamo

Carnes cites Fred Rodell: most legal writing has two flaws: 1) style; 2) substance

April 4, 2013 - 07:44:01 pm by Lindsey Kaley

here are JC’s colleagues in the 11th Circuit

April 4, 2013 - 07:43:38 pm by Andrew Mamo

Carnes turns this into a teachable moment

 

April 4, 2013 - 07:43:24 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  ”These fellows are a lot more collegial than some of the people I deal with back home.”  So much for Southern hospitality?

April 4, 2013 - 07:43:23 pm by Lindsey Kaley

burn to JC’s colleagues

April 4, 2013 - 07:42:46 pm by Lindsey Kaley

RETURN TO YO SEATS PPL AT HOME. unless you’re at a standing desk, then continue to stand.

April 4, 2013 - 07:41:43 pm by Lindsey Kaley

if you liked this Ames argument, you’ll LOVE our colloquium, also on 4th amendment, terrorism, and, who knows, cordless phones?

April 4, 2013 - 07:40:49 pm by Lindsey Kaley

Hey guys, while you’re just chilling, waiting for the judges to come back, add the CR-CL Colloquiumto your calendar! It will cover government secrecy in the context of the War on Terror, and will feature four of our forthcoming authors in CR-CL Volume 48.2, including:

-Jameel Jaffer, Dir. of the ACLU Center for Democracy

-David E. McCraw, VP and Assistant General Counsel at The New York Times Company

-Stephen Gikow, First Amendment Fellow at The New York Times Company

-Steven Aftergood, author of the blog Secrecy News

The event will be moderated by Professor Daniel J. Meltzer.

April 4, 2013 - 07:36:02 pm by Lindsey Kaley

hey NB, here’s some info on Mae West! “West was a symbol of outrageous female behavior. In the 1930s in particular, there was no other figure, male or female, whose very name evoked the concept of sexual desire and gratification.” Hence JC’s train of logic from “show me what you got!”

April 4, 2013 - 07:28:14 pm by Andrew Mamo

Judges Out

 

April 4, 2013 - 07:28:03 pm by Hallie Pope

NB:  It’s all about RESPECT.

April 4, 2013 - 07:27:59 pm by Andrew Mamo

NB: can expect that police will tap your phone or enter your home – but only with a warrant.

April 4, 2013 - 07:27:23 pm by Andrew Mamo

NB: Balancing inquiry per Katz. Warrant is an insubstantial burden compared to burden of not having or using unsecured networks

April 4, 2013 - 07:27:03 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  What is the objective reasonableness of the belief that files weren’t on default share?

April 4, 2013 - 07:26:46 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  The real motivating fact is that the files were on default share under “that Microsoft program”

April 4, 2013 - 07:26:29 pm by Andrew Mamo

NB: But that doesn’t mean “look at my files.” That’s intrusive

April 4, 2013 - 07:26:14 pm by Andrew Mamo

NB: The Network Exists.

April 4, 2013 - 07:25:40 pm by Andrew Mamo

NB: not familiar with Mae West

April 4, 2013 - 07:25:38 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR cracks up pretty good

April 4, 2013 - 07:25:35 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  Sorry, I’m old.

April 4, 2013 - 07:25:15 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  The computer invited them in!  It’s the digital equivalent of the old Mae West routine!  Show me what you’ve got!

April 4, 2013 - 07:24:29 pm by Andrew Mamo

NB: Scalia on Jones: keep easy cases easy.

April 4, 2013 - 07:24:10 pm by Andrew Mamo

NB up for rebuttal

April 4, 2013 - 07:23:55 pm by Andrew Mamo

AG: No jury; don’t let them infer an officer is lying

April 4, 2013 - 07:23:55 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: jury? and yea, you keep talking. even though your time is up. I make the rules.

April 4, 2013 - 07:23:08 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: programatic regimes (drug tests, etc.) are one thing, don’t apply here…

April 4, 2013 - 07:22:58 pm by Andrew Mamo

AG: prevention of terror attacks can elevate interest, says the 2d circuit

April 4, 2013 - 07:22:22 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: waitwait– isn’t it about risk of evidence being destroyed, not what might happend 3000miles away?

April 4, 2013 - 07:22:04 pm by Andrew Mamo

AG: Terrorism elevates caution of officers because the evidence on his computer may lead officers to identify terror networks or possible attacks, etc

April 4, 2013 - 07:21:28 pm by Andrew Mamo

AG: Terrorism concern is based on destruction of evidence. Police interest in terrorism is heightened because of preventative interest

April 4, 2013 - 07:21:21 pm by Lindsey Kaley

in case you’re interested in learning more about “compromise,” check out the Harvard Law Negotiation Program

April 4, 2013 - 07:21:13 pm by Hallie Pope

JE:  What kind of proper terrorist doesn’t even keep a drill in the house?

