Arguing a Human Rights Case at

ARGUING A HUMAN RIGHTS CASE AT THE UNITED NATIONS

On July 17, 2019, I was standing in a large room at the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland. Directly in front of me was a long table with ten judges from around the world. There were professors, attorneys, and a few judges from the European Court of Human Rights. Behind them were interpreters who were translating my argument for the Applicant. To my right, were windows overlooking the Alps. I looked left and right down the bench and said, “Mr. President, your Excellencies, and may it please this Court.” While standing in that room, I decided I wanted to practice appellate law for the rest of my life.

Learning and Practicing in Context

Last summer, as a rising senior on the Liberty University Moot Court team, Tyler Shannon and I competed in an international moot court competition called the Nelson Mandela Human Rights World Moot hosted at the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland. The year prior, my junior year and Tyler’s senior year, had been my first year on the moot court team, and his second. The goal of a moot court team is to prepare students for the legal profession using a rigorous competition style structured to simulate the appellate style arguments given before the Supreme Court. In preparing for competition, we are given ten court cases in order to develop a ten-minute oral argument based on a hypothetical case. Typically, we would have from May until November in order to prepare oral arguments. Though the summer of 2019 was our first competition as teammates, Tyler and I had both qualified to national competitions in the regular season alongside many of our other friends on the team.

The Importance of Mentorship in Moot Court

The goal of moot court is to train a new generation of legal practitioners in structuring oral arguments, legal research, and poise under pressure. Since Professor Robert Robertson came to Liberty in Fall of 2015, after practicing commercial litigation in Louisiana, our undergraduate Moot Court team has risen from virtually non-existent to the sixth ranked program in the country. These ranks are based on total ballots won by Liberty teams, with each team consisting of two people.

Professor Robertson’s role as a coach and mentor requires significant dedication in time and training. Each week he dedicates over seven hours preparing us for oral arguments in the regular moot court season. After the regular season was over, to prepare for the international competition in summer, he called us weekly to prepare our oral arguments, and then gave up over two weeks to assist in preparing and accompanying us to Geneva. His leadership and mentorship have been an invaluable part of my experience preparing for a career in law.

Following the regular season, Dr. Robertson’s encouragement toward a higher caliber of competition was just the same for the Nelson Mandela competition, if not more fervent. The first step in the competition was to apply to compete in the oral arguments at the United Nations. For this, Tyler and I wrote two case memorials, which are similar to a pre-trial brief that condenses all of the relevant legal authority and case law pertaining to the hypothetical fact pattern. Beginning in February, we spent the following two months developing our core arguments and completing research in order to submit two twentypage documents for the Applicant and Respondent, to earn our spot in oral arguments.

After receiving the news that we qualified in May, we spent the next two months conducting further research and writing oral arguments. We incorporated international, regional, and domestic authority. We researched the European Court of Human Rights, the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights, German Basic Law, and we even included journal articles written by leading international jurists.

As we prepared for this competition, there were a few differences that made it instantly a more thrilling and

demanding task, although a few elements remained the same. Teams were still composed of two members and they competed by advocating either for the applicant or the respondent in a round. Both speakers from one team made their arguments for the applicant, then the other team argued for the respondent, followed by a rebuttal from the applicant. Each team still argued both sides roughly an equal amount of times, and arguments were based on the relevant laws and previously decided cases.

However, moving from a regional and national level to an international level at World Moot brought significant changes by means of research and tactics. First, instead of every team’s arguments being limited to the same ten cases like in the regular season, World Moot is an “open world problem.” Meaning, all of the research was done by us, and we could include any and all legal authority or cases that we could find. That also meant that the competitors could potentially have drastically different arguments and case law from us that we would need to be able to respond to in rounds. Another key difference is that instead of eight months of preparation, we had closer to three.

Learning and Leading in Human Rights

All of our research was on the topic of human rights — specifically pertaining to the rights of the accused, freedom of expression, right to property, right to life, and the rights of the disabled. Much of international law is synthesized based on international general principles in law — past cases decided by international bodies, and conventions that were held multilaterally. Decisions on cases are made in order to follow social standards around the world, though much of international law aligns most closely with western legal traditions. As one of two American teams to compete, the other being Yale Law School, we were able to utilize much of the US Supreme Court Law to address the more intricate junctions of individual rights and governmental jurisdiction.

After two days of preliminary rounds, Tyler and I advanced to quarterfinals, then finally to the semifinals. We ultimately placed third overall, after losing to the Oxford Law team by .12 of a point, and placing as the highest undergraduate team in the competition. Tyler placed fifth overall, and I placed tenth for the top scoring oralists. Though to be eliminated on such a slim margin was disheartening, to come so far in Liberty’s first time competing at this level was an accomplishment in and of itself. The encouragement from all of our other teammates, professors, and family was far more than I could have imagined.

Approaching Law from a Christian Outlook

Our views as Christian’s regarding human rights are unique within the context of the world. The title “human rights,” is the way the world secularly identifies intrinsic human value, the inalienable rights we have, and the resulting need to protect human life from the government, oppressive leaders, and from any other situation that may unjustly deprive innocent men, women, and children from these rights. Prior to this competition, I hadn’t thought very often of international judicial bodies acting on behalf of human rights. Though during the competition, it was evident that each team present had high respect and admiration for human rights idealized in the potential of the United Nations. For many around the world, international bodies such as these are people’s only hope for protection and justice due often to the corruption of their governments.

Law and Vocation

Every year, our moot court team continues to grow, and I have had the pleasure of developing deep, longlasting friendships with my teammates. The Lord has brought a unique group of students together who are passionate, talented, selfless, and hard-working. The resulting dynamic of the team is one that is celebratory of each other’s successes and supportive in one another’s hardships.

Similar to many of my peers, the Lord has placed a burden on my heart to use my passion and love for public speaking, justice, and the law to protect and fight for the weak. Prior to this competition, I saw that role only in the context of practicing law domestically, either through a position as a criminal prosecutor or a civil liberties attorney. Now, however, I have an interest in human rights law internationally.

While my vocational future and the next steps toward that vocation are not fully clear, I know the direction to which I am called. My hope then, to fulfill this calling, is to either attend law school following graduation this coming May, or to pursue a Master’s in Applied Human Rights at the University of York, in England. World Moot has only further cemented my desire to practice law in order to bring glory to God and to protect the weakest among his people. The Lord blessed Tyler and me in an incredibly unique way by allowing us to compete at this tournament. It was something I will look back upon and remember the Lord’s generosity.