TED: How to win an argument (at the US Supreme Court, or anywhere) | Neal Katyal

The speaker shares insights from his first Supreme Court case, emphasizing the importance of empathy over confidence in persuasion. He recounts his preparation and emotional control strategies, the impact of the Guantanamo case, and challenges faced with the travel ban. Lessons from historical cases highlight the significance of timing and persistence in legal arguments. The speaker concludes by stressing the enduring power of good arguments and the importance of not giving up.

What was the main argument against relying solely on confidence in persuasion?

• Confidence is always effective.

• Confidence can lead to arrogance.

• Empathy is more important than confidence.

• Confidence is irrelevant in legal arguments.

How did the acting coach help the speaker improve his argument delivery?

• By providing legal advice.

• By encouraging him to read from a legal pad.

• By helping him connect with his audience.

• By teaching him courtroom etiquette.

What personal items did the speaker use to ground himself before the court argument?

• A bracelet, a tie, and his children's names.

• A photograph of his family.

• A lucky pen and notebook.

• A new suit and shoes.

What was the broader impact of the Guantanamo case victory?

• It resulted in a new law against terrorism.

• It increased the number of Supreme Court justices.

• It ended the use of ghost prisons and waterboarding.

• It led to more military tribunals.

Why is it important to avoid emotional displays in court arguments?

• Emotions are not allowed in court.

• Emotions are only effective with family members.

• Emotional displays can undermine the speaker's credibility.

• Emotions are irrelevant in legal settings.

What historical case did the speaker reflect on during the travel ban challenge?

• The Civil Rights Movement.

• The Japanese-American internment.

• The Watergate scandal.

• The Vietnam War protests.

What lesson did the speaker learn about timing in arguments?

• Delays always lead to failure.

• The right argument must be made at the right moment.

• Arguments should be made as soon as possible.

• Timing is irrelevant in legal cases.

How did the speaker respond to Ann Coulter's criticism?

• By emphasizing the strength of being an immigrant.

• By agreeing with her views.

• By ignoring her comments.

• By filing a lawsuit against her.

What does the speaker believe about the power of good arguments?

• They can outlive the speaker and influence future generations.

• They are only effective in the short term.

• They are only useful in legal settings.

• They are irrelevant in modern society.

What is the speaker's final message about losing arguments?

• Losing means you should give up.

• Losing is a sign of weakness.

• The only true loss is giving up.

• Losing is inevitable and should be accepted.