Penn Law students get first day in court

Law school graduates usually have to wait years before they get the opportunity to actually argue in court. But in the Keedy Cup, this opportunity comes before students even graduate. In the moot court competition, third-year Penn Law students get the chance to argue before three U.S. Court of Appeals judges. The final round of the highly esteemed competition was held yesterday at the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Anthropology and Archeology, highlighting the four students who made it to the the last stage. The contest was the culmination of a year-long moot court tournament, which is only open to Penn Law students. Participants begin the competition as second-year law students, and are in their third -- and final -- year of study by the time they reach the last round. "I did it because it was something that I was interested in doing [in the future]," finalist Jamilah Jefferson said. "I'm interested in litigation in general. It wasn't for the honor; it was more for the experience and the practice." The competition requires that participants present several rounds of written briefs and oral presentations. The four finalists -- Jefferson, Kenneth Brown, Jonathan Feinberg, and Kynya Manning -- were randomly paired to compete for two awards, Best Team and Best Oralist. One team took on the role of plaintiff, while the other became the defendants. The students recreated presentations of both sides of Ferguson v. City of Charleston, a case dealing with the clandestine drug testing of pregnant women and the legality of reporting positive results to law enforcement officials. Brown and Manning -- as petitioners on behalf of 10 women arrested after testing positive for cocaine use -- won the prize for Best Team. Feinberg, arguing for the defense, won Best Oralist. The questions flew from the panel of judges, which included Edward Becker, William Fletcher and Jane Roth. The argument focused on whether the central question concerned the Fourth Amendment guarantee to privacy or the compelling interests of the government. "What if this is the case where we can finally decide that the privacy interest is fundamental? You'd be famous," Becker teased the students. In closing remarks, the judges complimented the competitors for their skill, but found fault with some of their responses. "Questions are a very important part of an oral argument, and it's very important to listen to the question the judge is asking and to answer the question the judge has asked," Roth said. "I thought some of the questions tonight were answered very well, and some of the questions weren't answered so well." The judges' message seemed to fit with that of Edwin Keedy, a former Penn Law professor and dean. They all noted that the participants needed to pay closer attention to the question, not the solution. According to legend, every year on the first day of Keedy's class, "2 & 4" was written on the board on the first day of class, every year. Students failed to answer his question, "What is the solution?" because they all failed to ask "What is the problem?" First-year Law students came to see their peers in the Keedy Cup, hoping to see some of the best speakers in the Law School. "These are some of the best litigators [coming out of Penn]," first-year Law student Todd Hettenbach said. "It's exciting to see what sort of skills you learn."