Starting Tuesday, May 18, 2021 until Tuesday May 25, 2021, the annual freshman v. sophomore law debate occurred, where the class of 24 freshman and 21 sophomores split into five groups to go toe to toe on five different Supreme Court Cases. Each day, each of the groups argued on many different issues and presented their arguments to a panel of a total of eight guest judges, most of whom are alumni from the Bergen Tech Law and Justice Program. The different teams who argued on many topics such as the freedom of speech, freedom of religion, campaign funding, abortion, or the right to counsel for felonies, were able to bring compelling arguments to the table as well as refute each of their opponents’ arguments. After an intense 2 hours each day, here is a recap:
Day 1: Tuesday, May 18, 2021
Roe v. Wade (1973)
Resolve: The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is a fundamental “right to privacy” that protects a pregnant woman’s choice whether to have an abortion.
Pro Team: 10th grade
Con Team: 9th grade
Starting off with a strong modern conflict, Roe v. Wade is surrounding the issue of a woman’s choice whether to have an abortion.
Day 2: Thursday, May 20, 2021
Citizens United v. FEC (2010)
Resolve: The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act that places limits on campaign financing is unconstitutional.
Pro Team: 10th grade
Con Team: 9th grade
One of the more modern cases of the bunch, Citizens United v. FEC takes front the issue of campaign financing, more specifically, the limit of it and where the line should be drawn.
Day 3: Friday, May 21, 2021
Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)
Resolve: The free exercise clause of the First Amendment outweighs the State’s interest in compelling school attendance beyond the 8th grade.
Pro Team: 10th grade
Con Team: 9th grade
The First Amendment of the Constitution includes many different rights, but this case specifically confronts religious traditions and practices against a state government that wants its people to be prepared for the fronts of society.
Day 4: Monday, May 24, 2021
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
Resolve: The Sixth Amendment’s right to counsel in criminal cases extends to felony defendants in state courts.
Pro Side: 10th grade team
Con Side: 9th grade team
In 1963, after committing petty crime, Clarence Earl Gideon had to represent himself in his court trial. After being charged guilty and sentenced to five years in prison, Gideon filed a habeas corpus to the Supreme Court stating that his right to counsel was violated. In this debate, the two sides argue the extent of this right to counsel.
Day 5: Tuesday, May 25, 2021
Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. (2021)
Resolve: The first amendment prohibits school officials from regulating off campus student speech.
Pro Side: 10th grade
Con Side: 9th grade
The only case that hasn’t been decided, Mahanoy Area School District is especially unique because it confronts the famous case precedent of Tinker v. Des Moines (1968) involving freedom of speech in a modern light with the current Age of the Internet and Social Media.
After watching the outstanding performances and clashing during each of the debates, with thorough deliberation, the sophomores emerged as the overall victors, though the freshman also gave very excellent performances. Even through the zoom, each group had presented with professionalism, clarity, and confidence, and it is clear that this experience will be an integral part of their Law and Justice experience at Bergen Tech.
Written by Lianne Shin