April 4, 2013 - 07:20:43 pm by Andrew Mamo

AG: And now to talk about terrorism. Terrorism is serious.

April 4, 2013 - 07:20:19 pm by Andrew Mamo

AG: Officer-created exigency no different from any other as long as it isn’t created to get around the 4th Amendment

April 4, 2013 - 07:20:09 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: isn’t that bootstrapping, encouraging officers to yell compromise?

April 4, 2013 - 07:19:49 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: @70yds, officer yelled “compromise”– and that fact itself is enough to argue that occupants were tipped off

April 4, 2013 - 07:19:20 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  You know where a hammer is…

April 4, 2013 - 07:19:20 pm by Lindsey Kaley

judges talk amongst themselves about destroying computers

April 4, 2013 - 07:19:15 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR to AG: Do you keep a drill near your desktop?

April 4, 2013 - 07:19:08 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  I thought you argued that all it takes is a drill to delete files?

April 4, 2013 - 07:19:04 pm by Andrew Mamo

AG: I don’t keep a drill near my computer

April 4, 2013 - 07:18:45 pm by Lindsey Kaley

**I CAN SEE DELETED FILES**

April 4, 2013 - 07:18:43 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR: its damn hard to delete files on your computer

April 4, 2013 - 07:18:29 pm by Andrew Mamo

AG: common knowledge to delete files on computers – right?

April 4, 2013 - 07:18:28 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR: in this case there was a high risk, this guy does not know how to password protect his network, how do we know he can even properly delete the finals on a computer? is there really a risk?

April 4, 2013 - 07:17:14 pm by Andrew Mamo

AG: the simultaneous searches indicates that they had suspicion that they might interact

April 4, 2013 - 07:16:38 pm by Andrew Mamo

AG: the risk is destruction of evidence or warning at other locations. No evidence that he knew the others, but this was a single task force operating

April 4, 2013 - 07:16:23 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR risk was the destruction of evidence, correct?

April 4, 2013 - 07:16:02 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  Getting up that early “is a horrendous practice and ought to be outlawed,” but it happens

April 4, 2013 - 07:15:49 pm by Khaled Mowad

JC: is it weird to stand at a window at 6:00 A.M.?

April 4, 2013 - 07:15:34 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  Part of your argument rests on the premise that folks don’t get up at 6am?  What time do officers get up?

April 4, 2013 - 07:15:32 pm by Andrew Mamo

AG: a reasonable officer may be surprised to see someone in the window at 6am.

April 4, 2013 - 07:15:01 pm by Andrew Mamo

AG: can’t be a blanket rule. There have been cases where no-knocks have been foreclosed; more extreme in the facts. Here, the facts are sufficiently particularized

April 4, 2013 - 07:14:48 pm by Hallie Pope

JE: any authority we can overrule the magistrate?

April 4, 2013 - 07:14:21 pm by Khaled Mowad

JE any authority for this court to overrule factual finding of the magistrate?

April 4, 2013 - 07:13:44 pm by Andrew Mamo

AG: in rapidly evolving circumstances, need to be deferential to the cops

April 4, 2013 - 07:13:08 pm by Andrew Mamo

AG: mistakes happen.

April 4, 2013 - 07:13:06 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: what about JR’s statement that there’s contradictory statements… unless unusual sleeping arrangements (wink wink)

April 4, 2013 - 07:13:06 pm by Hallie Pope

Judges crack themselves up.  Again.

April 4, 2013 - 07:12:32 pm by Andrew Mamo

AG: going outside the no-knock context: shooting people due to arm movements. But plaintiffs can’t avoid SJ on suspicion that officer lies

April 4, 2013 - 07:11:49 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: before it was judges making this decisions re: suppression. now I don’t know why it doesn’t go to a jury…

April 4, 2013 - 07:11:24 pm by Andrew Mamo

AG: Yes, Saman testified that everyone was in bed. But none of this is sufficient to overcome summary judgment. All no-knock cases are done based on decisions made outside the house thinking about things inside the house

April 4, 2013 - 07:10:48 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR people who are in bed are not at the window

April 4, 2013 - 07:10:44 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: motive? why isn’t that enough to allow jury to set aside testimony?

April 4, 2013 - 07:10:09 pm by Andrew Mamo

AG: if an officer under the circumstances sees someone in the window doing stuff consistent with destroying entry, then no-knock is ok. Nothing suggests a lie

April 4, 2013 - 07:09:34 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: if that’s the pivot, why is this a matter for SJ? with all due respect, popos be lying. like all the time.

April 4, 2013 - 07:09:12 pm by Andrew Mamo

AG: If the agent saw nothing, then ok, we have no case.

