• The town of Viemior is pronounced Vee-EM-ee-or

• Question: On page 6 of the packet, the government stipulates that the search of the vehicle was not justified under the border search exception or probable cause. However, The extended border search doctrine has a burden of proof of reasonable certainty for the first element (vehicle crossed the border & no changes occurred), which is a higher standard than probable cause. If the govt. stipulates that there wasn't probable cause, then isn't there no argument for reasonable certainty? 

  • Answer: The problem says: “Government stipulates that the search of the vehicle was not justified under the border search exception or by probable cause.” Probable cause to search a vehicle requires the officers have probable cause to believe the vehicle has evidence of a crime, so that is all that the government is stipulating. The government has not stipulated that they lacked probable cause to believe that the vehicle crossed the border. 

• Question: Just to be certain, we are not to assume the existence of any fact that is not explicitly listed in the problem, correct?

  • Answer: You should not assume facts that are not provided in the problem. However, you may draw reasonable inferences from the facts that are listed, as long as those inferences are logically supported and clearly explained. The key is to avoid introducing new facts or speculative assumptions. If your argument relies on an inference, make sure to show how it flows directly from the given information.

• Question: For citations to the lower court decisions in this case, should we format it as a citation to the factual record or the decision itself? I.e.: R. at 19. -or- Miller v. United States, 20-PASAF-3168174 at 19 (13th Cir. 2022). Thanks.

  • Answer: Cite to the record for the lower court decision. 

• Question: Should we/can we include an introduction in our briefs?

  • Answer: In the interest of fairness, we decline to answer.

• Question: Rule 8(e) of the Rules and Regulations states that citations to the record "must conform to the following format: R. at [Page #]. i.e., R at 8." The format contains a period after the "R" while the example provided does not. Which should we use in our briefs?

  • Answer: Thank you for bringing this to our attention. Rule 8(e) of the Rules and Regulations includes a typo. The example should read: "R. at 8." This has been corrected on the website. 

• Question: Is there a specific hex code we need to use for the blue/red of our cover page? Additionally, does the font for the entire cover page also need to be times new roman, 12 point font? 

  • Answer: There is no specific shade of blue/red for the cover page. Use your discretion. The cover page does not have to be in Times New Roman, 12-point font. Check U.S. Supreme Court sample briefs for cover page stylistic ideas. One example from the U.S. Supreme Court website can be found here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1397/246643/20221116131246505_21-1397%20-%20Brief%20for%20the%20Petitioner.pdf. 

• Question: For citations to the record, should we cite to the record only in our Statement of Facts? Or should discussion of those facts within our Argument section also cite to the record? 

  • Answer: In the interest of fairness, we decline to answer.

• Question: Rule 10(a) indicates we should submit our briefs via email by the deadline. A recent email update provides a Google Form to submit our briefs. Should we only submit by the Google Form, email, or both? Thank you!

  • Answer: We apologize for the confusion. You only need to submit the brief via the Google Form that was sent out. If you have any trouble submitting there, you may also email it to sdcrimpro@gmail.com. Either way, you will receive an email confirming that we received your brief. 

• Question: For submitting the brief, per Rule 9 of the 2025 Competition Rules and Regulations, is the identification number that is supposed to be the team number or the 4-digit ID?

  • Answer: The 4-digit ID is a private ID number that only your team should know. Final results of ranking in the competition will be posted with this ID to keep you anonymous to other teams. The ID number you put on your brief is your Team Number. On your brief, you should put: Team #1, Team #30, etc.

• Question: Can you please clarify the timing rules for oral argument? Rule 15(a) states arguments should be limited to 15 minutes per person, per team; however, 15(c) states no single competitor may argue for more than 18 minutes total, including time spent in argument and rebuttal. Rebuttal is also limited to 5 minutes, which seems to conflict if the rebuttal time is separate and apart from the original 15 minutes. Specifically, we are seeking clarification about how oral argument time and the rebuttal time relate.

  • • Answer: Under Rule 15, each competitor is allotted up to 15 minutes for their argument. Petitioners may reserve up to 5 minutes for rebuttal, but that rebuttal time must be requested by the first Petitioner counsel at the start of the round and designated to come from one teammate’s 15-minute allotment. Either Petitioner may deliver the rebuttal, but only the teammate whose time was reduced may do so.

    • To clarify the structure:

    • Petitioner counsel 1 argues first and may request rebuttal time, specifying whether it will come from their own time or their co-counsel’s.

    • Petitioner counsel 2 then argues.

    • Respondent counsel 1 and 2 each argue for 15 minutes.

    • After Respondents conclude, the designated Petitioner counsel delivers rebuttal using the time previously reserved.

