American Bar Association National Appellate Advocacy Competition

American Bar Association National Appellate Advocacy Competition
Name	American Bar Association National Appellate Advocacy Competition
Established	1980s
Venue	various law schools
Participants	law school teams

Contents

American Bar Association National Appellate Advocacy Competition is a prominent moot court tournament for law students, administered by the American Bar Association and hosted at rotating law schools across the United States. The competition simulates appellate advocacy before fictional panels and emphasizes brief writing and oral argument, attracting teams from law schools affiliated with the Association of American Law Schools and independent institutions such as Harvard Law School, Yale Law School, Stanford Law School, Columbia Law School, and University of Chicago Law School. Over decades it has intersected with legal education trends exemplified by curricula at Georgetown University Law Center, New York University School of Law, University of Michigan Law School, Duke University School of Law, and University of Pennsylvania Law School.

History

The competition traces roots to national moot traditions established alongside events like the Jessup International Law Moot Court Competition and the Vis Moot. Early iterations paralleled appellate advocacy programs at regional competitions such as the National Moot Court Competition and the American Collegiate Moot Court Association circuit. Influences include advocacy pedagogy at institutions like Northwestern Pritzker School of Law and Cornell Law School, as well as professional advocacy models exemplified by the Supreme Court of the United States bar and historical advocates including Thurgood Marshall, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Antonin Scalia whose written opinions and oral advocacy shaped casecraft. Expansion of the tournament reflected changes in accreditation overseen by the American Bar Association Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar and paralleled national events such as the rise of specialty competitions hosted by University of Virginia School of Law and Boston University School of Law.

Rounds typically involve preliminary and elimination stages mirroring procedures before the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and occasionally issues echoing matters adjudicated by the Supreme Court of the United States. Teams submit appellate briefs modeled after filings to courts like the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and the Federal Circuit. Oral arguments follow time limits set by organizers and judged by panels comprised of practitioners from firms such as Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, Latham & Watkins, and public jurists from offices including the United States Solicitor General and state attorney general chambers like New York Attorney General's office. Procedural rules reference citation practices found in the Bluebook and trial advocacy norms taught in clinics at University of California, Berkeley, School of Law and Texas Law.

Invitations and qualification routes mirror selection procedures at competitions like the National Appellate Advocacy Competition and regional qualifiers organized by bar associations including the American Bar Association Young Lawyers Division and state affiliates such as the California Lawyers Association. Participating teams often come from schools with storied advocacy programs—University of Texas School of Law, SMU Dedman School of Law, Washington University School of Law, Vanderbilt Law School—and include competitors who have clerked for judges from the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit or served in externships with the Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia. Eligibility rules address enrollment and accreditation conditions promulgated by the American Bar Association and often require competing students to be enrolled at institutions recognized by the Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar.

The problems presented in the competition frequently mirror constitutional, statutory, and administrative law issues akin to those litigated in landmark decisions such as Brown v. Board of Education, Roe v. Wade, Marbury v. Madison, Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., and New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. Past rounds have featured hypotheticals touching on civil rights claims under precedents like Gideon v. Wainwright and Miranda v. Arizona, regulatory disputes reminiscent of Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency and Citizens United v. FEC, and intellectual property disputes echoing Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc. and MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd.. Judges—often professors from Georgetown University Law Center, Harvard Law School, and former clerks of the United States Supreme Court—have rendered evaluative decisions influencing competitors who later authored scholarship in journals such as the Harvard Law Review, Yale Law Journal, and Columbia Law Review.

Top honors parallel accolades given by organizations like the National Moot Court Competition and recognition programs such as the Order of the Coif and the American Bar Association Silver Gavel Awards in prestige. Trophies and individual awards for Best Brief and Best Oralist are sponsored by law firms including Cravath, Swaine & Moore and institutions such as the Federal Bar Association. Alumni of winning teams often pursue clerkships with judges from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, careers at firms like Gibson Dunn, or roles in government offices including the Department of Justice and state supreme courts such as the New York Court of Appeals.

The tournament is administered by committees within the American Bar Association in cooperation with host law schools including Georgetown University Law Center, University of Chicago Law School, and regional bar bodies such as the Chicago Bar Association and the New York City Bar Association. Organizing committees coordinate panels including academics from Stanford Law School, practitioners from Jones Day, and former judges from federal courts. Logistics incorporate scheduling practices used at conferences like the American Association of Law Libraries annual meeting and utilize volunteer judging rosters drawn from alumni networks at institutions such as Boston College Law School, Fordham University School of Law, and Temple University Beasley School of Law.

Category:Moot court competitions