topics for rebuttal essays

50 Argumentative Essay Topics

Illustration by Catherine Song. ThoughtCo. 

• M.Ed., Education Administration, University of Georgia
• B.A., History, Armstrong State University

An argumentative essay requires you to decide on a topic and take a position on it. You'll need to back up your viewpoint with well-researched facts and information as well. One of the hardest parts is deciding which topic to write about, but there are plenty of ideas available to get you started.

Choosing a Great Argumentative Essay Topic

Students often find that most of their work on these essays is done before they even start writing. This means that it's best if you have a general interest in your subject, otherwise you might get bored or frustrated while trying to gather information. (You don't need to know everything, though.) Part of what makes this experience rewarding is learning something new.

It's best if you have a general interest in your subject, but the argument you choose doesn't have to be one that you agree with.

The subject you choose may not necessarily be one that you are in full agreement with, either. You may even be asked to write a paper from the opposing point of view. Researching a different viewpoint helps students broaden their perspectives. 

Ideas for Argument Essays

Sometimes, the best ideas are sparked by looking at many different options. Explore this list of possible topics and see if a few pique your interest. Write those down as you come across them, then think about each for a few minutes.

Which would you enjoy researching? Do you have a firm position on a particular subject? Is there a point you would like to make sure to get across? Did the topic give you something new to think about? Can you see why someone else may feel differently?

50 Possible Topics

A number of these topics are rather controversial—that's the point. In an argumentative essay, opinions matter and controversy is based on opinions, which are, hopefully, backed up by facts.   If these topics are a little too controversial or you don't find the right one for you, try browsing through persuasive essay and speech topics  as well.

• Is global climate change  caused by humans?
• Is the death penalty effective?
• Is our election process fair?
• Is torture ever acceptable?
• Should men get paternity leave from work?
• Are school uniforms beneficial?
• Do we have a fair tax system?
• Do curfews keep teens out of trouble?
• Is cheating out of control?
• Are we too dependent on computers?
• Should animals be used for research?
• Should cigarette smoking be banned?
• Are cell phones dangerous?
• Are law enforcement cameras an invasion of privacy?
• Do we have a throwaway society?
• Is child behavior better or worse than it was years ago?
• Should companies market to children?
• Should the government have a say in our diets?
• Does access to condoms prevent teen pregnancy?
• Should members of Congress have term limits?
• Are actors and professional athletes paid too much?
• Are CEOs paid too much?
• Should athletes be held to high moral standards?
• Do violent video games cause behavior problems?
• Should creationism be taught in public schools?
• Are beauty pageants exploitative ?
• Should English be the official language of the United States?
• Should the racing industry be forced to use biofuels?
• Should the alcohol drinking age be increased or decreased?
• Should everyone be required to recycle?
• Is it okay for prisoners to vote (as they are in some states)?
• Is it good that same-sex couples are able to marry?
• Are there benefits to attending a single-sex school ?
• Does boredom lead to trouble?
• Should schools be in session year-round ?
• Does religion cause war?
• Should the government provide health care?
• Should abortion be illegal?
• Are girls too mean to each other?
• Is homework harmful or helpful?
• Is the cost of college too high?
• Is college admission too competitive?
• Should euthanasia be illegal?
• Should the federal government legalize marijuana use nationally ?
• Should rich people be required to pay more taxes?
• Should schools require foreign language or physical education?
• Is affirmative action fair?
• Is public prayer okay in schools?
• Are schools and teachers responsible for low test scores?
• Is greater gun control a good idea?
• Preparing an Argument Essay: Exploring Both Sides of an Issue
• Controversial Speech Topics
• 100 Persuasive Essay Topics
• Tips on How to Write an Argumentative Essay
• Bad Essay Topics for College Admissions
• 25 Essay Topics for American Government Classes
• Topic In Composition and Speech
• MBA Essay Tips
• How to Write a Solid Thesis Statement
• How to Write a Narrative Essay or Speech
• High School Debate Topics
• 61 General Expository Essay Topic Ideas to Practice Academic Writing
• 40 Writing Topics for Argumentative and Persuasive Essays
• Expository Essay Genre With Suggested Prompts
• 501 Topic Suggestions for Writing Essays and Speeches
• Middle School Debate Topics

130 Argumentative Essay Topics: Tips on How Choose the Best One

Defining What Is an Argumentative Essay

Imagine the following scenario: You just got into an argument with your friend over climate change. You said that this is an actual issue that poses significant threats to our environment and world population. Your friend, on the other hand, argued that climate change is not real, saying that it's a natural occurrence that has happened several times during world history. You got home, had time to reflect on the debate, and came up with several good reasons for your position. Oh! The things you could have said to clearly express and defend your stance... Now you're annoyed with the constant monologue running through your mind, reflecting upon the previous debate.

