Academic Legal Writing - Eugene Volokh [170]
ii. Focus on the counterarguments that are made somewhere in the materials you've been given, in preference to the counterarguments you think up yourself. Again, these are the ones the graders are most likely to be looking for.
iii. Focus on those twists to your argument for which there is some relevant authority. Say that you're writing about pornography law, and all your sources have to do with the tests for whether the material is obscene (the substantive question) rather than with the tests for when an obscenity regulation is a prior restraint (a procedural question). You probably don't need to discuss the prior restraint issue: Chances are that the graders aren't expecting a prior restraint discussion, and won't give you any points for it.
d. Maintain an “outtakes” file
When you decide that something is worth deleting, don't just delete it; move it to a separate file, so you can bring it back if you change your mind. This will help you undo deletions that you later realize were mistakes. And more importantly, this will embolden you to delete things that you really do need to delete, but that you might at first be afraid of deleting.
16. Near the end
You're near the end. You have only a day left. If all has gone well, you've finished the first draft of the paper days ago, and you've edited both the text and the footnotes several times. You've also done the production test several times from scratch, and merged the results into your final answer. What do you do?
a. Leave time for the final procedural details
Remember that there are a few things you need to do at the very end: You need to print the paper, make the proper number of copies, and drive to school or to the post office. These things take longer than you think; make sure you leave time for them.
b. Reread the Introduction
You've probably learned a lot, and perhaps even changed your mind on some issues, since you started the paper. Reread the Introduction and make sure that you still agree with everything you said there.
In particular, make sure that the Introduction and the Conclusion are compatible. For instance, if both state your basic thesis, make sure there aren't subtle but important differences in the way they state it.
c. Reread the materials you were given
What you've learned while writing the paper may also affect how you understand the materials—cases, statutes, and articles—that you were given as part of your competition packet (or that you found on your own, if the competition requires to do your own research). If you reread the materials, you may catch details that you missed when you first read them, that seemed irrelevant or mysterious at the time, or that you forgot shortly after reading. Look in particular for:
i. Quotes or arguments that seemed unimportant when you first read them, but that you now realize directly support your proposal.
ii. Materials that show the author (whether a judge or a commentator) would likely disagree with your proposal—you might need to deal with these as possible counterarguments.
iii. Provisos that limit the scope of a principle on which you're relying, such as when a court announces a rule but then explicitly or implicitly notes that the rule only applies in certain situations.
iv. Factual details that make some case especially similar to the scenario you're discussing, or that make it importantly different from your scenario.
d. Do the editing/proofreading/bluebooking test one more time
If your assignment includes an editing/proofreading/bluebooking test, and you have some spare time, do it once more. As p. 314 explained, each new pass can let you find errors that you'd missed before.
I. Special Suggestions for Case Notes
If your law review competition requires you to write a case note—something that's focused on one particular case, rather than on a more general issue—read Part I.J, p. 38, which may give you some ideas about the kinds of things that you could say about the case. (Remember, though: If the