April 4, 2013 - 07:09:02 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: everything turns on the sighting– ALLEGED SIGHTING– at the window. otherwise you have no case. dun dun dun…

April 4, 2013 - 07:08:49 pm by Hallie Pope

JE gets his revenge by interrupting JC.  Brutal.

April 4, 2013 - 07:08:36 pm by Andrew Mamo

AG: may have been reasonable to expect to wait, to let residents wake up and get dressed (in 30 seconds?). But that changed when they knew someone was awake. And if circumstances support exigency, they can go in. This reasonable suspicion existed, so we’re good.

April 4, 2013 - 07:07:54 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  30-40 seconds is okay if you’re at the door telling them you’re a cop, but if they’re at a window seeing you the seconds aren’t required?  What is the difference?

April 4, 2013 - 07:07:14 pm by Lindsey Kaley

don’t worry, JE, you’ll get your turn…

April 4, 2013 - 07:06:44 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE’s mad JC interrupted first

April 4, 2013 - 07:06:41 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  Let me tell you everything that is wrong with your argument.

April 4, 2013 - 07:06:31 pm by Khaled Mowad

JC cutting right to the chase

April 4, 2013 - 07:06:29 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  ”I hate to interrupt you, but if I don’t someone else will”

April 4, 2013 - 07:06:15 pm by Andrew Mamo

Aman George up. Cut off

April 4, 2013 - 07:05:58 pm by Andrew Mamo

ES: Policy impact here would expand 4th Amendment to detriment of modern police work

April 4, 2013 - 07:05:27 pm by Hallie Pope

According to JR this case is about a “computer whatever.”

April 4, 2013 - 07:04:48 pm by Andrew Mamo

ES: Don’t keep the cops in the 18th century while Bad Guys live in the 21st

April 4, 2013 - 07:04:35 pm by Khaled Mowad

EC confuses ES with somewhat elaborate hypo

April 4, 2013 - 07:04:20 pm by Andrew Mamo

ES: not a trespass under Jones if we shone a flashlight at a photovoltaic cell in the house.

April 4, 2013 - 07:04:20 pm by Hallie Pope

JC is describing some sort of elaborate doomsday laser that can charge computers.  I, for one, am afraid.

April 4, 2013 - 07:03:53 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  The computer just wants to share!

April 4, 2013 - 07:03:31 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  Better analogy:  you shine a laser into a house.  Isn’t that trespass?

April 4, 2013 - 07:03:15 pm by Andrew Mamo

ES: back to the flashlights; not a search.

April 4, 2013 - 07:02:43 pm by Andrew Mamo

JR: The internet is like a fishing pole

April 4, 2013 - 07:02:42 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR something about sticking a fishing pole in the house

April 4, 2013 - 07:02:25 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: you know who had ideas about technology? the Framers. Let’s ask them.

April 4, 2013 - 07:02:16 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR taking it back to the framers!!!

April 4, 2013 - 07:01:49 pm by Lindsey Kaley

sorry: Ted Kaczynski and “savvy”. TK was a neo-luddite

April 4, 2013 - 07:01:47 pm by Andrew Mamo

ES: also, fits purpose of Jones’ backstop privacy protections, going allll the way back to 1791.

April 4, 2013 - 07:01:45 pm by Khaled Mowad

JD Scalia’s distinction is just dictum in Jones

April 4, 2013 - 07:01:05 pm by Andrew Mamo

ES: on a giant ranch, he’d have an expectation of privacy. Not a trespass under Jones: distinguish trespass from electronic transmission per Scalia

April 4, 2013 - 07:00:40 pm by Khaled Mowad

JD why is this not a trespass?

April 4, 2013 - 07:00:23 pm by Hallie Pope

While the other judges grill ES about reasonableness and whether people hang out in cars accessing networks, JC takes notes and bides his time.  Soon.

April 4, 2013 - 07:00:15 pm by Andrew Mamo

ES: while the area was sparsely populated, not anymore. network is available beyond boundary of the home.

April 4, 2013 - 07:00:02 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: Saman is a “tech savy Ted Kozinski”– sparsly populated, so expectation of privacy

April 4, 2013 - 06:59:23 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: are you arguing for a nationwide rule, or something more nuanced depending on how populated the area is?

April 4, 2013 - 06:59:13 pm by Andrew Mamo

ES: this is common behavior. No evidence that people knew cordless phones could be intercepted. likewise people don’t know that files can be shared over the network

April 4, 2013 - 06:58:26 pm by Andrew Mamo

History lesson from Rubin

April 4, 2013 - 06:58:05 pm by Andrew Mamo

ES: neighbors not supposed to listen to each others’ conversations

April 4, 2013 - 06:57:50 pm by Hallie Pope

JC rubs his temples in distress.

April 4, 2013 - 06:57:39 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JR drops “facetime” “wifi” and “network” demonstrating his street cred. he knows the lingo. he knows the 411.

