CIV-02 · Argue a landmark case both ways

Take a real, decided case and write the strongest honest argument for each side — using only what the actual opinion and oral argument record support.

One real, decided case with a publicly available opinion and, where available, oral argument audio or transcript (https://www.oyez.org) or a legislature/court's own published opinions archive. The majority opinion. Any dissent, if one exists. A two-column argument brief: strongest case for the winning side, strongest case for the losing side, both built only from language in the actual record.

Summarizing only the outcome ("the Court ruled that...") without engaging either side's actual reasoning. Inventing a quote or holding that is not in the opinion. Writing one side persuasively and the other as a strawman.

Case identification (name, docket, court, year); two-column argument brief with pinpoint citations to the opinion/transcript; a short reflection on which side's reasoning the student finds more persuasive and why, kept separate from the two-column brief itself.

CT: steelmanning both sides from the real record. CR: every quoted line traceable to the actual opinion or transcript. CO: peer checks one quotation on each side against the source. CM: two-column brief. CZ: parties and communities affected by the ruling.

Government/civics or social studies teacher reviews that both sides are genuinely argued, not one strawmanned. School-supervised.

R1: one case, two arguments. R2: every quote checkable against the real opinion. R3: process understanding shown by correctly identifying which court, what stage, what's binding. R4: both sides genuinely represented. R5: brief readable by someone who has not read the case.

(a) One side gets three paragraphs, the other gets a sentence. (b) A quotation that does not actually appear in the opinion.

Lane A immediately. No verified credit claim.