UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. — The Penn State Dickinson Law Civil Rights Appellate Clinic visited the nation’s capital to observe Supreme Court oral arguments on November 3, 2025, arranged by Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett. The cases before the court were "Rico v. United States" and "Hencely v. Fluor Corporation."
Led by Director and Professor Michael Foreman, the clinic is made up of third-year students: Alexis Bloodsworth, Caden Dean-Sauter, Ema Dick, CJ Gust, Sarah Kelly, Lyn Mungin, Haley Russell and Kiera Stubbs. Clinical students learn appellate advocacy by conducting research, drafting briefs and petitions, and discussing case selection and development.
Kelly described the significant impact viewing oral arguments would have on her legal writing.
“I need to be able to apply the positions that we take to hypotheticals and put more emphasis on the policy implications of a ruling,” she said.
"Rico," the first case argued, presented the question of whether the fugitive-tolling doctrine applies in the context of supervised release.
Of the justices’ roles during oral arguments, Dean-Sauter said, “I thought it was really interesting seeing how the different justices acted and how they obviously cared about different topics. I also found it fascinating how the justices framed their questions.”
In the second case argued, "Hencely," the court considered whether another Supreme Court precedent, "Boyle v. United Technologies Corp.," should be extended to allow the Federal Tort Claims Act’s combatant activities exception to preempt state tort claims against a government contractor for conduct that breached its contract and violated military orders.
Taking note of the advocacy on display, Mungin said, “I really enjoyed listening to the justices push back on the attorneys’ positions. The attorneys did a good job responding to the justices’ questions while simultaneously advancing their positions.”