April 4, 2013 - 06:57:36 pm by Khaled Mowad

ES gives JR a good laugh

April 4, 2013 - 06:57:26 pm by Andrew Mamo

ES: pleads the 5th

April 4, 2013 - 06:56:56 pm by Andrew Mamo

ES: fundamental question: social understanding about protection from intrusion into the home

April 4, 2013 - 06:56:54 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR likes his metaphor, even the symbol on wifi thing is a lock…

April 4, 2013 - 06:56:43 pm by Hallie Pope

I think it would be reasonable to stop talking about when things are reasonable.

April 4, 2013 - 06:56:30 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: “reasonable but a reasonable felony?”

April 4, 2013 - 06:56:22 pm by Andrew Mamo

ES: under the constitution, this would be a reasonable felony

April 4, 2013 - 06:56:07 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: WAIT DOES THE CONSTITUTION MEAN SOMETHING DIFFERENT IN DIFFERENT STATES WHA?

April 4, 2013 - 06:56:00 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR may have stumped the appellee

April 4, 2013 - 06:56:00 pm by Andrew Mamo

ES: Other states reasonableness doesn’t speak to reasonableness in Ames.

April 4, 2013 - 06:55:30 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR:  reasonable expectation of privacy in the house, if the door is unlocked do I lose my reasonable expectation of privacy?

April 4, 2013 - 06:55:09 pm by Lindsey Kaley

because Congress is totes up on the latest technology…

April 4, 2013 - 06:54:55 pm by Andrew Mamo

ES: Leave the question to congress, like in the cordless phone cases, etc. There, courts held back on the constitutional issues

April 4, 2013 - 06:54:40 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: why isn’t the best measure what CONGRESS says about what’s lawful and unlawful

April 4, 2013 - 06:53:46 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: “how do we know what’s reasonable?” asks Mr. Obvious

April 4, 2013 - 06:53:25 pm by Andrew Mamo

The CFAA rears its head

April 4, 2013 - 06:53:05 pm by Andrew Mamo

ES: Public exposure (no, not that kind of exposure)….

Look at case law re: knowledge. files inadvertently shared w/o knowledge

April 4, 2013 - 06:52:45 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR file sharing different from this issue, thats posting something deliberately, this seems different to me, its common knowledge that if network is not password protected it can be accessed, everyone knows there hackers too. Is my expectation of protection reasonable or unreasonable?

April 4, 2013 - 06:52:37 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  Don’t be so sure you don’t have to worry about your network being secure, JR.  MUAHahahahahaha

April 4, 2013 - 06:52:13 pm by Lindsey Kaley

are ES and NB brothers as JR claims?

April 4, 2013 - 06:51:18 pm by Andrew Mamo

ES: evidence he read the user manual not necessary (people read user manuals?). public exposure of the signal

April 4, 2013 - 06:51:13 pm by Lindsey Kaley

for those of you too young to know what a cordless phone is (it’s like an iPhone with a BIG charger), here’s a picture.

April 4, 2013 - 06:50:42 pm by Andrew Mamo

ES: this distinction is not dispositive. See katz. intrusion not dispositive. Technicalities of electronic intrusion don’t have the weight that the judges suggest. Functional interaction between agent and file

April 4, 2013 - 06:50:28 pm by Khaled Mowad

ES Presence or absences of an intrusion is not dispositive entirely of 4th amendment violation.

April 4, 2013 - 06:50:22 pm by Hallie Pope

Listening the judges describe technology is hilarious.  ”Zeros and ones”

April 4, 2013 - 06:49:58 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR your entire argument turns on whether the signal is exposed to the public.

April 4, 2013 - 06:49:30 pm by Andrew Mamo

ES: courts have analogized files like this to those left on the street or in a common area

April 4, 2013 - 06:49:25 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: broadcast files outside home??? where’s THAT record? seems like agent had to take an affirmative step (incredulous)

April 4, 2013 - 06:48:55 pm by Andrew Mamo

ES: distinguish between trespass and mere transmission of signals. Saman’s broadcasting…

April 4, 2013 - 06:48:29 pm by Andrew Mamo

Eden Schiffmann: we contest physical intrusion under Jones

April 4, 2013 - 06:48:23 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  You contest physical intrusion, right?

April 4, 2013 - 06:48:06 pm by Andrew Mamo

And now the respondents.

April 4, 2013 - 06:48:04 pm by Lindsey Kaley

AR actually gets in a summary of his position! Go AR! (disclaimer, I’m biased and a big fan of AR)

April 4, 2013 - 06:47:52 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR what if the agent’s mistake was reasonable or honest? the answer, if its reasonable does not make a difference if its wrong

April 4, 2013 - 06:47:49 pm by Andrew Mamo

AR: at a minimum, appropriate to return to lower court; need to show particularized facts

April 4, 2013 - 06:47:26 pm by Andrew Mamo

AR: No one at the window, only saw a glimpse of something, a reasonable jury (does this exist?) could conclude that there is a factual issue

April 4, 2013 - 06:47:00 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: but on our record, what’s the nonspeculative basis to think he didn’t see someone in the window?

