Our Attorney General, Martha Coakley, learned yesterday that arguing before the United States Supreme Court is really, really hard. The issue in the case is whether the government needs to make the person who prepares a lab report in a criminal case available for cross examination. That, it seems, is the way they do it in California.
So Justice Kennedy asked how that's been working out in the Golden State. Good question, right? Especially when one of the arguments against requiring live testimony is that it wouldn't be workable.
Attorney General Coakley didn't have an answer to Justice Kennedy's question.
One of the keys to oral argument in appellate courts is coming up with an exhaustive list of potential questions from the judges and, of course, answers to those questions that help (or at least don't hurt) your case. A good way of filling in gaps in your list is to have a moot court. Or, if you're arguing before the United States Supreme Court, a *bunch* of moot courts.
Did that just not happen here? Or did the moot court judges not think of this question?
Showing posts with label Prepare like your campaign for Senate depends on it. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Prepare like your campaign for Senate depends on it. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)