Lesson Plan: Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton

Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit - Opinion (March 7, 2024)

Supreme Court Docket No. 22-277 (docketed on August 11, 2022)

Certiorari granted by the United States Supreme Court (September 29, 2023)

Oral Argument Scheduled for TBD.

Case Information

Petitioners: Free Speech Coalition
Respondents: Ken Paxton, Attorney General of Texas

Supreme Court Filings

Briefs from Free Speech Coalition:

Briefs from Paxton:

Brief of Paxton in opposition to certiorari
Reply Brief (to be filed on 11/15/24)

Amicus Briefs in support of Free Speech Coalition:

Amicus Briefs in support of Paxton:

To be filed on 11/22/24

Supreme Court Precedents

Tournament Instructions

Teams of two high-school students will write an appellate brief, and present oral arguments, addressing the following question:

Whether Texas House Bill 1181 should be reviewed with rational-basis review scrutiny or strict scrutiny?

Petitioners will argue that Texas House Bill 1181 should be reviewed with strict scrutiny.

Respondents will argue that Texas House Bill 1181 should be reviewed with rational basis scrutiny.

Phase 1 - Research and Write Your Brief

Coaches can register their teams at the Institute for Competition Sciences (ICS). ICS will generate a number for each team. Odd-numbered teams will represent the Petitioners and even-numbered teams will represent the Respondents.

Teams will research and write their briefs. Carefully review the lesson plan. The brief must be a minimum of 2,000 words. Please download this template. The brief should have the following sections:

Table of Cited Authorities: List all of the original sources, and other documents you cite in your brief.
Summary of Argument: State your position succinctly in 250 words or less.
Argument: Structure your argument based on at least ten Supreme Court precedents. The more authorities you cite, the stronger your argument will be–and the more likely your team will advance.
Conclusion: Summarize your argument, and argue how the Supreme Court should decide this issue.

Be sure to proofread your work. The work must be yours, and you may not seek help from anyone else–including attorneys or law students. Students who submit plagiarized briefs will be disqualified.

Please review the winning submissions from previous years:

OT 2023 - Moody v. NetChoice
OT 2022 - Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard
OT 2021 - New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen
OT 2020 – Torres v. Madrid
OT 2019 – Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue
OT 2018 – Timbs v. Indiana
OT 2017 – Carpenter v. United States
OT 2016 – Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer
OT 2015 – Abigail Fisher v. University of Texas, Austin (II)
OT 2014 – Zivotofsky v. Kerry
OT 2013 – National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning
OT 2012 – Abigail Fisher v. University of Texas, Austin (I)

Phase 2 - Virtual Mentoring

Teams that register before November 4, 2024 will be invited to participate in a virtual mentoring session. These sessions will be hosted during the week of December 2, 2024. The Harlan Institute will match each class with a mentor from our network. These sessions will be helpful to finalize your briefs and prepare your preliminary round arguments.

Phase 3 - Preliminary Round

For the preliminary round, each team must prepare a YouTube video. The argument must be at least 15 minutes in length. Coaches will ask their students the following ten questions:

[Questions will be posted shortly.]

Teams will upload a PDF of their brief, as well as a link to their YouTube video to the Institute of Competition Sciences. The deadline for the preliminary round will be December 16, 2024. The brief and preliminary round video will be scored based on this rubric.