April 4, 2013 - 06:46:43 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR confused about argument about reversing summary judgment on issue of material fact, why is agent’s state of mind an issue of material fact?

April 4, 2013 - 06:46:39 pm by Andrew Mamo

AR: Challenging credibility of agent’s statement. A material fact. If Saman can make plausible argument, no summary judgment

April 4, 2013 - 06:46:06 pm by Andrew Mamo

AR: Low risk warrant, respondents’ plan was to knock and announce and wait, etc. The 8 seconds unlikely to disrupt other searches going on simultaneously

April 4, 2013 - 06:45:50 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  Let me give you the right answer that you should have given.  You’re welcome.

April 4, 2013 - 06:45:36 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR giggles at EC

April 4, 2013 - 06:45:22 pm by Andrew Mamo

AR: Look at murders: mere fact of involvement in murder not sufficient

April 4, 2013 - 06:44:53 pm by Andrew Mamo

AR: the mere fact that terrorism is at issue says nothing about Saman’s likelihood of acting violently

April 4, 2013 - 06:44:45 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JR wants to be the comic of the group. Makes statements like “he’s not going to flush himself down the toilet.”

April 4, 2013 - 06:44:36 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR man cant flush himself down the toilet.

April 4, 2013 - 06:44:19 pm by Andrew Mamo

AR: Good thing he didn’t show up in the window with a gun

April 4, 2013 - 06:44:15 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR what about risk of violence? Are there circumstances where risk of violence would permit with dispensing with the knock and enter rule?

April 4, 2013 - 06:43:47 pm by Andrew Mamo

Actuaries > auditors

April 4, 2013 - 06:43:36 pm by Andrew Mamo

AR: yes, files can be deleted quickly. But drugs can be flushed quickly too. that doesn’t support no-knock entry. Need evidence of drugs in such a form. Particularity requirement is to address facts that may not be dispositive

April 4, 2013 - 06:43:29 pm by Hallie Pope

JC looks like he’s praying for Fourth Amendment law to become less convoluted.

April 4, 2013 - 06:43:15 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: *nods* to AR’s reply

April 4, 2013 - 06:42:55 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: isn’t it common knowledge that with a few short keystrokes files could be deleted?

April 4, 2013 - 06:42:37 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR Can a computer crime ever lead to a risk to destruction of evidence?

April 4, 2013 - 06:42:20 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  More than a hunch and less than probable cause?

April 4, 2013 - 06:42:07 pm by Andrew Mamo

reasonable suspicion is a low standard. Specific and articulable facts.

April 4, 2013 - 06:41:59 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  ”Low standard” is a description not a definition.

April 4, 2013 - 06:41:45 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  Define reasonable suspicion

April 4, 2013 - 06:41:43 pm by Andrew Mamo

AR: in Curtis, a silhouette not enough to justify. Nothing suggests that he was fleeing to destroy evidence etc

April 4, 2013 - 06:41:04 pm by Lindsey Kaley

5yds?

April 4, 2013 - 06:40:59 pm by Lindsey Kaley

10 yds?

April 4, 2013 - 06:40:58 pm by Andrew Mamo

AR: resident is entitled to presumption of innocence in presence of police. Expected that he’d leave the window to open the door or something

April 4, 2013 - 06:40:53 pm by Lindsey Kaley

20yds?

April 4, 2013 - 06:40:37 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: at what point can you dispense with knock and announce?

April 4, 2013 - 06:40:30 pm by Andrew Mamo

if cops saw him running, that’s ok.

April 4, 2013 - 06:40:07 pm by Andrew Mamo

AR: Case boils down to this: if the background facts don’t justify no-knock entry, the theory is that Saman became aware of presence and engaged in further activity. Awareness isn’t enough and couldn’t be enough

April 4, 2013 - 06:39:47 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: biggest problem with case is that the person would have picked up the phone

April 4, 2013 - 06:39:22 pm by Andrew Mamo

AR: the fact that they couldn’t distinguish Saman from a child is relevant. Also, mere fact of a visible person insufficient to justify this

April 4, 2013 - 06:39:08 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: reality check! from POV of the officer, they care about fact that someone might have spotted them, not details of his PJS

April 4, 2013 - 06:38:43 pm by Andrew Mamo

AR: Respondents unable to offer facts about the person in the window

April 4, 2013 - 06:38:35 pm by Hallie Pope

Everyone involved in this case is apparently a superhuman.

