Opening Arguments When You're So Bad At Your Job, You Make the Supreme Court Look Good By Comparison
6 snips
Jul 8, 2025 
Jenessa Seymour, a dynamic disability rights activist and PhD, joins to delve into the chaotic oral arguments in the Supreme Court case AJT v. Osseo. They discuss the legal complexities surrounding disability rights, particularly for students needing accommodations. Expect a blend of humor and serious analysis as they unpack the tensions in legal standards and the courtroom dynamics that overshadow advocates' efforts. Jenessa's insights highlight the critical need for clearer protections for students with disabilities amidst the legal chaos.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Higher Standards Hurt Disabled Kids
- School-age children with disabilities face unjustly higher standards for damages claims than adults under ADA and Section 504.
- This contradicts logical protections necessary for children's developmental needs at school.
Shifting Arguments Undermine Justice
- The disability rights case AJT v Osseo reveals procedural issues where the school changed defenses mid-brief.
- This tactic complicates justice and frustrates fair legal proceedings at the Supreme Court.
Avoid Flip-Flopping Arguments
- Avoid introducing new legal theories late in the case, especially at the Supreme Court oral arguments.
- Stick to consistent arguments to maintain credibility and respect from the court.