U can Wikipedia Civ pro personal jurisdiction and tort vicarious liability and corporate law agency theory. These keywords would probably help u understand it better!
Jargons are often used in law and court decisions (judgment). They are sort of titles for some rule or court decision which apply to a set of situations. Decisions/Judgements of courts apply the same rules to the same situations. For example: “This rule applies in Case X which has these circumstances. Therefore the same judgment and the same rules should apply to Case Y which has similar circumstances.” Context is key that’s why law students/lawyers study massive amounts of text so that they can apply those rules to a similar situation. Hope this explanation helps as to why law jargon sounds so alien. - From a J.D. Studying for the Bar
I just mooted this past semester, and this is absolutely impressive. To be able to delve into caselaw so effortlessly in answering minute and specific questions from judges is unbelievable. These law students could give most practicing lawyers a run for their money. Insane. That’s the level of Harvard.
no they couldnt give practicing lawyers a run for their money. They'll be good in time but they also mock trail this about 200x before the competition. something real lawyers dont do (at best a real lawyer might run 1 mock trial if its a massive case)
@@onebuffalo5402 You're right that they practiced way more than a normal attorney would, you're also confusing mock trial and moot court. Two completely different kinds of audiences and argumentation styles. If you don't practice, you're going to have a bad time. Oyez has a huge cache of SCOTUS oral arguments, you can really distinguish between someone who practiced and someone who didn't.
Love the fact that Justice Kagan never forgets to mention and honor her former law students, and one of them, Elizabeth Prelogar, is now the Solicitor General of the United States (mentioned at the last part). 💯
My favorite time of year. When the next generation of lawyers argue in court. (I’m also glad to see one of my heroes, Justice Elena Kagan, back at the Ames Court)
I was finnaly able to sit down and give this a listen... The third speaker was incredible...I can't say I heard a single "um" really in her entire argument. I think, if i remember right, i can say the same thing about the 4th speaker as well tbh. Moreover, the way she articulated her thoughts+ her tone was something to behold.
I feel like they can never get the audio right until 30-45 minutes in the competition but it does get better. Also, deciding on who the best oralist was must've been tough but Morgan Sandhu was the right choice!
Ames Moot Court! Medicine is completely a different world! other than law ; because it needs empathy! One cannot become a good physician without empathy! Pharmaceutical companies need to be more informative before using a particular drug! I am a native English speaker who can speak French, German , Spanish, Mandarin, Swahili (Africa); Tamil, Telugu, Malyalam(Indian Subcontinent),Arabic( United Arab Emirates), Punjabi or Urdu ( Northern Indian States)! Basically I have a very deep root of British Ancestry ! My paternal family was involved in Bureaucracy and Judiciary ; and my maternal family was involved Science and Technology which also includes Agriculture (Small and Large Scale farming);
Don’t worry, this is not the day to day for most attorneys. And presenting a case in front of these judges is not what most lawyers will ever face in their careers! Law is dynamic. And you will learn oral argument skills to equip you to deal with situations like this.
Although I am not a law student but I like this videos. I started to watch the video but I didn’t understood what they are talking about.After you read the paper that they attached it, you can enjoy the whole video until the end.
Well I do recall, from my attention payed in class, that there is a concept called “State’s Rights”; whereas, a state government could have jurisdiction to enforce constitutional laws unto their citizens rather than having permission from the federal government.
It sounds like the basic facts of the case are that the Plaintiff took the generic version of a drug and was injured in a way that the warning label didn't cover. So they are suing the manufacturer of the *brand name* drug, who wrote the label that appears on the generic version. The question is whether the manufacturer of the brand name drug is sufficiently connected to the state, and to the harm that occurred, to allow the court to exercise jurisdiction over them. The first speaker relies very heavily on Ford, a case involving a similar, but not identical, set of circumstances, to argue that because the Supreme Court allowed jurisdiction to be exercised in Ford, the court should also allow jurisdiction to be exercised here. So they wind up arguing a lot about Ford, because the Judges are trying to poke holes in the argument that Ford is *actually* applicable to the facts of this case.
They... are conservative justices? On this moot court, Justice Kagan is the only judge that was appointed by a Democratic President. Judge Kimberly Sudd was appointed by a Republican governor, and Judge Consuelo Callahan was appointed by a Republican President. This panel has a 2-1 Conservative supermajority.
these people must be high on something to speak like this...just string together a bunch of big words into sentences which make 0 sense. talk about blowing hot air out of one's mouth.
@@pheeuh wtf 🤣 what misogyny ? Just criticizing women is misogyny? Maybe he's not a very good judge hence he's not in the video but how tf is that misogyny 🤣🤣🤣
![Coheed and Cambria - Searching for Tomorrow [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/hDsYGLbmadg/mqdefault.jpg)
I understand all of the words individually, but not together.. still can't stop watching
Same here
U can Wikipedia Civ pro personal jurisdiction and tort vicarious liability and corporate law agency theory. These keywords would probably help u understand it better!
