Yesterday I was asked to write a memo for a pro bono attorney detailing a very complex legal question that the courts have only skipped around. Basically the question deals with whether being a child who is in a very unfortunate and unique situation can form an "extraordinary circumstance" exception to the one year filing deadline requirement for asylum cases.
The answer is probably no. I am being told by a supervisor that the answer should be definately so. I'm telling the pro bono that the answer is possibly so.
For those of you in summer clerkships, how do you handle a memo where you are asked to figure out if a legal argument has a chance in the courts and it doesn't? In your answer would you just say that the argument is one that the court would be reluctant to hear but it is the best option available if the partner wishes to pursue this path?
For others, what would you do? Be honest about the lack of any real argument or go ahead and come up with a weak argument that will be shut down by the courts?
Thursday, June 10, 2004
Query: Is this the right answer?
-x-
