These were the questions centered in the fictional case analyzed and argued by 116 first-year Elon Law students in the school’s 19th Annual Intramural Moot Court Competition, held May 27 and 28.

A deaf small-business owner applied for a loan from an online lending company and was offered a 14.25% interest rate. After his twin brother — who shared nearly identical financial, educational and employment credentials but did not have a disability — received a 6.25% rate for the same loan, he suspected the lender had considered his disability when evaluating the application.

The business owner sued under the ADA, arguing that the online lender discriminated against him based on his disability. A federal court dismissed the case, finding that the lender’s website was not a place of public accommodation covered by the ADA and that the law regulates access to lending services, not the terms of the loans offered.

The business owner appealed the ruling to the fictional U.S. Court of Appeals for the 15th Circuit, which regularly hears cases represented by Elon Law students.

Members of the Class of 2027 comprised the largest group ever to compete in the spring event, with 58 teams appearing before volunteer judges that included local judges, attorneys, Elon Law alumni, and law school faculty and staff.

All first-year students were introduced to the case in their Legal Method & Communication courses as the basis for graded oral arguments this spring. Each student presented two oral arguments, one for appellant and one for appellee, and was scored on preparation, speaking ability, argument structure and responses to judges’ questions.

Top 10 Oral Advocates in the 2026 competition (with ties)

• Gabrielle Brown Roycroft
• Aarya Deshmukh
• Zaria Hanchell
• Adelaide Anne Zahren
• Avery Vidt
• Michael Iafrato
• Grant Paramore
• Rachel Wilson
• Jacqueline Gardner (tie)
• David Bryant (tie)
• Megan Chen

“This competition was a reminder not to let fear of failure keep me from trying,” said Gabrielle Brown Roycroft L’27, from Salisbury, North Carolina, who is interested in family law, estate planning and civil litigation. She graduated from Catawba College with a degree in politics. “It’s worth it to push through the nerves and use them as fuel to perform your best. You can’t memorize your way through oral advocacy. You have to think on your feet and respond in the moment. When you’ve done the work in advance, you can trust your preparation and focus on having a conversation with the judges.”

Selections for membership on the Moot Court Board will be announced this summer before the board hosts the 17th Billings, Exum & Frye National Moot Court Competition on Oct. 22-24. Moot Court Board members will also compete in a slate of national moot court competitions during the 2026-27 school year.

Vice Dean and Professor of Law Alan Woodlief, director of Elon Law’s Moot Court Program, praised the Moot Court Board for its professionalism and hospitality in running the spring competition.

The annual event sees the Elon Law community step up to provide an exceptional experience for first-year students. This year, Elon Law was honored to host more than 50 volunteer attorneys and judges, including over 20 Elon Law alumni, as well as a current justice and former chief justice of the North Carolina Supreme Court participate as judges.

“Moot Court is a great experiential learning opportunity, and I was excited to see so many students take advantage of this experience to strengthen their advocacy skills,” Woodlief said. “Our Moot Court Board did an exceptional job coordinating the school’s largest-ever competition, and they could not have done it without the great support from our student body, faculty, and staff, as well as the many Elon Law alumni, attorneys, and judges who contributed to the success of the competition.”

Alumni judges reflect: ‘It helped me find my voice’

The annual Intramural Moot Court Competition — along with the graded Legal Method and Communication Program’s graded oral arguments held the week before — is also a homecoming of sorts.

Alumni return to campus each spring to hear arguments, offer feedback and help first-year students develop the advocacy skills they will use throughout their careers.  They have clear memories of standing at the podium themselves and how meaningful it was to their development to receive feedback from legal professionals.

April Franklin L’25 said oral arguments helped her overcome her nerves and discover a passion for advocacy.

“It gave me confidence. It helped me find my voice that I didn’t know that I had,” said Franklin, who is pursuing practice in wills and estates, health care or corporate law. “Elon gave me the support that I needed to progress in this career path, and I want to be able to give that same support to the next generation of Elon Law students.”

Landon Eckard L’25, who will begin a federal judicial clerkship in Detroit this summer, said moot court taught him to think on his feet and respond to difficult questions from judges.