Jargons are often used in law and court decisions (judgment). They are sort of titles for some rule or court decision which apply to a set of situations. Decisions/Judgements of courts apply the same rules to the same situations. For example: “This rule applies in Case X which has these circumstances. Therefore the same judgment and the same rules should apply to Case Y which has similar circumstances.”
Context is key that’s why law students/lawyers study massive amounts of text so that they can apply those rules to a similar situation. Hope this explanation helps as to why law jargon sounds so alien.
- From a J.D. Studying for the Bar
Hahaha true
Every time I watch these, I think of this comment :P
I just mooted this past semester, and this is absolutely impressive. To be able to delve into caselaw so effortlessly in answering minute and specific questions from judges is unbelievable. These law students could give most practicing lawyers a run for their money. Insane. That’s the level of Harvard.
no they couldnt give practicing lawyers a run for their money. They'll be good in time but they also mock trail this about 200x before the competition. something real lawyers dont do (at best a real lawyer might run 1 mock trial if its a massive case)
@@onebuffalo5402 Ahhh I didn’t know that. Repeated study of one case would make anyone good.
@@onebuffalo5402 You're right that they practiced way more than a normal attorney would, you're also confusing mock trial and moot court. Two completely different kinds of audiences and argumentation styles. If you don't practice, you're going to have a bad time. Oyez has a huge cache of SCOTUS oral arguments, you can really distinguish between someone who practiced and someone who didn't.
@@onebuffalo5402 To be fair, if you're a real attorney arguing before the Supreme Court you're probably going to practice more than once, lol.
8
Love the fact that Justice Kagan never forgets to mention and honor her former law students, and one of them, Elizabeth Prelogar, is now the Solicitor General of the United States (mentioned at the last part). 💯
The stress I would have standing before a court like that.
I thought I knew English till I started watching moot courts in english
Fantastic to see that Ames is back! I don’t understand some of the technical legal arguments but the quality of the oralists is very impressive.
9
Brilliant students. Must be very intimidating arguing about /applying Ford considering Kagan wrote the opinion.
Babe wake up new Ames Moot Competition just dropped
31:47 to 33:15 This young man is great at going back and forth with Judges.
Finally...it's here. I've been waiting for so long....sitting in a corner...pondering "what is life without Ames".
lol are we going to be seeing ur face at one of these in the future 😏
My favorite time of year. When the next generation of lawyers argue in court.
(I’m also glad to see one of my heroes, Justice Elena Kagan, back at the Ames Court)
I've watched multiple of these and continue not to know anything they're saying. 💀
Read the captions. It’ll all make sense better lol
Technical language can be a bit difficult to grasp at first, but it gets better with practice!
I’d simply faint.The sheer amount of pressure is suffocating.
1:06:21 Excellent response to the question on precedents and stare decises (i may have spelt that incorrectly)
stare decisis
The danger is found in the different side effects that are being felt by the petitioners who have brought the suit😢
Woww. I am speechless. This big annual event is coming again... Hope i'll be there soon.
I was finnaly able to sit down and give this a listen...
The third speaker was incredible...I can't say I heard a single "um" really in her entire argument. I think, if i remember right, i can say the same thing about the 4th speaker as well tbh.
Moreover, the way she articulated her thoughts+ her tone was something to behold.
I feel like they can never get the audio right until 30-45 minutes in the competition but it does get better. Also, deciding on who the best oralist was must've been tough but Morgan Sandhu was the right choice!
Ames Moot Court! Medicine is completely a different world! other than law ; because it needs empathy! One cannot become a good physician without empathy! Pharmaceutical companies need to be more informative before using a particular drug! I am a native English speaker who can speak French, German , Spanish, Mandarin, Swahili (Africa); Tamil, Telugu, Malyalam(Indian Subcontinent),Arabic( United Arab Emirates), Punjabi or Urdu ( Northern Indian States)! Basically I have a very deep root of British Ancestry ! My paternal family was involved in Bureaucracy and Judiciary ; and my maternal family was involved Science and Technology which also includes Agriculture (Small and Large Scale farming);
just checking in to see if anyone fainted this year
🤣🤣🤣🤣 same
I want to become a lawyer but man i cant imagine myself standing there and not shaking
Don’t worry, this is not the day to day for most attorneys. And presenting a case in front of these judges is not what most lawyers will ever face in their careers! Law is dynamic. And you will learn oral argument skills to equip you to deal with situations like this.
I'm an LLB student watching all the way from South Africa, I love this.
Some impressive performances including that from a fellow Brit. I wouldn’t like to stand before those judges. I’d crumble.
That speaker “stacy” at the beginning doesn’t seem to be too confident she nervous
She’s British amongst native Americans
Thank you Harvard Law School for posting this video.
Couldn't wait to see it been uploaded. Great insight from all candidates. Great stuff
The party must be wild upstairs. Kagan knows how to let loose.
21:39 that hair slick was so confident omg LOL
it will be good if yall lawyers get together with other lawyers who does the same thing that you do.
I disagree with the judges - the gentlemen was by far the best oralist.
no one fainted..
