Moot Court is a form of oral advocacy that can be likened to a legal debate in an appellate courtroom setting. Teams of two are presented with a hypothetical legal problem in which issues of law are in dispute. The task of each team is to persuade the judges to rule for their position by supporting their arguments with legal principles and applying those principles to the facts of the case. Throughout the competition, participants receive feedback on oral argument style and presentation techniques from practicing and sitting judges.

Unlike public speaking and policy debate where judges are passive listeners, moot court judges ask probing questions during a competitor's speech. A competitor must be prepared to answer impromptu questions or apply theory to hypothetical situations. Such questions make every round unique.

The competitor sometimes delivers a prepared speech and, like a debater, must be quick to pick up new points and incorporate them into his presentation, but the similarities end there. Because moot court judges can interrupt a team's presentation at any time, the content of the team's argument and their ability to answer questions are vastly more important than fluent verbal persuasion. Moot court is more than a display of oratorical skills; it is an intellectual exercise requiring research, advocacy, and teamwork.

Moot court competition requires time and effort, but you will be rewarded with an introduction to written and oral advocacy that is invaluable, regardless of whether you ever enter a real courtroom.

The current moot court case (PDF or Word) involves questions of the U.S. Supreme Court's First Amendment jurisprudence.