Standing before a panel of three judges, Courtney Mascarenas argued that the legal decision against a teenager whose cell phone had been confiscated by a teacher, after assuming a text message was about drugs, should be overturned because it violated the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution. Her colleague, Hannah Schweitzer, also argued that the school violated his First Amendment rights.

Four second-year students presented their cases - two seeking to overturn the decision and two seeking to uphold it - as part of the annual Moot Court competition at Creighton University’s law school. The four students advanced to the final competition after 37 teams started arguments a week earlier.

The competition focused on an actual case involving a student, who was enrolled in the Des Moines, Iowa, public school district, said Henry Nunn, a third-year law student and vice-president of the school’s Moot Court Board.

“He’s a bit of a problem student, with a reputation for causing trouble in class and being disruptive,” Nunn said. “He’s also very entrepreneurial, and sells clothes, basically anything he can get his hands on.”

One day during a class, his cell phone rang, which violated school rules during instructional periods.

“He runs out to the hallway to silence his phone, and it just so happens that his phone has a ring tone that has a very specific marijuana reference,” Nunn exlpains. “and a teacher who is supervising a study hall confiscates his phone, saying he can have it after class. However, that doesn’t happen when the teacher sees a text message (that he assumed involved a drug sale).”

It’s later learned the message was related to a sweatshirt the student had sold someone. However, as the teacher searched the student’s social media content, he found a social media page where the student called for the legalization of marijuana.

Students researched the case, writing legal briefs concerning it. Then, 74 second-year law students – 37 teams – presented arguments, alternating as the appellant and the appellee, before a group of professors, judges, and local attorneys, with the teams’ arguments scored over two days. The top 16 advanced to the moot court tournament, which took place over a five-day period, with the final case presented Oct. 28 before a packed Gross Appellate Court lecture hall. Sitting judges were New Mexico Supreme Court Chief Justice Shannon Bacon (a 1997 Creighton alum), Nebraska Judge Stefanie Martinez, and Iowa Court of Appeals Judge Julie Schumacher (a Creighton graduate).

Creighton’s first law school graduating class, in 1906, consisted of six white men. This year’s competition marked a first in Creighton Law School history, as the finals consisted of all-women finalists and an all-woman judge panel. The winner of the Best Brief was also a woman, Kara Stark. According to the American Bar Association, from 1950 to 1970, only 3% of all lawyers were women. The percentage increased to 8% in 1980, 20% in 1991 and 29% in 2000. As of 2022 38% of lawyers are women.

Mascarenas and Schweitzer represented the appellant, while Heidi Strigenz and Emily Cvitanov handled the appellee roles. Following arguments laid out by both teams concerning the appellants’ claims that the student’s First and Fourth Amendment rights were violated, the judges voted to overturn the decision.

Each law student was commended by the judges for her professionalism, preparation, and arguments during the finals. Strigenz was recognized as the Outstanding Oralist.

Moot court helps Creighton students, because the school requires each student to participate, while other law schools see it as an elective, said Robert Toth, a 2022 Creighton graduate. He credited his moot court performance with helping him receive a job offer as an associate at Erickson and Sederstrom, P.C. The former teacher with Omaha Public Schools told a group of students attending a moot court introduction class that researching and knowing how to write legal briefs are key to a law career.

“As an intern, I wrote legal briefs for the public defender’s office, and they used pieces of them in their cases,” Toth said.

His Moot Court participation taught him to write clearly and concisely, using the proper sources, he said. His presentation led to lunch with an attorney, and later a job offer, after the attorney reviewed the brief he created for the competition, Toth said.

“No matter what kind of law you end up doing, or want to do, you’re going to have to understand legal writing,” he said.