April 4, 2013 - 06:38:34 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: 70yds away, someone sees someone in the window– impossible to know where that person is looking– why reasonable discretion to say that person saw us and we were “COMPROMISED”?

April 4, 2013 - 06:38:19 pm by Hallie Pope

The judge are poking so many holes in this record.

April 4, 2013 - 06:38:11 pm by Andrew Mamo

AR: No, this isn’t about the difference of a few seconds.

April 4, 2013 - 06:38:10 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR Someone may have seen him from the window, is this case just about the difference between 8-10 seconds and 15?!?

April 4, 2013 - 06:37:35 pm by Andrew Mamo

AR: for less than 10 seconds, we have greater particularity etc etc

April 4, 2013 - 06:37:19 pm by Andrew Mamo

AR: 15-20 seconds is a “close call” to wait.

 

April 4, 2013 - 06:37:06 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  The fastest human being ever couldn’t move as fast as the record suggests.

April 4, 2013 - 06:36:59 pm by Khaled Mowad

EC man has some southern swag

 

April 4, 2013 - 06:36:41 pm by Lindsey Kaley

there are secret amendments to the record and the judges don’t like not knowing what’s going on!!!

April 4, 2013 - 06:36:20 pm by Andrew Mamo

AR: Clarification questions addressed the wait time, that’s in the amended record, not the original

April 4, 2013 - 06:36:04 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  I read the record so many dang times WHERE DID YOU GET 8-10 SECONDS??

April 4, 2013 - 06:35:41 pm by Andrew Mamo

JR: “you’re the chief”
JC: “I like the sound of that”

April 4, 2013 - 06:35:37 pm by Hallie Pope

JC on being the chief:  ”I like the sound of that”

April 4, 2013 - 06:35:32 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR defers to the chief

April 4, 2013 - 06:35:20 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR whats the law?

April 4, 2013 - 06:35:07 pm by Andrew Mamo

AR: No idea how long to wait before entering. But wait-time isn’t raised by the other side.

April 4, 2013 - 06:35:02 pm by Khaled Mowad

Jr How long do officers need to wait after knocking the door? before entering

April 4, 2013 - 06:35:01 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  If you don’t know what’s reasonable, how could police officers know?

April 4, 2013 - 06:34:45 pm by Andrew Mamo

AR: look at generalized concern that lacks particularity. Nothing indicated that Saman knew the other people being searched. The case cited by respondents didn’t address no-knock entry

April 4, 2013 - 06:34:10 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: if there was a tip-off wouldn’t have to tell people at other locations? or exercising 1st amendment right to spread the news?

April 4, 2013 - 06:33:55 pm by Hallie Pope

Judges laughing about how out-of-touch they are with technology.  As they decide issues dealing with technology.  Woo.

April 4, 2013 - 06:33:55 pm by Andrew Mamo

AR: colloquial unlawfulness.

April 4, 2013 - 06:33:42 pm by Andrew Mamo

AR: still unlawful if he disrupted other searches

April 4, 2013 - 06:33:05 pm by Lindsey Kaley

video summary here

April 4, 2013 - 06:33:02 pm by Andrew Mamo

AR: busting into the house violated his 4th Amendment rights. 1. background facts known to officers didn’t indicate any unlawful response by Saman; 2. events in search didn’t indicate this

April 4, 2013 - 06:32:22 pm by Andrew Mamo

Andrew Rohrbach up.

April 4, 2013 - 06:31:53 pm by Andrew Mamo

NB: intrusion into a person’s house. And I’m out.

April 4, 2013 - 06:31:48 pm by Lindsey Kaley

let’s get physical, physical…intrusion

April 4, 2013 - 06:31:33 pm by Andrew Mamo

NB: The physicality requirement in torts: computer signals are sufficiently physical to constitute trespass.

April 4, 2013 - 06:31:02 pm by Andrew Mamo

NB: I can’t think of an intrusion that isn’t physical

April 4, 2013 - 06:30:48 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  Nope.  Not buying it.

April 4, 2013 - 06:30:46 pm by Andrew Mamo

NB: non-physical intrusion in Karo. Ok, not an intrusion at all.

April 4, 2013 - 06:30:25 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  If this is a physical intrusion, what’s a non-physical intrusion?

April 4, 2013 - 06:30:02 pm by Andrew Mamo

NB: Flashlights are sense-enhancing. Exceptions for flashlights from the 1920s!

April 4, 2013 - 06:29:48 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR how do you distinguish search light from mega speaker, why is flashlight distinct?

April 4, 2013 - 06:29:28 pm by Andrew Mamo

NB: cordless phone cases are all ok! broadcasts outside of the home. Smith analogized to yelling

April 4, 2013 - 06:29:11 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: shift to trespass theory. why if signals are sent outside home is it trespass? and what about fact that intercepting a cordless phone is not trespass?