    • Example: Petitioner 1 reserves 3 minutes of rebuttal from Petitioner 2's time. Petitioner 1 argues for 15 minutes. Petitioner 2 argues for 12 minutes. Respondents 1 and 2 argue for 15 minutes each. Petitioner 2 gives a 3-minute rebuttal. 

Rule 15(c) sets an 18-minute maximum per competitor, which includes both argument and rebuttal. This cap accounts for situations where judges permit a competitor to briefly exceed their 15-minute allotment to finish answering a question. 

• Question: Can we use Almeida-Sanchez v. U.S., 413 U.S. 266 (1973) in our oral argument so long as we limit its scope and not use it to categorically prohibit the extended border search doctrine, or should we not be using it at all in arguments? 

  • • Answer: In the interest of fairness, we decline to answer.

• Question: Can both petitioners evenly deduct the amount of time requested from their rebuttal argument? For example: If Petitioner #1 requests 2 minutes for rebuttal, can each petitioner deduct 1 minute from their argument instead, meaning both Petitioner 1 and Petitioner 2 have 14 minutes for their oral argument.

  • Answer: No. Under Rule 15(e), rebuttal time must be deducted from the argument of one Petitioner counsel, not split between both. If Petitioner #1 requests 2 minutes for rebuttal, those 2 minutes must come entirely from either Petitioner #1’s or Petitioner #2’s 15-minute allotment, and Petitioner #1 should specify which person's argument the time should be deducted from. Only the counsel whose argument time was reduced is eligible to deliver the rebuttal.

• Question: What timecards will be held up to the students and judges during oral arguments? 

  • Answer: Bailiffs will hold up cards showing competitors and judges when the competitor has 10 minutes, 5 minutes, 2 1/2 minutes, and 1 minute remaining. When a competitor's time is up, bailiffs will hold up a card that says "Stop." 

• Reminder: We are no longer answering substantive questions. We will respond to basic questions about tournament rules, procedures, and grading criteria and will post those answers here. 

• Question: Given the current concerns regarding the government shutdown and subsequent travel issues that are beginning to occur across the country, is there a backup plan currently in place to hold the tournament virtually? Or at least an option to grant teams that may be affected by travel issues to appear virtually? 

  • Answer: At this time, we have not received any reports of flight disruptions from participating teams, and the tournament remains scheduled to proceed in person as planned. If your team experiences a flight cancellation or other travel issue directly related to the shutdown, please contact us immediately. We are committed to ensuring a fair and inclusive competition and will work with affected teams to develop a solution.

• Question: Just to clarify, are friends and family allowed to see the preliminary rounds? 

  • Answer: Yes, as long as they are quite and respectful and adhere to Rule 6 – particularly Rule 6(e) which prohibits scouting. 

• Question: Will recording of the final round (on Sunday) be permitted to share with family members who could not travel to San Diego? 

  • Answer: We ask that no recordings be made during any rounds of the competition, including the final. This helps us maintain a consistent and fair environment for all participants and ensures that everyone can focus fully on the experience in the room.

• Question: An earlier update indicated that friends and family are allowed to see the preliminary rounds (Friday/Saturday), provided they are quiet, respectful, and adhere to the non-scouting restriction (Rule 6(e)). This seems in conflict with Rule 21 on Spectators only being permitted on Sunday (Semi/Final rounds). Please clarify if family members can attend the preliminary rounds, notwithstanding Rule 21. 

  • Answer: Friends and family are welcome to attend all rounds, as long as they are there to support their own team and are not scouting. Scouting (watching other teams to gain a competitive advantage) is prohibited under Rule 6(e). Eliminated teams may attend rounds only if their school no longer has any teams remaining in the competition. If a school still has an active team, its eliminated members may not attend other rounds (except the final round), to prevent indirect scouting. We’re working on updating Rule 21 to reflect this more clearly. 

• Question: In the past there’s been a rule against any “technology” being used during the round… can the coach use a Remarkable and/or iPad for note taking purposes?

  • Answer: Yes, coaches may use a Remarkable or iPad to take notes during the round as long as it does not make audible typing sounds, which may be distracting to the competitors and judges. 

• Question: Coaches may only watch the round(s) containing the Team(s) they attend the Tournament with, except the Final Round. - If there are two teams competing from the same school, can the coaches from the same school swap which team they watch during the competition?

  • Answer: Coaches should only observe the team they are coaching. The only way a coach may sit in on the rounds of both teams from their school is if that coach is the only coach for both teams. If each team from the same school has its own, individual coach, that coach may only watch the rounds of the team they are coaching.