|
|
|
|
back
|
|
May It Please the Court |
| |
|
 When the next United States Supreme Court decision is announced, ask a Brooklyn Friends School seventh grader to explain it to you. After all, they’ve had plenty of practice as Supreme Court justices and attorneys.
For six weeks in February and March, the students studied of the U.S. legal system, the three branches of government, and constitutional law through The Constitution Works, a renowned 20-year old educational program. Then, on the morning of March 10, they took a two-block field trip to the federal bankruptcy court on Cadman Plaza East to take on the roles of Supreme Court justices, and attorneys for the petitioners and respondents in the case of Denver Dispatch v. The United States.
The case centers on a fictional event in which a Colorado newspaper, the Denver Dispatch, published an exposé on the existence of a secret US Government anthrax research lab in the community. The article was the first of what was going to be a six-part series on safety conditions at the lab, but the Government wants to stop further publication of the articles because they feel their publication could jeopardize the safety of the nation. The newspaper thinks that the people have a right to know what is happening in their community, and that the ban is a violation of their first amendment rights. It was up to the attorneys for both sides to present their case based on constitutional law and for the justices to decide whether the further articles should be printed.
 Prior to their court appearance, the seventh graders studied eight important First Amendment cases, complete with lower-court rulings and excerpts of Supreme Court justices’ opinions. The cases ranged from Schenck v. United States, a 1919 case in which an opponent of American involvement in World War I was convicted of espionage for distributing antiwar leaflets, to The New York Times Company v. United States, the 1971 “Pentagon Papers” case in which the Government tried to block the newspaper’s publication of a secret official history of the Vietnam War. Students also learned about assembling briefs, preparing oral arguments, and following court protocol.
At the courthouse, each side had 30 minutes to present its case. The justices asked clarifying questions and then each team of lawyers had a five minute rebuttal period.
The student-attorneys cited case law and precedent to enforce their arguments and also displayed exemplary rhetorical skills. “If Congress can’t stop freedom of speech, then how can you?” stated a lawyer for the Denver Dispatch, referring to the U.S. Supreme Court as one of three equal branches of government. “Is the right to live more important than free speech? asked another. One student posed the question, “Why would you take away a right people have died for,” citing the U.S. citizenry’s devotion to freedom of speech. To this, another student countered, “If you’re dead, freedom of speech doesn’t matter.”
Ninety minutes after being sworn in as justices and attorneys, the gavel banged, and Docket 93800 came to a close. There was one assignment yet to complete: the justices who heard the two Brooklyn Friends School legal teams at the courthouse were to confer, write their decisions and deliver the to their classes the next day. Their decisions? While two different “courts” heard the case, the result was the same: 4-3 and 6-1 in favor of publication. |
|
back
|
| |
|