American Constitution Society

Skip to content



Constance Baker Motley National Moot Court Competition

About | Problem | Registration| Schedule | Rules | Travel | Oral Arguments |Briefs|FAQ
Judge Constance Baker Motley
“Something which we think is impossible now, is not impossible in another decade.”
— Judge Constance Baker Motley (1921-2005)

Judge Motley was born in New Haven, Connecticut in 1921. She graduated from New York University and then Columbia Law School. While she was still a law student at Columbia, she met Thurgood Marshall who hired her to work at the NAACP LDF. Over a 20-year period, Judge Motley fought segregation throughout the South and won nine of the ten cases that she argued before the Supreme Court, including James H. Meredith's right to be admitted to the University of Mississippi. In 1964, Judge Motley became the first African-American woman elected to the New York State Senate, representing Manhattan's upper west side and west Harlem districts. In 1965, she became the first woman elected President of the Borough of Manhattan. In 1966, Judge Motley became the first African-American woman appointed to the federal judiciary when she joined the Southern District of New York at the behest of President Lyndon Johnson. In 1982, she became the first woman, and the first African-American woman, to serve as Chief Judge in the federal judiciary. Four years later she became a senior judge. In 1993, in recognition of her contributions to civil rights and the legal profession, Judge Constance Baker Motley was inducted into the National Women's Hall of Fame.

Recent Stories

ACS Launches 2009 Constance Baker Motley National Moot Court Competition in Constitutional Law

We are pleased to announce the fourth annual Constance Baker Motley National Moot Court Competition in Constitutional Law. In recognition of the ongoing debate about warrantless wiretapping conducted by the federal government, the 2009 Moot Court legal problem involves questions about the ability of U.S. citizens to invoke the jurisdiction of federal courts to challenge these surveillance activities.
Two issues will be briefed and argued:

• Whether, based on the government’s invocation of the state secrets privilege, a challenge to the NSA’s publicly-acknowledged warrantless wiretapping program should be dismissed as non-justiciable because “the very subject matter” of the litigation involves state secrets, the disclosure of which would harm national security;

and

• Whether, relying only on the publicly-available information about the warrantless wiretapping program, a plaintiff can establish Article III standing to pursue a claim that the government violated its First Amendment rights by operation of the program.

More Stories