“It’s the most spontaneous kind of advocacy there is in the legal profession,” Eckard said. “You can have a rough script before you get there, but one minute into the argument, that script goes out the window. It made me a better litigator and a better attorney.”

Thomas Harvey L’22, a criminal defense attorney in nearby Rockingham County, North Carolina, pursued law as a second career. He returns because he remembers exactly what it felt like to stand at the podium as a student and believes the experience helps shape better advocates.

“It wasn’t that long ago that I was standing right where they are. Believe it or not, the judges are all rooting for you individually,” Harvey said. “It’s such a joy to come back and be a part of Elon Law.”

2026 Intramural Moot Court Competition student leadership

Overall Chairs of the Competition: Isabel Craige L’26, Elizabeth Gregory L’26, Sierra Watkins L’26

Judge Recruitment and Coordination Chairs: Emma Farrell L’26, James Galipeau L’26, Cayla James L’26, Bailey Langford L’26, Renata Navarro L’26

Bailiff Recruitment and Coordination Chairs: Madisyn Butler L’26, Erin Carleton L’26, Megan Eldredge L’26, Cameron O’Neil L’26, Tyler Sesker L’26

Scoring Committee Chairs: Brittany Balis-West L’26, Jackie Rullman L’26, Rebecca Vairin L’26

LMC Oral Argument Coordination Chairs: Daulton Hadaway L’26, Courtney Maxwell L’26

The foundation is the charitable arm of the Mecklenburg Bar Association, dedicated to service, access to justice and community engagement in the Charlotte region.

The appointment reflects Elon Law’s growing engagement with Charlotte’s legal community and the law school’s emphasis on service and experiential learning through its existing part-time Flex Program and proposed full-time, 2.5-year J.D. program, which plans to enroll its first class in fall 2027.

Since the launch of the Flex Program in 2024, Butterworth has helped cultivate partnerships between Elon Law and nonprofit organizations across the Charlotte area, connecting students with volunteer opportunities, nonprofit organizations and community service initiatives. Those efforts have included collaborations with organizations such as Safe Alliance, Charlotte Center for Legal Advocacy and the Guardian ad Litem Program, as well as campus supply drives and events hosted by area agencies.

Many of those organizations have also met with Flex Program students during weekly Evening Docket events, providing students the opportunity to meet with and learn from legal professionals in the community.

Dean Zak Kramer said Butterworth has played an important role in establishing the Flex Program’s presence and growing the law school’s presence in Charlotte.

“Emma has invested herself in the life of the Flex Program and the Charlotte community,” Kramer said. “She has made a real difference for Elon Law, our students, and our neighbors in Charlotte.”

Vice Dean and Professor of Law Alan D. Woodlief said Butterworth’s appointment reflects both her commitment to community engagement and Elon Law’s broader mission in Charlotte.

“The Mecklenburg Bar Foundation does important work throughout the Charlotte area, and Emma has been deeply committed to connecting our students with opportunities to serve and learn,” Woodlief said. “Her leadership has strengthened Elon Law’s ties to Charlotte’s legal and nonprofit communities, and advanced our students’ professional lives.”

Butterworth said the role aligns closely with Elon Law’s mission and will create additional ways for students to engage with the legal profession in Charlotte.

“I’m honored to serve alongside members of the Mecklenburg Bar Association in support of the Foundation’s mission of giving back to the Charlotte community,” Butterworth said. “The Charlotte legal community has warmly welcomed both the Flex Program and me personally, and that support has created opportunities for meaningful partnerships and collaboration. I look forward to continuing to build connections with local nonprofits while expanding opportunities for our students to engage in service and professional development.”

Presiding over the ceremony were The Hon. Catherine C. Eagles of the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, The Hon. Stephanie L. Reese of the North Carolina Superior Court and The Hon. Bill Davis of the North Carolina District Court. Graduates were presented to the court by sponsoring attorneys before being admitted to practice before the state bar, the federal bar or both.

“Today is the day you can represent people, represent clients and call yourself a lawyer,” Eagles said during the Thursday, May 21, session. “It’s your job to stand up for people and to stand up for the rule of law. It is your job to conduct yourself uprightly and according to law, and to look after our system of justice every day in everything that you do.”