April 4, 2013 - 06:28:37 pm by Khaled Mowad

“knower should of known” line of reasoning

April 4, 2013 - 06:28:37 pm by Andrew Mamo

NB: not whether people will handle information;about expectations

April 4, 2013 - 06:28:19 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR Normatively we have to make a judgment about what is reasonable expectation of privacy.

April 4, 2013 - 06:27:59 pm by Lindsey Kaley

oh yea. someone’s handling bags in an “exploratory manner.” giggity.

April 4, 2013 - 06:27:49 pm by Andrew Mamo

NB: Bond: searching a bus. handling bag in “exploratory” manner. Reasonable to expect that no one would handle the bag in this way

April 4, 2013 - 06:27:32 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  She was just a “technical” expert.

April 4, 2013 - 06:27:20 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  Your expert was not qualified!  BURN.

April 4, 2013 - 06:27:07 pm by Andrew Mamo

NB: doesn’t turn on a subjective notion of privacy. Societal reasonableness of expectation of privacy

April 4, 2013 - 06:27:04 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  So even if your client had known people could access the network, as long as he had a subjective expectation that human beings are good and won’t snoop he’d be reasonable?

April 4, 2013 - 06:26:52 pm by Khaled Mowad

But Sotomayor, said thats a circular reasoning, just because more people watch the wire dosent mean people cant expect that theyre network is secured.

April 4, 2013 - 06:26:32 pm by Andrew Mamo

example: house. reasonable to expect that no one would go access information in the home.

April 4, 2013 - 06:26:08 pm by Andrew Mamo

Sotomayor raised the same issue in Jones – circularity of reasoning for expectations of privacy (or lack thereof)

April 4, 2013 - 06:25:58 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JR thinks people read these cases and will change their behavior hahahahahhaah

April 4, 2013 - 06:25:44 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR Back to JE quesiton, this case is in the newspaper now, people come to realize files can be obtained through open connection, does this destroy reasonable expectation of privacy?

April 4, 2013 - 06:25:11 pm by Andrew Mamo

Similar issue in Ahrndt. Reasonable to expect privacy in a home wireless network, even w/o password

April 4, 2013 - 06:24:46 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: factually, at one point would failure to protect rise to level of reckless disregard?

April 4, 2013 - 06:24:16 pm by Khaled Mowad

Not common knowledge unless user recieves some notice

April 4, 2013 - 06:24:13 pm by Andrew Mamo

Saman purchased the router to access the internet; no idea that people would access his files. Not common knowledge w/o notice

April 4, 2013 - 06:24:10 pm by Lindsey Kaley

really, check. do you use protection?

April 4, 2013 - 06:23:54 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  Why shouldn’t the appellant have protected the network with a password?

April 4, 2013 - 06:23:54 pm by Lindsey Kaley

PRUDENT PEOPLE! PASSWORD PROTECT YOUR INTERNETZ

April 4, 2013 - 06:23:37 pm by Andrew Mamo

Not common knowledge that files are accessible through a network. What should Saman have done? password protection for everything??

April 4, 2013 - 06:23:29 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: isn’t it common knowledge that passwords are available? suggests bright-line that we expect people to take security protections to prevent breach.

April 4, 2013 - 06:23:19 pm by Hallie Pope

NB starts to say everyone uses the Internet to communicate, then changes his mind.  Don’t forget about people over a certain age.

April 4, 2013 - 06:22:53 pm by Andrew Mamo

NB: Katz – the wiretap act not yet passed. But was society ready to consider a certain expectation of privacy reasonable? Now many people communicate via the internet. See cellphones in last night’s case

April 4, 2013 - 06:22:27 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: does the rule change when we have common knowledge re: access? why make it constitutional rule if the technology/expectations are changing?

April 4, 2013 - 06:22:15 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  Only cited four state legislatures, how do we know that “virtually all” have criminalized trespassing on networks?

April 4, 2013 - 06:21:51 pm by Andrew Mamo

NB: Not objecting to court’s rules! but word counts suck

April 4, 2013 - 06:21:31 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JR very interested in demonstrating that he understands the internetz

April 4, 2013 - 06:21:24 pm by Andrew Mamo

NB: In literally every case considering network=connected computers, no idea that access to files is common knowledge

April 4, 2013 - 06:20:58 pm by Lindsey Kaley

“Penny freeloads on Sheldon and Leonard’s wifi” — Big Bang Theory reference from JR

April 4, 2013 - 06:20:45 pm by Andrew Mamo

Big Bang Theory reference from Rubin?

April 4, 2013 - 06:20:03 pm by Andrew Mamo

NB: not common knowledge because virtually every state has computer trespass laws prohibiting access to networks. Just joining.

April 4, 2013 - 06:19:34 pm by Hallie Pope

JC:  How many people need to know something before it becomes a “reasonable expectation”?

