Utah Bar Journal

The relationship between debate and the practice of law is more than simple coincidence. For generations, young people who wanted to grow up to be lawyers first experienced competitive advocacy on debate teams. Debate, perhaps better than any other academic training, teaches students how to “think like a lawyer” long before they ever set foot in a law school. The fact that Katyal invited his debate coach to attend his moot court in preparation for Hamdan demonstrates that the value some lawyers find in debate does not end when legal training begins.

Despite the obvious synergies between scholastic debate and the practice of law, debate is often overlooked as a natural element of law-related education. Although debate encompasses more than strictly “legal” topics, students who are equipped with the skills to analyze, research, and discuss topics ranging from agricultural policy to nuclear proliferation are well-prepared for the transition to legal research, thinking and writing. After all, the practice of law includes more than simply knowing the letter of the law. Legal practice may call upon a lawyer alternately to develop an ad hoc expertise on both the grandest and the most obscure human pursuits. It is the ability to think critically and creatively about diverse issues that is the lawyer’s true skill. Similarly, debate opens students’ minds to a world of facts and ideas – both big and small – and provides students with the necessary analytical tools to recognize the relationships and concepts that connect them. When students put these skills to work before a judge in a competitive debate round, the debate becomes a microcosm of the world many lawyers inhabit every day.

The time is particularly ripe for recognizing the important relationship between debate and the law. Even as many Utah lawyers can look to debate as providing the foundation for their subsequent legal careers, debate programs in some of Utah’s public schools are in real trouble. Programs that once flourished are now struggling to survive – the victims of evolving standards for academic achievement and slim budgets that strain resources for extracurricular activities like debate. For example, the debate program at Brighton High School – once a Utah powerhouse – has been eliminated altogether. As debate loses ground generally, the opportunity to expand the activity among students that may be most in need of the opportunities debate provides is also lost. The Utah Bar and its membership, however, can make a difference in reversing these trends.

Many current members of the Utah State Bar were once debaters. As a former high school and college debater myself, I decided to conduct a brief survey of a few of Utah’s other debater/lawyers to collect their thoughts on the relationship between debate and the law.2 The few comments included here likely echo the views of many other members of the Bar.

Rich L. Humpherys
Before beginning his legal practice, Rich Humpherys of Christensen & Jensen, P.C. was a debater at Orem High School and later at Brigham Young University. Debate, in his view “was far more effective in preparing [him] for [his] profession as a litigator than any of [his] specific academic endeavors.” His comments provide an insightful overview of the role debate can play in the development of a legal career:

Though I have always desired to be a lawyer, my high school and college debate experience enhanced my desire. It helped me better understand many things, such as: (1) there are often good opposing views and authorities on both sides of a tough issue; (2) the most persuasive arguments focus on the real issues, not tangential issues; and (3) in life, we often face very difficult issues that don’t lend themselves to black and white answers.

My debate experience also taught me many things, such as (1) the need for thorough and accurate research; (2) how to take extensive research and synthesize it into an efficient and meaningful short presentation; (3) how to artfully and persuasively present information; (4) how to train my mind to think in advance about the possible opposing questions or viewpoints and be prepared to meaningfully respond to them (for example, when I prepare to try a case, I prepare different case presentations, depending on how the judge may rule on the admissibility of controverted evidence or how the defense may present its case – debate introduced me to and helped me succeed with this process); (5) to be comfortable and confident with an oral presentation; (6) how to find, analyze and focus on what is key and important, without being distracted by all of the other, though interesting, possible issues; and finally, (7) how to address the issues without giving in to the lure of exchanging personal attacks with the opposing side.

I have also found that many of the old debaters I got to know are now attorneys and our friendship continues.

Richard D. Burbidge
Richard Burbidge, of Burbidge, Mitchell & Gross, is one of Utah’s most respected trial lawyers. Before practicing law, Mr. Burbidge debated at South High School in Salt Lake City. Mr. Burbidge’s comments about his debate experience demonstrate that it can be difficult to overstate the value that debate can play in a would-be lawyer’s education:

I was enticed to [become a debater] in my senior year, having no prior interest whatsoever in that competitive arena.

The long and short of my encounter with the sport was full and complete engagement.

It was my first encounter with systematic critical thinking and the first opportunity in my educational career to begin to develop systematic skills for critical analysis. It is not an overstatement to say that my debate experience was the single most determinative factor in my choice of a life-long profession as a trial lawyer. I simply do not believe that there is a more rigorous or enlightening cognitive training available in a high school setting.

David C. Reymann
David Reymann, a partner at Parr Waddoups Brown Gee & Loveless, debated at Vestavia Hills High School in Alabama, where, along with his twin brother, he was the 1992 national high school debate champion. Reymann then went on to debate for four years at Dartmouth College before attending the University of Chicago Law School. His comments highlight that although there are significant differences between debate and courtroom arguments, debate provides essential training in the core critical thinking skills every lawyer needs:

Of all of the subjects, classes, and preparations people take in order to get ready for law school and the practice of law, nothing prepares you like debate. Most people think this is because debate trains you for persuasive public speaking, but for me that is not the reason. Court arguments are rarely like debates. Rather, I think the most essential skill debate teaches is the ability to evaluate arguments critically and discern those that are likely to succeed. I believe this is also the most valuable skill for a litigator, and, unfortunately, the one that is most difficult to learn once you are immersed in the practice of law. By developing this skill early, debate plays an enormous role in training and educating future members of the bar.

