Welcome to the Supreme Court! In other parts of the conference, delegates will be debating what is most efficient, most prudent, and most beneficial for the country and its citizens. Yet, here in the Supreme Court, you will have a simple concern: to determine what is constitutional and what is just. Because the other branches of government so efficiently and powerfully channel the will of the people, the fear that popular opinion could trample the rights of the minority is a real one.
In the United States, all that stands between a just society and one ruled by the tyranny of the majority is the Supreme Court of the United States. This is because, in our country, we have long held to a peculiar notion: there are some things that even the government cannot do and some laws that are invalid no matter how many duly elected officials consent to its passage.
From this fundamental assertion about the limitations of state authority flows all of the intricacies of constitutional jurisprudence that we will take up. What are the boundaries of Congress’s power in enacting legislation? How “equal” must “equal protection” be — and to whom does it apply? How far can a president go in bending the constitution during wartime? How should violations of the Bill of Rights be rectified — and by whom?
These are just some of the questions that we will be dealing with in a few months, but the larger question of governance that the Supreme Court as an institution answers is this: how can a country be governed by the will of the people and yet protect the people from the excesses of popular opinion? In a world ruled by the many, who draws the line to uphold the rights of the few?
That job, at least at Harvard Model Congress San Francisco, falls to you.
Because the job of the court is so important and the questions they tackle so very difficult, it is essential that you are very well prepared for your role. Of all the committees at HMCSF, the Supreme Court is the most intellectually demanding. The committee requires extensive preparation, logical reasoning, and oral presentation ability. Your arguments will require you to integrate centuries of judicial precedent, combine the words of long-dead justices with your own, and present it all in a way that is relevant and compelling to a judging panel of your peers.
To put it more practically, you will be required to stand in front of your peers and speak for 20 minutes while being bombarded with questions regarding the minutiae of constitutional law. Please, put in the time required for preparation.
If you have any questions while preparing for the conference, please let me know. I am a freshman, pursuing a degree in Classics with an interest in constitutional law. I was a delegate at Harvard Model Congress Boston for four years in high school and spent two of those years in the Supreme Court. I am interested in the Supreme Court and its practice of reading and interpreting the law as defined by the founding fathers and modified by past precedent. Outside of the classroom and Model Congress, I am a singer who is part of the Harvard-Radcliffe Collegium Musicum, an a cappella subset of the choir, and other musical theater productions on campus. I am excited to be a part of the San Francisco conference this year!
Looking forward to meeting you in January,