The ceremony was hosted by the ’s Young Lawyers Section, one of many held across North Carolina and the nation as members of Elon Law’s Class of 2025 complete their legal studies after December graduations and successful performances on the February 2026 bar examinations. Dean of Elon Law Zak Kramer delivered remarks welcoming new attorneys, calling the ceremony “the culmination of years of work and sacrifice by our graduates and their families.”

Jonathan M. Parisi, president of the Young Lawyers Section, encouraged newly licensed attorneys to engage in the legal profession and broader community as they begin their careers.

“This is not the end of your learning journey. It’s just the beginning,” Parisi said. “Seek out mentors, get involved in your legal community, and find ways to serve.”

Davis reminded them that their professional reputation will shape their careers.

“Your reputation is your greatest tool and your greatest asset,” Davis said. “Be thoughtful about how you interact with judges, lawyers, clients and court staff. Build a reputation that will serve you well and help you succeed.”

Reese emphasized the responsibility attorneys assume when clients place their trust, livelihoods and futures in lawyers’ hands.

“You’ve shown incredible strength and character in making it to this point,” Reese told the newly admitted attorneys. “People put their very lives in your hands. From today forward, you have that responsibility, and no one else can carry it for you. You are their voice. You are their guide and their strength in the storm.”

Eagles also encouraged the graduates to pursue civic leadership beyond courtrooms and law offices.

“Lawyers are often the people making the nonlegal parts of our community work,” Eagles said. “Find your place where you can make a contribution beyond the courtroom and your office.”

Presiding over the ceremonial court sessions were:

The Hon. Catherine C. Eagles of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina

The Hon. Stephanie L. Reese of North Carolina Superior Court for the 24th District

The Hon. Bill Davis of North Carolina District Court for the 24th District

Elon Law graduates admitted to federal and state court

Elon law graduates seeking admission only to federal court

Elon Law graduates seeking admission only to state court

����’25

About Elon Law

Elon Law is the preeminent school for engaged and experiential learning in law. With a focus on learning by doing, it integrates traditional classroom instruction with a required residency-in-practice field placement for all full-time students during the winter or spring of their second year. The law school’s distinctive full-time curriculum provides a logically sequenced program of professional preparation and is accomplished in 2.5 years, which offers exceptional value by lowering tuition and permitting graduates early entry into their careers.

Elon Law has graduated more than 2,000 alumni since opening its doors in downtown Greensboro in 2006. Its annual enrollment now tops 500 students. The law school is regularly featured in PreLaw Magazine’s “Best Schools for Practical Training” rankings, maintaining an A+ rating each year since 2023. Elon Law was also among schools highlighted by Bloomberg Law in 2023 for its innovative approach to student development.

�þ��� has applied to the American Bar Association to open a full-time, 2.5-year J.D. program in Charlotte beginning in fall 2027. The Elon Law Flex Program, a part-time, in-person program of legal study, launched there in 2024. Designed for students balancing work, family and other commitments to earn their J.D. in under four years, it will enroll its third cohort in fall 2026.

This volume includes articles from contributors to the law review’s 2025 symposium, “Breaking News: First Amendment on Trial,” which explored emerging challenges to free speech and expression. It also features legal analysis by Elon Law graduates of the Class of 2025.

Published annually by Elon Law students, the Elon Law Review is dedicated to advancing thoughtful, practice-informed legal scholarship that engages timely and complex legal questions shaping the profession and society.

The volume continues the journal’s commitment to rigorous analysis of emerging legal issues.

“The Elon Law Review is proud to present Volume 18 to scholars, practitioners and readers interested in timely legal issues,” said Rachel Claffee L’26, the journal’s editor-in-chief. “This edition features scholarship exploring how artificial intelligence and emerging technologies are reshaping the First Amendment and journalism. It also includes analysis of juvenile commercial sexual exploitation courts, racial annexation in rural North Carolina, the reasonable doubt standard, and disaster resilience, including work completed by members of the Elon Law Review Class of 2025.”

