The "Supreme Court of The Community School" entered session Thursday, Dec. 8, to determine the constitutionality of the death penalty.
"The strong precedent established over the last few years indicates the death penalty is less and less acceptable," said Anja Sundali, a senior.
Utilizing an actual legal case in a moot court format, students of the Interpretations of Law and Literature class at the private Sun Valley-based school experience democracy at work. This week, student teams examined the Matthew Poncelet murder case to argue the constitutionality of the death penalty and the law's application in Idaho.
"The class makes them look at the nuances of the law, rather than philosophically talk about the law," said Phil Huss, the class teacher.
Citing a number of legal decisions, Sundali presented the opening argument for the defense to a panel of students serving as Supreme Court justices.
"The death penalty in all cases is unconstitutional," Sundali said.
Guiding the anti-death-penalty argument, the defense team asked the justices to consider a predisposition to discrimination based on poverty and a lack of education.
"Poncelet did not have the financial means to hire an adept lawyer. He had a court-appointed lawyer, who had never served in a capital case," Emily Stephens said.
Senior Ross Campbell responded on behalf of the plaintiff's team, arguing in favor of the death penalty.
Upon completion of the opening statements, the panel of four justices probed the teams, delaying the court session for another day. The justices vote at the completion of the arguments.
All students are then required to reconsider the case by writing their own opinion. The opinions must be based on precedent, the constitution and interpretive practices.
The interpretive practices call on methods used to examine literature. The approach awakens students to different interpretations of the constitution.
"There are different ways to get a meaning. Once you are aware of those, you can read the constitution with new lenses," Huss said.
The students use the lenses to study five legal issues throughout the semester. Using the moot court format the class debates affirmative action, abortion, gay rights, the death penalty and assisted suicide.
"They leave the course knowing exactly what they believe about these arguments," Huss said.
Anja Sundali, right, argues against the death penalty, supported by her classmate Emily Stephens, at left. Express photo by Megan Thomas