What if you documented the arguments that came to you afterward? Much like jotting them down on a piece of paper and giving some direction to your ideas. We say it would have made a brilliant work with fresh ideas and fiery passion.

That's exactly why you should practice argumentative essay writing. It will enhance your reasoning skills while allowing you to become more quick-witted. By doing this, you won't have to listen to your friends defending their stance while you lack your own arguments to contribute to the debate.

To persuade the reader of their position in an argumentative essay, the author must choose a position on a certain subject or problem and provide evidence to support it. This kind of essay is frequently required in high school or college classes to sharpen students' analytical abilities and motivate them to engage in challenging discussions.

So, let's take on a mission of fully understanding how to write an argumentative essay with a clear structure and endless topic ideas. We promise that after reading this article, you'll become an unshakable debater!

Three Common Argumentative Essay Models

First, let's start with the three most prevalent models of argumentative writing. Knowing this will guide you toward structuring your essay in your preferred style. The options are:

• Toulmin model - Most commonly used model out of the three, the Toulmin model starts with an introduction, moves on to a thesis or claim, and then provides information and proof to back up that argument. This type of essay usually includes rebuttals of opposing points. This approach performs effectively when there is no undeniable truth or perfect answer to an issue.
• Rogerian model - Created by Carl R. Rogers, the Rogerian model of argument assesses a debate and offers a compromise between opposing sides. This paradigm emphasizes cooperation and teamwork. It recognizes that an argument can be seen from a variety of angles. The Rogerian model starts with an introduction, moves to acknowledge opposing views, then states the author's main claims. Before the conclusion, it tries to provide a middle ground by carefully considering all sides of the argument.
• Classical (Aristotelian) model- In the traditional paradigm, all sides of an argument are examined, and the side with the most convincing evidence is shown to be correct. This approach effectively convinces a listener to take a side in an argument by combining Ethos, Pathos, and Logos.

Proper Argumentative Essay Outline

This is not something new that you should be scared of - an essay outline that consists of classic five paragraphs and employs a sacred triangle of introduction, body, and conclusion. But still, in an argumentative essay outline, you should find something unique to this kind of paper. Let's examine these specifics more closely below with the help of our argumentative essay writing service :

Introduction

Your first task while writing argumentative essays is to grab the reader's attention with an eye-catching fact, story, or quotation that will work as a hook. Then continue by giving background information and outlining the problem at hand while clearly articulating your case and your point of argument.

• Background information
• Thesis statement

I. Introduction

The argumentative essay introduction should grab the reader's attention and provide background information. The introductory paragraph should also include a thesis statement, the main argument the essay will present, and support. For example:

• Hook : Did you know that over 50% of Americans believe in aliens?
• Background: UFO sightings and conspiracy theories have been around for decades.
• Thesis: Despite the lack of concrete evidence, extraterrestrial life is a real possibility that should be explored further.

Body Paragraphs

The body section is where you confidently roll up your sleeves and give direction to your discussion. In the first paragraph, give your best argument in favor of your thesis, using examples, data, or expert opinions. Then, evaluate the data and describe how it backs up your claim. Remember to confront and disprove any potential opposing viewpoints. You might use the same strategy in the second body paragraph for a different argument supporting your thesis.

Consider the opposing position and offer arguments in the third and fourth paragraphs. Lastly, dispute the counterargument and explain why your argument is more powerful.

• First supporting point
• Explanation
• Counterargument
• Second supporting point

To wrap up, restate your major idea and summarize your supporting points. Explain why your point is important and what it means for the reader. To end on a strong note, encourage the reader to act or think more deeply about the subject.