April 4, 2013 - 06:19:30 pm by Andrew Mamo

Flattery will get you everywhere. Everyone is as surprised as Rubin.

 

April 4, 2013 - 06:19:18 pm by Khaled Mowad

Everyone under a certain age knows wireless networks can be accessed… “everyone under a certain age”

April 4, 2013 - 06:19:12 pm by Lindsey Kaley

*does everyone know you can access shared wireless network?*

April 4, 2013 - 06:18:45 pm by Andrew Mamo

common knowledge that animals will go through my trash

April 4, 2013 - 06:18:35 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR does your garbageman look through your trash?

April 4, 2013 - 06:18:33 pm by Andrew Mamo

NB: in Greenwood, trash collector, as well as children, animals, etc go through garbage

April 4, 2013 - 06:17:43 pm by Andrew Mamo

4th Amendment under Katz doesn’t matter whether info can be accessed, but whether it is reasonable that it will be accessed. see: trash.

April 4, 2013 - 06:17:31 pm by Lindsey Kaley

JE: quick with a question– agent intruded on the files, but couldn’t anyone have accessed the files? What does that say about “reasonable expectation of privacy”?

April 4, 2013 - 06:17:03 pm by Andrew Mamo

NB: Federal agent logged onto Saman’s network – a search under 4th Amendment: Katz – violated reasonable expectation of privacy; Jones – a trespass

April 4, 2013 - 06:16:27 pm by Andrew Mamo

Nikolas Bowie up first

April 4, 2013 - 06:16:25 pm by Hallie Pope

Judge Carnes (JC) has an amazing southern accent.

April 4, 2013 - 06:16:11 pm by Andrew Mamo

With the introductions over, it begins.

April 4, 2013 - 06:15:45 pm by Khaled Mowad

shout out to the organizing ames folks

April 4, 2013 - 06:15:12 pm by Andrew Mamo

And thanks, of course, to the BSAs

 

April 4, 2013 - 06:14:49 pm by Lindsey Kaley

re: team name– Henkin has been called the “father of human rights.” Clerked for Learned Hand. Helped author refugee convention, and support the human rights movement. Taught human rights and continued to litigate.

April 4, 2013 - 06:13:48 pm by Andrew Mamo

Now meet the Henkin team

 

April 4, 2013 - 06:12:49 pm by Andrew Mamo

Meet the “Motley Crew”

April 4, 2013 - 06:12:48 pm by Lindsey Kaley

Re: team name– Motley participated in nearly every desegregation case. Eventually served as Chief Judge of SDNY. Demonstrates the social change that can come from a brief.

April 4, 2013 - 06:11:41 pm by Andrew Mamo

The teams tonight have survived intense competition. This sounds like the beginning of a reality tv show.

April 4, 2013 - 06:11:24 pm by Khaled Mowad

these teams are “survivors”

April 4, 2013 - 06:10:48 pm by Andrew Mamo

And you too will have the opportunity to take a class with Rubin next year!

April 4, 2013 - 06:10:07 pm by Khaled Mowad

JR taught at G-Town, HLS grad and law review

April 4, 2013 - 06:10:00 pm by Andrew Mamo

Last, but certainly not least, Rubin. Yet another HLS alum. Noticing a pattern here.

April 4, 2013 - 06:08:06 pm by Andrew Mamo

Engelmayer, another HLS alum, ’87

April 4, 2013 - 06:07:54 pm by Andrew Mamo

Carnes teaches legal writing. Briefs will be marked up in red ink

April 4, 2013 - 06:07:10 pm by Andrew Mamo

Carnes, HLS ’75, Alabaman

April 4, 2013 - 06:07:06 pm by Hallie Pope

Dean Minow will tell us about the judges and teams and then will “sit down and shut up.”

April 4, 2013 - 06:06:56 pm by Andrew Mamo

Let’s meet our judges:

April 4, 2013 - 06:06:43 pm by Andrew Mamo

Dean Minow speaks.

Thanks to all, etc. etc.

April 4, 2013 - 06:06:20 pm by Lindsey Kaley

Dean Minow is sorry to interrupt.

April 4, 2013 - 06:06:05 pm by Lindsey Kaley

Oyez oyez oyez!

April 4, 2013 - 06:05:40 pm by Andrew Mamo

The judges enter the room

April 4, 2013 - 06:05:12 pm by Andrew Mamo

It Begins

April 4, 2013 - 05:55:45 pm by Andrew Mamo

Tonight’s teams are the Constance Baker Motley Memorial Team (Nikolas Bowie and Andrew Rohrbach, oralists) and the Louis Henkin Memorial Team (Aman George and Eden Schiffmann, oralists)

April 4, 2013 - 05:52:23 pm by Andrew Mamo

The best oralist is… Dershowitz?