At �þ��� School of Law, Dean Emeritus and Professor of Law Luke Bierman left his mark on a curriculum unlike any other in legal education: a 2.5-year J.D. program built around a full-time Residency-in-Practice. Already proven “a law school with a difference,” that curriculum has become a nationally recognized model of experiential legal education, consistently ranked for the quality of its programs and the success of its graduates.

“Everything that distinguishes Elon Law today traces back to Luke’s vision and the decisions he made to reimagine legal education,” said Dean Zak Kramer. “Our students learn the law by living it, and that distinctive model continues to shape every graduate who walks across our stage.”

Faculty, staff, university leaders and friends gathered May 12 in the Elon Law Library to celebrate Bierman’s career and unveil an impressively detail portrait painted by Laurel Boeck, honoring a teacher, scholar and dean whose influence continues to impact every Elon Law student.

“Without question, Luke was the right person to lead Elon Law when he arrived in 2014,” said Vice Dean Alan Woodlief, who has served as an associate or vice dean since the law school’s inception, on May 12. “Luke is truly an innovator, and his innovations at Elon Law have been central to the school’s success and prosperity over the past 12 years.”

When Bierman arrived, legal education faced a crisis of cost, time and relevance. Applications were plummeting nationwide, and critics — including then-President Barack Obama — argued that law school took too long, cost too much and left too many graduates unprepared for the realities of practice.

Bierman turned that critique into an opportunity.

Working with Elon Law’s faculty and staff, he led the curriculum redesign, shortened the path to a law degree and embedded every student in full-time legal residency before graduation. Elon Law students now complete their degrees in seven trimesters over 2.5 years and spend a full trimester in a course-connected Residency-in-Practice that pairs them with judges and lawyers in judicial chambers, law firms, businesses, government agencies and other organizations. Tying the residency program to academic requirements emphasizes professional development and mentorship from both faculty and site supervisors.

The redesign reduced average student loan debt by nearly 30 percent — a fact he’s most proud of — and propelled Elon Law to record enrollment, stronger academic credentials, improved bar passage and employment outcomes, and sustained national recognition for practical training. In 2021, the American Bar Association reaccredited the law school following a successful review under Bierman’s leadership.

“Luke Bierman’s contributions to �þ��� extend far beyond his tenure as dean of the School of Law,” said �þ��� President Connie Ledoux Book. “He guided Elon Law through a period of transformative change and continued to invest in our students as a teacher and mentor. His legacy is reflected in the strength of the law school, its distinctive place in legal education, and the generations of lawyers who will continue to find their purpose at Elon Law.”

“�þ��� has been fortunate to have the right dean at the right time in the evolution of its young law school,” said Leo M. Lambert, �þ���’s president emeritus and professor of education. “Dean Bierman brought a tremendous spirit of innovation and experimentation to Elon Law, building on Elon’s national reputation for experiential learning. It was a perfect DNA match.”

“Luke is first and foremost a teacher, and a lawyer second,” said Steven D. House, who served as Elon’s provost from 2009 through 2019. “His focus has been and always will be transformation. The program he built transforms students’ lives while strengthening and serving the broader legal and civic community.”

An Educator First

Bierman always carries two items with him: A Bic pen and a pocket Constitution.

For him, they symbolize a commitment to �þ��� and to the institutions that sustain democracy. As dean, he began the tradition of giving every Elon Law student a pocket Constitution.

“Education is important to us because we know how important it is to America,” Bierman said May 12. “Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and all those folks from 250 years ago thought that education was incredibly important to the American experiment in self-government. That’s the rule of law. That’s what we’re here at this law school and across the country thinking about and are terribly worried about at this moment in our national history.”

He is a third-generation lawyer but didn’t grow up anticipating a legal career. Perhaps because of that, his career rarely followed a straight line.

He moved among roles in legal practice, public service, policy and higher education, pursuing work that interested him and challenged him. Before joining Elon Law in 2014, he served as associate dean for experiential education at Northeastern University School of Law, executive director of the Institute for Emerging Issues at North Carolina State University, general counsel to the New York State Comptroller and leader of the American Bar Association Judicial Division. These responsibilities reflect academic and professional achievements that include election to Phi Beta Kappa and the American Law Institute.

