As a time-bound academic exercise, Moot Court takes place in the confines of what is known as the “closed universe” to prevent argumentation from extending into an endless web of potentially related case law. However, the boundaries of the universe can be difficult to understand, and the Moot Court Committee and our Compliance Teams get several questions about the following rule every season.
“The content presented in the round is restricted to a ‘closed universe’ that is limited to material contained or referenced within the Moot Court packet and the United States Constitution” (2022 Debate Guide: Section III.4).
Understanding this rule begins with understanding what makes up the Moot Court packet. The packet consists of the following:
- The case, which is a fictitious lower court’s decision, including the majority and dissenting opinion.
- The full text of the cases and/or articles which are directly cited in the fictitious lower court’s decision. (We do not reproduce all of these cases as part of the packet, but links are provided in a list at the end of the case.)
- Any appendices that may be attached to the case.
The “closed universe” consists of the Moot Court packet plus the United States Constitution.
Confusion happens when one of the permissible cases in the packet cites a case which is not part of the packet (because it was not cited in the fictitious case at bar). In other words, there is a reference to another case embedded within one of the cases in the packet.
In a Moot Court round, it is permissible to use part or all of the excerpt of the embedded case that is contained within the case that is part of the packet, but ONLY the substance of the excerpt may be used. Competitors may not reach beyond the bounds of the included case to cite any other assertions, conclusions, or arguments from the embedded case.
Think of it this way: If the fictitious case at bar is State vs. Bananas, and the lower court’s decision cites State vs. Apples, then State vs. Apples will be part of the closed universe and will be included in the table of cases permissible to cite in the round. However, if State vs. Apples quotes or discusses something from State vs. Oranges, that does not mean that all of State vs. Oranges becomes part of the closed universe. The only part of State vs. Oranges that may be used for argumentation and support in the round is the exact portion cited in State vs. Apples.