Recently, I was listening to oral argument and was struck by one advocate’s repeated reference to opposing counsel as “my friend.” The phrase struck me as odd because, to my knowledge, the lawyers were not friends outside of the courtroom.
Appellate Advocacy Blog
A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network
The Appellate Advocacy Blog, published by the Law Professor Blogs Network, focuses on issues related to appellate practice and constitutional law. It covers topics such as procedural fairness in appellate courts, the evaluation of pretext and neutrality in government actions, interpretive methods like originalism, and the legitimacy of judicial decision-making. The blog also provides updates on recent appellate court cases, including U.S. Supreme Court arguments and decisions, with attention to First Amendment rights, due process, and the role of appellate courts in reviewing institutional procedures. It serves as a resource for appellate practitioners, scholars, and students interested in appellate litigation strategies and constitutional interpretation.
Blog Authors
Latest from Appellate Advocacy Blog
Offensive Language: Quote or Redact?
“So the FCC won’t let me be or let me be me, so let me see. They tried to shut me down on MTV, but it feels so empty without me.”[i] – Eminem, Without Me
A recent CNN article…
What the Best Negotiators Do Differently — And Why Appellate Lawyers Should Care
Most lawyers think they’re good negotiators because they argue for a living.
They’re not.
Argument is about winning a point.Negotiation is about shaping a decision.
The best negotiators don’t overpower the other side—they design the environment in which agreement becomes…
Not All Facts Belong in the Facts Section
Every appellate brief includes a statement of facts. But one question quietly frustrates many advocates: how specific should those facts be?
When an appeal involves multiple claims or claims that require granular details, putting every detail in the facts section…
What the Best Appellate Advocates Do Differently at Oral Argument
Most lawyers approach oral argument as if it were a performance: a polished introduction, a rehearsed outline, and a hope that the judges will let them get through at least half of it before the questions begin. But elite appellate…
Ten Pieces of Writing Advice Every Serious Writer Needs—but Rarely Gets
Most writing advice is either vague (“find your voice”) or obvious (“be clear”). Neither helps when the stakes are real—when you’re writing for judges, editors, gatekeepers, or readers who are actively looking for reasons to stop reading.
What follows is…
Academic Speech and Garcetti v. Ceballos
Garcetti v. Ceballos sought to clarify the limits of the First Amendment in the public workplace. In doing so, it revealed the boundary of a rule the Supreme Court itself declined to cross.
That boundary is the university.
Under Garcetti,…
Regulation Without Rules: How Modern Institutions Punish Speech While Evading Appellate Review
Public-employee speech doctrine appears, on paper, to be well settled. Courts recite familiar tests, invoke settled standards, and reaffirm bedrock First Amendment principles. The rules are known. The frameworks are stable. The citations are routine.
And yet, in case after…
How Universities Punish Disfavored Speech Through Pretext—and Call It Governance
Speech is punished because it is disfavored.Universities then invent other reasons to conceal the suppression of free expression—presenting themselves as benevolent actors even when their conduct, in constitutional terms, constitutes a textbook violation of the First Amendment.
This is how…
When “Professionalism” Becomes a Speech Restriction
Public employers rarely punish speech outright anymore.They do something more subtle—and more effective.They invoke professionalism.
Across public institutions, and especially universities, adverse actions are increasingly justified by claims about tone, collegiality, reputation, or “professional conduct.” The language is vague, moralized,…