“The attraction was to do something different where I could learn something,” Bierman said recently. “Coming to Elon to think about curriculum and curricular programs and activities was natural for me.”

That motivation — to learn, to experiment, to acquire new skills — stemmed from a core family value: Education.

“I think of myself as an educator, maybe even more than I think of myself as a lawyer,” Bierman said.

He is the second of three generations of teachers. His mother taught in public schools. His sister leads a school in Vermont. Two of his daughters work in education, and all three have earned doctoral degrees.

Reflecting on his legacy at Elon Law, he returned to the same concerns that guided Elon Law’s transformation.

“I do hope the work that we did at Elon Law remains. The ideas about cost, length and relevance: I hope those remain top of mind. Higher education is critically important in the world. We need to be responsive to how the world functions and operates.”

Elon Law Review

• Aleezah Adams
• Trinity Barata
• Vivian Camplin
• Megan Chen
• Kali Crooks
• Samantha Davis
• Frank Deronja
• Avery Ferrigno
• Lauren Heist
• Jordan Hicks
• Isabela Latorre
• Maya Mahs
• Carson Patterson
• Bryanna Rediger
• Queen Salaam
• Alex Sarmiento
• Andrew Stark
• Baron Turner

The Elon Law Review was established in 2008 as the student-run and student-edited scholarly journal of the �þ��� School of Law. With each issue, the journal strives to advance legal education and scholarship through the contribution of intelligent discussion and analysis of the law. In addition to publishing an annual issue that examines novel and significant topics of legal scholarship, the Elon Law Review hosts an annual symposium on an emerging topic in the legal field.

Professor David S. Levine and Professor Eric Fink serve as advisors to the Elon Law Review.

We The People – Elon Law’s Constitutional Law Journal

• Madison Curtis
• Kayleigh Foster
• Jacqueline Gardner
• John Grice
• John Grosso
• Noah Jackson
• Kyla King
• Michael Maroney
• Gordon McKeehan
• Kassidy Neuner
• Grant Paramore
• Cole Payne
• Karly Pins
• John Prather
• Emily Radcliffe
• Lily Sanders
• Kaitlyn Sella
• Leah Shaw

We The People – Elon Law’s Constitutional Law Journal aspires to promote the contribution of intelligent discussion and analysis of the U.S. Constitution and constitutional law-related issues. The online journal was founded in 2022, aiming to foster healthy dialogue on timely legal issues in a respectful manner that its founders observed is often missing in contemporary debate.

Professor David S. Levine serves as the journal’s advisor.

Speaking during Elon Law’s Joseph M. Bryan Distinguished Leadership Lecture on Wednesday, May 6, at Greensboro’s Proximity Hotel, Kantor discussed her reporting on the Supreme Court, including extensive behind-the-scenes investigations of the Court’s internal processes and the justices themselves.

This spring, she and colleague Adam Liptak examining the Supreme Court’s growing use of its emergency or “shadow docket,” through which consequential rulings are often issued rapidly and with limited explanation or legal reasoning. At a moment of declining trust in institutions and the judiciary itself, Kantor warned that the practice can bypass some of the traditional safeguards associated with judicial deliberation and further erode public confidence in the court.

“Judges write opinions as an act of transparency and humility and faith,” Kantor said. “An opinion says to the public: ‘You may disagree with this decision. It may put your brother in jail. It may mean the end of your business. But I want you to know that I’m being sincere, and that I diligently worked through the law to come to this conclusion.’”

Kantor’s lecture series appearance featured an extended conversation with Professor Catherine Ross Dunham, a charter member of Elon Law’s faculty whose scholarship focuses on civil procedure and complex litigation.

Kantor earned international recognition for her work with colleague Megan Twohey in exposing decades of sexual abuse allegations against Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein. That reporting helped ignite the global #MeToo movement. Kantor and Twohey won the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service in 2018, and their work was later published in later adapted into an acclaimed film. Her other work has focused on technology and the modern workplace, leading to changes at companies like Amazon and Starbucks, and the Obamas’ life inside the White House. Most recently, she joined the New York Times’ Supreme Court team.