David F. Mull
David Mull, an associate at Snow, Christensen & Martineau, was a champion high school debater in his native Alaska before going on to debate at Franklin & Marshall College in Pennsylvania, and then on to law school at the S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah. For Mull, it is debate’s role in promoting active citizenship that has left the most lasting impression:

It is obvious that debate gives students practice in the nuts and bolts of making and analyzing arguments, and it builds public speaking skills. Just as important, I think, is that it shows students how much fun it can be to discuss and engage in issues of civic importance. People who have some confidence in analyzing public affairs are much more likely to engage in them.

Utah Judges
In addition to practicing attorneys, former debaters also number among the judges in the Utah courts. Utah Supreme Court Chief Justice Christine M. Durham counts high school debate as an important stepping stone in developing the logic and language abilities essential to legal thought and practice:

I think that my early experiences with the structure and focus of debate programs introduced me to critical thinking, to persuasive logic, and to the deep significance of rhetoric (in the classical sense) for human communication and understanding about hard ideas.

Debate also played a very significant role in United States District Court Judge Paul Cassell’s legal training. In fact, following a successful high school debate career in Idaho, Judge Cassell initially enrolled at Stanford University, but left Stanford for a time to attend Western Washington University where he could compete on that school’s outstanding debate team.3

An enthusiastic supporter of debate, Judge Cassell notes, “Debate has helped me see both sides of complicated issues and to understand the relationship between advancing a good argument and prevailing on issues in court.”

Judge Michael McConnell of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit was also a distinguished debater before he pursued law. In fact, Judge McConnell was the Kentucky State High School Debate Champion in 1972. His comments reflect on debate’s unique role in developing young minds:

More than any other student activity, debate requires the participant to match evidence to thesis in a logically compelling manner, and to communicate complex ideas to an audience.  If some evil genius concocted a magic potion that made high school students voluntarily give up their weekends to engage in so intellectually worthwhile an activity, we would award him a Nobel Prize for pedagogical necromancy.

Debate as Law-Related Education
The common theme running through the comments of these practitioners, scholars, and judges is that debate develops important skills that transcend the typical classroom experience and translate exceptionally well into legal practice. These skills include developing the capacity for critical thinking, increasing the comprehension of substantive information, developing broad organizational skills, and providing the opportunity to make persuasive presentations that demonstrate an appreciation and understanding of these skills. In the context of a debate round, students must rely on both critical thinking and an ability to apply substantive knowledge in order to succeed. Students must learn to present the most effective argument within the bounds of the accepted rules and time constraints; they must learn how to argue from the evidence, rather than from personal opinions; and they must learn how to think and respond quickly, but carefully, to unexpected arguments, as well as to evolving events in a changing world.

With these perspectives in mind, it is fair to conclude that debate should properly be considered a form of law-related education, and promoted as such. Not everyone may call their debate coach to attend their moot court session to prepare for an argument before the Supreme Court. In a real sense, however, lawyers with a background in debate carry the skills they learned in debate into every argument they attend.

Looking Forward: Fostering the Bar’s Engagement with Debate
Decades ago, the Bar sponsored an annual debate tournament for high school students here in Utah called the “Utah State Bar Debate Tournament.” The event was very popular among Utah’s high school debate programs. For unknown reasons, the Bar’s sponsorship of that tournament ended abruptly in the mid 1980’s. In 2005, through the sponsorship efforts of the Bar’s Young Lawyers Division (YLD) and the Bar’s Litigation Section, the Bar’s involvement in high school debate found new life, and the “Young Lawyers Debate Tournament” was born. Now in its second year, the Young Lawyers Debate Tournament has brought together hundreds of students from more than two dozen Utah schools to participate in a weekend of intense scholastic competition. Highlighting the overlap between debate and the Bar, the tournament has been organized so that a panel composed of lawyers who were once debaters serve as judges for the final debate round.

The new debate tournament is an important step toward preserving an important link between debate and the legal community in Utah. The YLD and the Litigation Section deserve significant recognition for their efforts these past two years. Looking ahead, it is my hope that the Bar’s leadership will endorse sponsorship of the tournament on a long-term basis so that the connection between debate and the Bar will remain vital, even as the individuals involved in coordinating the tournament on an annual basis may change. With the support for this event from the highest levels of the Bar, the Bar can help turn a growing event into an established tradition and give back to the debate community what many members of the legal community have already received.

On an individual level, there are other ways to become involved in fostering and preserving scholastic debate. For example, David Reymann sets aside significant time to coach the debaters at Highland High School’s nationally recognized debate program. Robert Wing, an attorney at Holland & Hart, sets aside time to coach the team at Viewmont High School and to judge debate tournaments regularly. Others make financial contributions to the debate programs at Utah high schools, providing the opportunity for students to raise the funds needed to provide essentials that limited school budgets do not cover and to fund travel opportunities to debate tournaments nationwide. Individual law firms can also contribute to the Young Lawyers Debate Tournament or to individual debate programs as an extension of their charitable giving efforts.

Conclusion
Obviously, debate will not make a lawyer out of every participant. It may, however, convince some students who might otherwise pursue different careers, to choose law. As Neal Katyal noted, “I do not think there is any chance I would have become a lawyer were it not for debate, both in high school and in college.” Participation in debate – the direct engagement in advocacy on hard issues in the context of a head-to-head competition – teaches students much of what lawyers do in daily practice. But these skills are also important for every student we hope and expect to become an effective and engaged citizen. In this sense, creating links between debate and the law advances the Bar’s mission of leading society in the creation of a justice system that is understood, valued, respected, and accessible to all.

1. Correspondence from Neal Katyal to Chad R. Derum, on file with the author.

2. The contributors’ written comments are on file with the author.

3. See http://www.fedbar.org/utah-profile_cassell.pdf