Simulated Supreme Court hearings teach constitutional law

KOKOMO, Ind. - How much power does an elected official have during a state of emergency?

Students in an Indiana University Kokomo constitutional law class argued that point in front of the Concordia Supreme Court this semester, making the case for and against actions taken by the governor of the fictional state.

Andy Tuholski, assistant professor of political science, developed the class and the political simulations students participated in, giving them hands-on experience reading a record, identifying the relevant constitutional text, briefing the case, arguing it, conferring as justices, and writing opinions.

"When I decided to offer this class, I realized I didn't want students to treat constitutional law as a pile of famous cases and abstract opinions," he said. "My goal is for them to understand it as an institutional practice that impacts lives."

During the semester, students worked through four cases, serving as the petitioners, the respondents, or as members of the nine-member supreme court.

"While they are in it, they are supposed to feel the pressure of limited time, unique sets of facts, contested rights, institutional constraints, and public consequences," Tuholski said. "The simulation is designed to give students a chance to practice judgement instead of just recall. It makes the subject matter come alive, and students will be more likely to remember the cases and topics covered because they live through it, defend positions, absorb questions, and write decisions."

The first three cases involved a robbery investigation built around digital evidence, which questioned if constitutional protections written for an earlier era still work in a digital world. The second shifted to equality, education, and administrative review, exploring a situation where a child was denied tuition-free public school access because her parents did not satisfy newly imposed residency and lawful-presences requirements. The third involved home rule, public safety, and preemption, highlighting a private fugitive recovery agent who mistakenly detained an 18-year-old scholarship recipient on stage at a public ceremony.

In the capstone case, petitioners and respondents argued separation of powers and emergency governance, as Concordia's governor postponed the statewide general election by executive order during a deadly heat emergency and rolling grid outages. Petitioners also argued that he blocked legislative oversight using a Capitol access system that did not allow all legislators into the building.

Petitioners stated that allowing an elected official to change the state of an election sets a dangerous precedent, and that the governor should have tried other solutions first. They also questioned if he was attempting to stay in power longer. The respondents stated that the case was not about expanding elected officials' power, but the right to respond quickly when there is a credible, documented risk to public safety. They also noted the postponed election date was within constitutionally allowed dates, and that the postponement ensured elections can happen while not putting people in danger.

Each side had 20 minutes to present their arguments, followed by time for the justices to ask questions and clarify points. Within a few days after the arguments, the justices issued a written decision and upheld the emergency order postponing the election by three months, but also stated the executive branch crossed a constitutional line when the access pass system kept voting lawmakers from entering the building to perform emergency oversight.

Moriah Crawford, a senior from Springfield, Illinois, said students argued their sides passionately - even when they did not personally agree with it.

"It's not about politics," she said. "You have to know the facts, and you have to be able to argue them. You want to win, and the only way to win is with documented facts. You can think that something is dead wrong, but in this class, you know who you are representing, you know what they want, and that's all that matters."

Freshman Jennifer Anaya-Serrano, Logansport, agreed that they learned to think impartially.

"This class does a good job of getting you to disconnect from your own opinions," she said. "I've learned to look at everything from an outside perspective. You have to be a zealous representative of who you are fighting for."

Senior Brandon Maish, who wants to be a prosecuting attorney, said he enjoyed the interactive class structure.

"It's not like anything you would get in a standard constitutional law class," said Maish, from Macy. "You learn from experience what the court is like. It feels a bit too real at times. That's the greatest part about it."

Kokomo resident Aidan Birkey, who wants to be a judge, said with more than 60 pages of documents to read to prepare for each case, the class was a lot of work.

"It's good work, not busy work," he said. "It's all productive and you're using what you learn instead of just remembering it for a test."

Tuholski was impressed with the effort students made.

"The tenor of debate, the side eye given, the whispers within each counsel table showed they cared about the facts of the case, and the need to get it right," he said. "Concordia is not real, but they cared about this governor on his way out, and the way he worked with the assembly, and the actual text of the state's constitution. It was incredibly real because it mirrors things that happen in real life."

Education is KEY at Indiana University Kokomo.

Student Success and Opportunity

IU Kokomo will ensure the long-term success of all students through a quality education filled with enriching opportunities.

See our full plan here.