Investigating the Supreme Court

“Investigative journalism is about taking secrets that are in the public interest and putting them into sunlight,” Kantor said.

She described her reporting on the Court — in her words, “one of the most secretive institutions in American life” — as seeking to better understand how power operates within one of the nation’s least transparent institutions, including questions surrounding internal negotiations among justices, the role of clerks and the long-term effects of lifetime appointments.

“How much do they bargain with one another? What role do clerks play? How does power really flow?” Kantor asked. “What does it mean to hold power at that level for 20 or 30 years? How do people age in those jobs?”

At the same time, she acknowledged the tension between transparency and judicial independence, arguing that “judges need room to think, to deliberate, to change their minds.”

She emphasized that she isn’t interested in exposing pending Court decisions because that  “would interfere with the judicial process.”

“I’m not trying to know everything about the Supreme Court,” she said. “But I still think there are important questions worth answering.”

Privacy, secrecy and institutional power

Kantor repeatedly turned to the distinction between privacy and secrecy — a theme connecting both her Weinstein reporting and her more recent investigations into the Supreme Court.

“What I learned from the Weinstein investigation is that there’s a difference between privacy and secrecy,” Kantor said, referencing the nondisclosure agreements now required of Supreme Court staff and the stifling secrecy of settlement agreements in Weinstein’s case.

“Victims deserved privacy,” Kantor said of the Weinstein investigation. “But was the system benefiting from blanket secrecy that enabled predation? No. Legal culture is very invested in confidentiality, but confidentiality can run amok in ways that deprive the public of enough information to understand what is happening.”

She warned that excessive confidentiality inside powerful institutions — including courts, workplaces and corporations — can ultimately weaken public understanding and democratic trust.

“Journalism is one of democracy’s valves,” Kantor said. “I would rather us have rigorous coverage of the Supreme Court that leads to productive debate than a thousand other things, including the really disruptive political violence we’re seeing across the (political) spectrum.”

Resisting political caricatures

The conversation explored the dangers of reducing Supreme Court justices to simplistic political caricatures. Kantor pointed to Justice Amy Coney Barrett as an example of a jurist who was immediately misunderstood by both the political right and left when she was appointed in October 2020.

Kantor described Barrett as “perhaps the most independent of the Republican-appointed justices,” adding that even some of Barrett’s ideological critics view her as intellectually serious and institutionally minded.

“She’s very conservative,” Kantor said, “but she has this independent streak. She wants to be trusted by a broad swath of Americans. She does not want to be pigeonholed.”

Starting a meaningful career

Kantor also reflected on questions of professional purpose and career-building, themes explored in her new book, Drawing on her workplace reporting and conversations with students navigating political uncertainty, economic anxiety and rapid technological change, Kantor encouraged young professionals to identify their talents, develop a craft and identify a societal need their craft addresses.

When evaluating early-career opportunities, Kantor said she encourages young professionals to focus less on prestige and more on growth, mentorship and intellectual curiosity. Taking calculated risks to gain experience and further develop craft will pay off.

“Are you learning?” Kantor said. “And are you working for good people?”

Earlier in the day, Kantor met with Elon Law students, faculty and staff for a smaller discussion centered on identifying purpose and launching meaningful careers in a challenging time.

About Elon Law’s Distinguished Leadership Lecture Series

The Distinguished Leadership Lecture Series presented by The Joseph M. Bryan Foundation is an integral part of Elon Law’s commitment to learning, lawyering and leadership. Endowed through a generous gift from The Joseph M. Bryan Foundation of Greensboro, N.C., the series brings accomplished leaders from a variety of disciplines to �þ��� to share their experiences and perspectives with students and faculty.

Elon Law students and faculty gathered for “Judicial Interpretation and Review Under the United States Constitution,” hosted by We the People — Elon Law’s Constitutional Journal.

The program featured retired North Carolina Supreme Court Chief Justice Cheri Beasley, Elon Law’s Sandra Day O’Connor Professor of Law; North Carolina Supreme Court Justice Phil Berger Jr., an adjunct professor at Elon Law; and Professor of Law Enrique Armijo, a constitutional law scholar. Professor of Law David Levine, who also serves as faculty adviser to We the People, moderated.

