Supreme Court Simulation

Good & Pretti v. Department of Homeland Security

A Supreme Court Simulation on Civil Liberties, Federal Power, and Qualified Immunity

What happens when federal immigration agents kill American citizens during a domestic enforcement operation?

Who decides whether those agents can be held accountable?

And what does the Constitution require when First Amendment freedoms collide with executive power?

In this immersive, college-level Supreme Court simulation, students step into the roles of Justices, attorneys, reporters, activists, and citizens to confront one of the most controversial constitutional doctrines of the modern era: qualified immunity.

Centered on the deaths of Alex Pretti and Renée Good during federal immigration operations in Minnesota, this simulation challenges students to examine:

• The limits of the First Amendment right to record law enforcement

• The boundaries of the Fourth Amendment’s protection against excessive force

• Whether federal officers may be shielded from liability even when constitutional violations occur

• The tension between civil liberties and national enforcement policy

Students conduct oral arguments, engage in judicial deliberation, draft majority and dissenting opinions, and experience the real-world consequences of Supreme Court rulings through a dynamic media and public reaction phase.

This is not a scripted debate.

There is no predetermined outcome.

The final ruling depends entirely on constitutional reasoning, persuasion, and judicial philosophy.

By the end of the week, students will understand:

• How the Supreme Court evaluates “clearly established law”

• Why qualified immunity remains one of the most debated doctrines in American law

• How public opinion and media framing influence constitutional legitimacy

• What it means for rights to exist — and whether they have remedies

This simulation transforms constitutional law from static doctrine into living controversy.