{"id":2160,"date":"2018-06-22T04:21:19","date_gmt":"2018-06-22T04:21:19","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ontherecord.empiremocktrial.org\/?p=2160"},"modified":"2018-06-23T14:10:37","modified_gmt":"2018-06-23T14:10:37","slug":"2018-pre-trial-oral-argument","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ontherecord.empiremocktrial.org\/?p=2160","title":{"rendered":"2018 Pre-Trial Oral Argument"},"content":{"rendered":"

An Introduction<\/span><\/h3>\n

What does the First Amendment say about hate speech? How does a public university balance the free exchange of ideas with campus safety? Who should bear the costs of security when controversial speakers want to express their unpopular views? And how far can free speech protections stretch before they snap? These are the questions at the core of this year\u2019s Empire Pre-Trial Oral Argument (POA).<\/span><\/p>\n

The controversial speaker in this year\u2019s case is Harry McCarson. He\u2019s a well-known white nationalist who has a history of using hateful language at rallies and on social media, directed at the Empirials: the indigenous people of Empirion. McCarson is charged with a crime that occurred on February 20, 2018 (we\u2019re not telling you what that crime is yet!) He faces trial in the fall of 2018. As we\u2019re about to explain, this year\u2019s POA involves a separate legal matter.<\/span><\/p>\n

Fact Summary<\/b>
\n<\/b>In late 2017, Empirion State University\u2019s (ESU) First Amendment Club invited McCarson to speak on campus. The speech was scheduled for February 19, 2018. In the weeks leading up to the event, ESU and the First Amendment Club discussed the security challenges that McCarson\u2019s appearance would pose. Both sides recognized that McCarson\u2019s past history of divisive and hateful language would likely lead to protests and counter-protests, which could cause violence on campus. The University and Club sought to reach a compromise in which they shared the security costs. Negotiations broke down, and the Club sued the University in federal court. <\/span><\/p>\n

Legal Posture<\/b>
\n<\/b>The First Amendment Club has filed suit against the university, and they\u2019re seeking a \u201ctemporary restraining order\u201d (TRO). A TRO is a short-term civil order, issued by a judge or magistrate, that forbids a person or entity from engaging in some threatened action against someone else. So in this case, the Club is saying that it needs the Court to rule in its favor <\/span>immediately<\/span><\/i> so that it can have McCarson speak on campus. \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Naturally, McCarson\u2019s position is that the university is discriminating against him because they don\u2019t agree with his views. Is he right? Maybe. But ESU will never admit to that. Their defense is that security costs are substantial. \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

POA Timing is Mock<\/b>
\n<\/span>Like our beloved activity, the timing of the POA and trial are mock. In real life, the POA would take place on February 12. Remember, the Club\u2019s goal is to ensure that McCarson can speak on February 19. The TRO is also a separate civil action, so it would never take place on the same date, and in the same courtroom, as McCarson\u2019s criminal trial. <\/span><\/p>\n

But this is mock trial. \u00a0So we can suspend reality for a bit \ud83d\ude42 \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

When your round starts, you\u2019ll begin with the \u201cFebruary 12th\u201d oral argument. Each team will give a 10 minute oral argument, like in prior years. Then we\u2019ll take a break. When we restart, we\u2019re now in the present day, arguing a separate criminal trial involving McCarson (again, we\u2019re not telling you what that is <\/span>yet\u2026 <\/span><\/i>it\u2019s a surprise)! The lawyers who represent McCarson will do so in both the pre-trial AND the trial; the lawyers who represent ESU in the TRO will represent the Government in the trial.<\/span><\/p>\n

Is this an unconventional setup? Perhaps. But we felt that the importance of the First Amendment issue made a little time travel worth it! \u00a0<\/span>
\n<\/b>
\n<\/b>Impact on the Trial?<\/b>
\n<\/b>The outcome of the POA will change the facts of the trial <\/span>slightly<\/span><\/i>, but the basic timeline remains: <\/span><\/p>\n