Their conversation centered on three themes: competing approaches to constitutional interpretation, the growing public and political pressure on courts, and how judges navigate decision-making in practice.

A central focus was the longstanding debate between originalism and the idea of a “living Constitution.”

Berger said he follows a textualist approach grounded in original meaning, cautioning against judges imposing their own will on constitutional interpretation.

“If interpretation relies on will, then the Constitution can mean anything at any time,” Berger said, pointing to the amendment process as the appropriate avenue for change.

Beasley characterized judicial review and interpretation as a pendulum that swings back and forth throughout American history, and said that the Constitution must function for the country as it exists today. She pointed out that the Founding Fathers wouldn’t have considered her, a Black woman, as deserving of rights – let alone able to serve on the court.

Armijo pointed to processes and landmark cases, like Brown v. Board of Education, as examples where historical meaning did not control modern outcomes. He framed constitutional interpretation as competing theories that provide the “reasons for the reasons” behind judicial decisions.

Panelists also addressed the pressures shaping today’s judiciary.

Berger described a “cheerleading” dynamic in which the public focuses more on outcomes than legal reasoning. Beasley pointed to the influence of money in judicial elections and the challenge of balancing transparency with safety, citing concerns about threats against judges. Armijo noted that decisions in high-profile cases have become increasingly predictable in a more politically polarized environment.

“You can often predict how individual (U.S. Supreme Court) justices are going to vote,” Armijo said, adding that partisan politics risks reducing the rule of law to a scoreboard of judicial appointments.

Berger emphasized the importance of consistent methodology, even when outcomes are difficult. Beasley said judges inevitably bring their life and professional experiences to the bench, but are bound to apply the law faithfully, balancing human perspective with legal obligation.

“Is there some level of humanity in decision-making? I believe there is … and I don’t know that that’s a bad thing.”

Six judges, comprising two panels, heard oral arguments in two cases inside the law school’s Robert E. Long Courtroom on Wed., April 15. Following recess, they held an extended Q&A session with students in the courtroom where they shared lessons drawn from decades of experience on and off the bench.

Among their advice to young lawyers:

• Be willing to concede a point — then quickly move on to explain why your client still prevails.
• It’s OK to say, “I don’t know,” rather than risk your credibility. Return to your argument about why your client should win the case.
• Structure legal briefs as clear roadmaps of your argument for the Court.
• Be concise in your writing. Make your point, support it with the law and move forward.
• Use caution with AI: Verify facts and citations before submitting any work to the court. Large language models often hallucinate legal matters.

Judges hearing arguments and interacting with students were:

• The Hon. Chris Dillon, Chief Judge of the N.C. Court of Appeals
• The Hon. John Arrowood
• The Hon. Jefferson Griffin
• The Hon. Toby Hampson
• The Hon. Donna Stroud
• The Hon. John Tyson

Judges heard arguments in two very different cases.

The first, , centers on whether certain residential units should be classified as townhomes or duplexes under local building codes, a distinction with significant regulatory consequences — and now potential financial consequences for individual property owners.

The second case, , out of Forsyth County, involves the state’s appeal of a trial court’s decision to dismiss charges after testimony referenced a prior case, raising questions about prejudice and appropriate remedies.

“It was an incredible experience for our students to observe six judges from the North Carolina Court of Appeals and four highly skilled appellate advocates in action, particularly as our first-year students prepare to present their own appellate arguments in their required Legal Method & Communication course in a few weeks,” said Alan Woodlief, vice dean and professor of law. “Several of the judges visiting today consistently welcome Elon Law students to their chambers for their Residencies-in-Practice, summer internships, or full-time clerkships after graduation. It was great to have several current Residency students accompany their judges to the oral arguments.”

Elon Law students’ takeaways

Law students listened intently to judges’ lines of questioning, but also to the ways appellant litigators structured their arguments, responded to jurists’ questions and addressed the court.

