In the shower after my run, I started thinking about policy arguments for Crim, Contracts, and Civ Pro. (Yes, I think about law school in the shower... It's close to finals. I'm quite a monster, really.)
I decided that there are only about 4 policy arguments, they just get mashed up, applied to the facts and re-argued. Over and Over.
So here's my hint for the day (and note to myself):
If you need to argue policy, there's almost certainly a way to argue that going against your position will result in:
3. Morally Reprehensible or Societally Unacceptable Results
4. or, the last-ditch hide-out of every argument, a Slippery Slope.
Am I missing anything?