I’ve been waiting for this!
Finally... Winter is here... Waited for this for a year
Aaaand that's why I didn't get into Harvard!
Oh my goodness this was so much fun to watch! Bravo to everyone's hard work!
So excited to watch! I’ve been waiting for this all year!
Your dream is to become a lawyer ?
@@alillachmojahid3498 As a step to becoming a judge, yes!
@@elliewise4704 ohh good way to your nice goal , you have a Instagram ? I want to ask you about this work ( judge) 🙂🙂
I am so much excited also, I like to be a part of the upcoming moot Court, when it will be held
@@elliewise4704 congratulations 👏👏
The gaining of profit is absolutely important to the Pharmaceutical Company😮.
This was very spirited. Mr. Artabet was well prepared.
stupid question....they referenced "the state of Ames" multiple times...does the Ames competition take place in a fictional state?
yes. Ames is a fictional jurisdiction.
appreciate the clarification@@SoLyrical2
Although I am not a law student but I like this videos. I started to watch the video but I didn’t understood what they are talking about.After you read the paper that they attached it, you can enjoy the whole video until the end.
What's do the winner get
respect.
One state claims they have jurisdiction, then another state claims they have jurisdiction is this possible if so why??
Hi living that scenario for 3 years no answers
Well I do recall, from my attention payed in class, that there is a concept called “State’s Rights”; whereas, a state government could have jurisdiction to enforce constitutional laws unto their citizens rather than having permission from the federal government.
Easy to tell when these took place
who won!? Both right?
The second guy.. am I looking at Mike Ross in real world...?
Been waiting for this! 😱
Very professional
why did they literally hammer Ms. Amanze
Can someone explain what they r fighting about, r they fighting about drugs or Ford?
It sounds like the basic facts of the case are that the Plaintiff took the generic version of a drug and was injured in a way that the warning label didn't cover. So they are suing the manufacturer of the *brand name* drug, who wrote the label that appears on the generic version. The question is whether the manufacturer of the brand name drug is sufficiently connected to the state, and to the harm that occurred, to allow the court to exercise jurisdiction over them.
The first speaker relies very heavily on Ford, a case involving a similar, but not identical, set of circumstances, to argue that because the Supreme Court allowed jurisdiction to be exercised in Ford, the court should also allow jurisdiction to be exercised here.
So they wind up arguing a lot about Ford, because the Judges are trying to poke holes in the argument that Ford is *actually* applicable to the facts of this case.
thank you
Nice to see a justice from my state supreme court.
Why wouldn't they just sue who manufactured the drug?
I love MIT.
Español cuando van a subtitular eso
Brilliant!..
0:41 isn't she the one who fainted years ago?
No she isn’t.
Lol, no 🤣
i been want to know what its like to be on cnn or cspan.
the young lady introducing the case needs to find something else to do. litigation is not going to go well.
Well say and done some how there get time how they kill on get a way tell them God don't sleep
Nice
she does not emphasis important key pieces
Jones Larry Gonzalez Anna Lee Michael
wow
LLB
No choice for over a decade
And lots of property taken without consent or compensation that entire time (including Intel property)
💯
👍
Tôi cho rằng không thể thuyết phục được Tòa nếu bạn lụm thứ bạn đã từng vứt vào sọt rác.
la mujer y el de lentes mi gustan.
hard to take anyone that wears a face diaper seriously.
I’d just bring up my Fortnite wins and earnings and it would be an auto dub. I’d box these judges like fish, absolutely cranking 90’s. Case closed.
lel you go man
First
Smart 🐑
When will you bring conservative justices?
They... are conservative justices? On this moot court, Justice Kagan is the only judge that was appointed by a Democratic President. Judge Kimberly Sudd was appointed by a Republican governor, and Judge Consuelo Callahan was appointed by a Republican President. This panel has a 2-1 Conservative supermajority.
Oh aria
7th Circuit Judge Easterbrook was there previously.
shes very monotone and unenthused
why is everyone wearing masks? its very weird
Are you new here
You live under a rock?
these people must be high on something to speak like this...just string together a bunch of big words into sentences which make 0 sense. talk about blowing hot air out of one's mouth.
Just say you don’t understand
boo 🍅
Do they really all have to be wearing masks?
No lol. Virus goes straight through masks!!! With the exception of N95
That young man is too bright for these women even judges cannot defeat him.
That’s such a dumb correlation
@@birdieblair5817 the dumbest
@@birdieblair5817 Do you know the definition of correlation? That word doesn’t belong in this sentence.
That young man is great and understand law unlike these his colleagues women who are too mounthy and no substance .
Did you visit this video to be misogynistic?
The blatant misogyny in your comment
@@pheeuh wtf 🤣 what misogyny ? Just criticizing women is misogyny?
Maybe he's not a very good judge hence he's not in the video but how tf is that misogyny 🤣🤣🤣
@@HA-ug4qu you know that wasn't constructive criticism.. there's a complete difference from criticizing and insulting someone
I've been waiting for this