“I was paying attention to everything. I could understand why this is such a complicated case — codes changing, proposals changing, multiple parties — and I appreciated the judges asking why it got to this point and where responsibility lies,” said Lamarie Austin-Stripling LF ’29. A student in Elon Law’s part-time Charlotte Flex Program, Austin-Stripling drove from her home in Concord, North Carolina, to hear arguments before returning to the Queen City for classes that night.

Greensboro law students were just as engaged.

• “What struck me most is how much of what I’ve already been doing — in the classroom, in residency, and in internships — showed up in these arguments. It reinforced that I’m learning the skills I’ll need to be in that position one day.” – Tyler Sesker L’26, of Upper Marlboro, Maryland, who earned her �þ��� and graduate degrees at Hollins University and the University of Virginia.

•  “I was surprised by how collaborative the process is — judges discussing cases with each other and their clerks before and after arguments. It was valuable to see how the pros do it and what approaches seemed to resonate.” – Tom Desch L’27, of Cornelius, North Carolina, who earned his �þ��� degree at the University of South Carolina

• “One of the most impactful takeaways was hearing from the judges that if an attorney doesn’t know an answer, it is okay to say, ‘I don’t know.’ Being honest about the limits of your knowledge is much better than risking your credibility.” – Paulina Escobar L’27, of Ecuador, who holds a law degree from the University of the Americas in Quito, Ecuador.

Elon Law alumnus argues in his home court

For one attorney arguing before the court, the visit marked a return to where his legal career began.

Reginaldo Williams L’11, now an attorney with the North Carolina Department of Justice, presented arguments in State v. Cuadra. His path to appellate advocacy, however, was far from certain.

“I was that person wondering, ‘Why did I do this?’” Williams said following hearings, recalling his time as a law student. “I didn’t feel like I fit as a prosecutor or a public defender. But when I did my first oral argument, I knew — this is it.”

Williams credits guidance from Professor of Law Catherine Ross Dunham with helping him stay the course at a moment when he considered leaving law school altogether. That decision ultimately led him to appellate practice, where he now represents the state in criminal appeals.

“There are a lot of students who may not feel like they’ve found their place yet,” he said. “But you will. And when you do, it makes all the difference.”

In the influential publication’s 2026 , Elon Law is No. 11 nationally — the highest-ranked law school in the Southeast and the only school in North Carolina among the top 35.

, with its required Residency-in-Practice Program highlighted as a model for immersive, practice-based legal education. All Elon Law students spend 10 weeks in the winter or spring of their second year in full-time placements with practicing lawyers, judges and legal teams, graduating with hands-on experience in the day-to-day realities of legal practice.

“You cannot graduate from Elon Law without knowing exactly what it’s like to be a lawyer,” Elon Law Dean Zak Kramer said in the article. “The legal practice becomes their classroom … They leave law students and come back lawyers.”

The article also features insights from Patricia Perkins, Elon Law’s associate dean of academic affairs and professor of law. “Our curriculum is designed to assist students in transforming into the lawyers they want to be,” she said. “Skills are just as important to develop as a knowledge base.”

PreLaw Magazine graded and ranked schools based on student participation in clinics, externships, simulation courses, moot court and other special programs.

Elon Law offers students a broad array of opportunities to hone practical training skills throughout their 2.5 years of study. Those include:

• Full-time residencies-in-practice
• Lab and simulation courses
• Five clinics (immigration, small business and entrepreneurship, wills drafting, Social Security disability benefits and guardian ad litem appellate advocacy)
• Moot court and mock trial teams
• Internships, externships and judicial clerkships
• Bridge-to-practice courses
• Involvement with the Pro Bono Board

Elon Law adopted its 2.5-year, seven-trimester full-time curriculum in 2014, making it the only American law school to intentionally design a program where all students graduate in December and can sit for the February bar exam — months ahead of peers from other institutions. (In 2026, 91.96% of Elon Law’s first-time North Carolina bar takers passed the exam.)

By completing their legal studies nearly six months faster than traditional programs, Elon Law’s full-time graduates have lowered their average student debt at graduation by almost a third since the curriculum was adopted.

For more information on Elon Law and the application process, visit the law school’s admissions page. Elon Law continues to actively admit the Elon Law Class of 2028, which will enroll in August 2026.