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.

Latest from Appellate Advocacy Blog - Page 2

How Appellate Courts Should Evaluate Pretext Without Becoming Factfinders

Appellate courts are understandably cautious when constitutional claims turn on motive. The concern is familiar: probing intent risks entangling appellate judges in factfinding and undermining the deference owed to institutional decisionmakers.

As my colleague and I were planning out our fall semester, we had big ideas about how we were going to teach legal analysis—by spending more time focusing on the real skills needed, such as rule identification, extraction, and synthesis. 

A colleague recently asked me for feedback on some writing, and when I sent back revisions changing his en-dashes to em-dashes, he asked if I was working for ChatGPT.  I was confused until he explained that ChatGPT apparently loves em-dashes. 

Many posts on this blog emphasize the importance of maintaining credibility with the court. If the judges believe you lack trustworthiness because you stretched the evidence or the caselaw beyond the breaking point, the panel may discount not just your