Many debaters go on to careers in law (and politics as well), and that makes a lot of sense to me. Having been a debater and judge, I have recognized that the skills you develop through practice and competition become quite handy in legal settings.

There are multiple debate events – parliamentary, public forum, Lincoln-Douglas, congress, and Big Ideas, each with a different focus and format, including varying time limits, cross-examination opportunities, and preparation periods. However, the big idea is similar: each debate involves a resolution, or a position statement, which a student or a team of two either argues for or against. Each speaker has a limited amount of time to present their initial contentions, or arguments, as well as to rebut the opposing team’s points and even cross-examine them directly by asking questions and asking to see their supporting evidence.

I competed in high school parliamentary debate, and have judged all the debate formats but one. Here are my thoughts on how debate can help students gain helpful skills and knowledge for the legal world.

LESSON #1: Working with limits Debaters have a good amount of time to research, write, and prepare (although some forms of debate provide very little prep time), but the debating time is insufficient for presenting all the good arguments. So, debaters assess the strength of the arguments, making sure to highlight the strongest ones first and leaving the weak ones out or possibly for rebuttal. Debaters also think about the best way to present their arguments –what rhetoric and what evidence to use. These are just a few things that debaters do to manage their time well and ensure that the few minutes they have are well spent.

In the legal world, limits are a fact of life, whether you are writing a word-constrained brief, trying to wrap up a high-stakes negotiation, or closing a deal within weeks, getting ready for a seven-hour deposition, or other scenarios. Within organizational hierarchies, you need to meet internal deadlines to allow for review by more senior lawyers or build in buffer time to engage experts or collect information. Thus, being comfortable within constraints is critical to managing your stress levels and work flow. Debate heightens a person’s ability to produce high-quality work under pressure, by teaching organization, time management, and prioritization.

LESSON #2: Providing evidence As a debate judge, I view specific evidence as critical to my decision-making process. I look at the source and substance of any evidence for recency, relevance, general applicability, and credibility. Lawyers, while they certainly can bluff effectively, always need to gather evidence to support their positions when negotiating with counterparties, making recommendations to clients, opposing an adversary’s motion, and arguing for a jury verdict or court opinion. This is why lawyers hire investigators, put on expert witnesses, enter exhibits, and collect due diligence. While debaters do not have the resources and time to do these steps, they similarly ensure that their preparation is thorough. I enjoy hearing about international comparisons, statistics, academic commentary, and very recent articles and developments (sometimes on the day of the tournament).

LESSON #3: Appealing to the decision maker Debaters have access to prospective judges’ “paradigms,” which are statements by judges about their preferences and previous debate experience. Judges may ask debaters to speak slowly, or indicate that they can deal with fast paced talks. They may encourage debaters to be explicit about weighing the arguments as each other, or naming “voter issues” that the judges should decide the debate on. Judges may also share that they formerly competed, work as coaches, or are parent judges.

Lawyers’ version of researching decision makers comes in the form of assessing how jurors in a certain community may feel about a case based on the demographics, previous verdicts, and the circumstances relating to media attention or attitudes towards certain litigation parties. They also research the judges, mediators, or arbitrators’ past decisions and backgrounds. In a less or non-adversarial setting, lawyers still do their diligence on their negotiating counterparties, including both the clients and lawyers.

It is important to know who you are dealing with and how best to appeal to them, so that you can tailor your words to achieve persuasion. Debaters are already honing this skill by understanding their judges beforehand and observing their reactions during the debate round.

Concluding Thoughts Even if you do not have the opportunity and time to compete in debate or judge at tournaments, it is still possible to engage in similar activities. In law school, mock trial, moot court and oral arguments are great chances to debate your opponents on complex points of law. Outside of the law, you could watch videos of courtroom advocacy in the latest hot criminal trial or a Supreme Court oral argument. I would also suggest watching debates by high school and college students. I have been incredibly inspired by these young people who clearly work very hard to research their topics, create synergies with their debate partner, make their arguments succinctly and effectively, and adjust their strategies based on their opponents and the atmosphere. At the highest levels of these debates, the students are indistinguishable from some of most persuasive speakers, lawyers, and politicians.

Debate and law are highly related, whether you will work as a trial lawyer or deal attorney. I encourage you get involved in some way, wherever you are along your path to a legal career!

The post Debate and the Law: 3 Lessons from Competing in and Judging Debate appeared first on Law School Toolbox®.