  
To:
All Judicial Teams
From:
Jason Reimer
Date:
February 3, 2006
RE:
JUDICIAL REVIEW COMPONENT IN 2006 PROGRAM
Based on the number of requests over the past few years for a judicial review component,
we have developed such a review component to be implemented this year. The following will
outline how the judicial review component will operate. No attorney team will need to research
or complete preparatory work for the component.
Welcome to the judicial review component for the YMCA Pennsylvania Youth &
Government program! These instructions provide a brief overview of the nature of judicial review,
and provide the governing rules.
I.
Nature of Judicial Review at PA Y&G
Administrative rulemaking and review is an integral part of our state’s regulatory system.
After the legislature enacts a law, a government agency begins the process of implementation. As
part of the implementation process, agencies develop “regulations” that really determine how the bill
should work.
Often, in these cases, various parties will argue for specific results, in other words, trying to
come up with a result that would most benefit those they represent. Often such discussions are
formal events, with both an outside party as well as agency attorneys arguing before a Commission.
In our simulation, one party will argue that regulations relating to the statute should not be
implemented, while the other party (representing the government) argues for the implementation of
regulations. These attorneys will be made up of the attorney teams eliminated after the first round
of the tournament.
The Commission will be made up of members of the attorney teams that were eliminated in
the second round. Their decisions will be subject to review by the Supreme Court on Sunday, if the
Court so desires.
II.
Governing Rules
A.
Agency and Opposing Attorney Teams – The agency and opposing attorney teams will be
comprised of the teams eliminated after the first round. The teams (same teams as the
ones for the tournament) will meet with a “legal director” or “managing partner”
(program legal volunteers) after lunch on Saturday to review the bill, proposed
regulation, and relevant laws. The teams will have until after dinner to prepare a
maximum of one-page summary of argument and their oral arguments to be presented
to the commission.
Summary of Argument: The summary of argument cannot exceed one-page. It should
address, in an outline format, the major points they want the Commission to consider.
Oral Arguments: The oral argument before the Commission will not exceed 10-minutes
for each side with no rebuttal time.
B.
Commission Members – The Commission members will be comprised of the teams
eliminated after the second round. Half of the teams eliminated will be combined to
make-up one Commission, while the other half, the other. The Commission will review
all of the summary or arguments prior to the oral arguments, and based on all of the
arguments made Saturday evening, make their determination in writing through an
administrative ruling.
Administrative Ruling: The administrative ruling, written by a member of the majority-
side, cannot exceed one-page and must be presented to the Chief Justice for review prior
to the end of sessions Saturday. The minority may also write a minority statement not
exceeding one-page.
The Commission must also determine the best Agency and Opposing attorney teams.
C.
Role of Youth Governor and Administration – The Youth Governor, or designee, shall submit
a statement to the Commission during the Commission hearings. The statement can be
oral (not to exceed 3-minutes) and/or written (not to exceed 2-pages).
D.
Judicial Review – The decisions of the two Commissions can be reviewed by the entire
Supreme Court Sunday morning. If the Court determines it wants to review a
Commission’s decision, the best Agency and best Opposing attorney teams will get a 5-
minute presentation before the Supreme Court.
|