• Restate thesis
• Significance
• Call to action

Tips for Choosing Argumentative Essay Topics

Making a captivating and thought-provoking argumentative essay requires picking a strong topic. Here are six genuine suggestions to assist you through the process:

• Keep your audience in mind - Consider the audience for your essay, and attempt to guess what they would think about the topic you wish to cover. Think about if your audience would find it fascinating.
• Take a risk - Pick a highly debatable subject you think others would want to steer clear of. It will distinguish your topic from other ordinary argumentative essay topics. Make sure you can, however, present the reasoning for all sides of the controversy.
• Consider your surroundings - Consider things that are either negative aspects or taboos in your environment. Dare to discuss and debate such problems.
• Select an arguable topic - To avoid writing a dissertation; your topic should be in the middle of being both wide and narrow. Establish your paper's objectives. What point of view or hypothesis are you trying to support? Before you start writing, make an effort to clearly state your aim. If you cannot explain your goal effectively, try to free-write on your subject.
• Provide logical and persuasive evidence - Ensure that your proof is appropriately documented. Be certain to introduce and explain the relevance of the evidence you use in an easy-to-understand way. Avoid assuming that your evidence will speak for itself and that your readers will draw the conclusions you want from it. Describe the significance of each piece of evidence, how it clarifies or supports your claim, and why it is relevant. Include evidence in your work and use it wisely to support your arguments.
• Draft your essay - Make sure you include a lot of supporting material presented clearly and fairly, address the opposing viewpoint, and pay close attention to how your essay is organized. Ensure your argumentative essay structure is appropriate for your issue and audience, address and rectify any logical errors, and use appropriate transitions to make it easier for the reader to understand your argument.

Meanwhile, if you'd rather have a PRO craft your paper, you can always buy argumentative essay on our platform.

Examples of Argumentative Essay Topics

Choosing the proper topic for your argumentative essay might be a major difficulty. You should always ensure that your chosen topic is interesting and worthwhile. Your school may occasionally provide you with a selection of subjects, but sometimes you may struggle to choose the topic.

Consider your struggle to be over in the following sections; our persuasive essay writing service will help you find the best argument topics for your upcoming argumentative essay.

Argumentative Essay Topics for Middle Schoolers

Let's start with some easy argumentative essay topics for middle school students.

• Explain whether or not students should have schoolwork on weekends.
• Do you believe that the government should determine your school lunch?
• Should students have to take gym classes?
• Do you believe that children should have automatic screen time limits or should parents limit screen time manually?
• Describe your position on whether or not school uniforms should be required.
• Should violent video games be banned in the United States?
• How unhealthy are hot dogs?
• Why or why not should the electoral college be abolished?
• Should the school day be prolonged to accommodate a long weekend?
• Do you believe that prerequisite art classes should be mandatory for all college degrees?

Argumentative Essay Topics for High School Students

As you advance your education, you may also pick up more complex topics and open up a meaningful debate. So, here is a list of argumentative essay topics for students in high school.

• Do you think the FDA is effectively policing what is put into our food?
• What age do you consider the right age to start using social media?
• Do you believe a civics test is required for 12th-grade students to pass to graduate?
• Should professional athletes be permitted to use medications that improve performance?
• Should high school students receive free breakfast?
• At what point should children begin doing chores?
• Do you believe using electronic voting machines makes the electoral process fair?
• Do we have the power to affect climate change? Or is it far bigger and more powerful than we are?
• Should the legal age to vote be reduced?
• Should bottled water be prohibited if environmental protection is so important?

Argumentative Essay Topics for College Students

College students have more freedom when it comes to choosing a topic of choice and freely expressing their opinions. Here are some interesting topics for an essay to delve right into:

• Should the United States continue with daylight saving time, or should it be eliminated?
• Should superior grades guarantee scholarship eligibility?
• Has artificial intelligence overstepped its bounds?
• Should there be no tuition fees for a public college education?
• Do we need additional professional sports teams in the United States?
• Should social media companies be allowed to collect data from their users?
• Should there be a certain number of Supreme Court justices?
• Are actors and sportsmen in the entertainment industry paid more than they deserve?
• Should someone deny medical care due to their religious convictions?
• Why is the Second Amendment part of the US Constitution that causes the greatest controversy?

Controversial Argumentative Essay Topics

Touching upon controversy makes the best argumentative essay topics for writing. To add a little spice to your paper, consider the following options:

• Diversity Promotes Tolerance in Society
• Electronic Voting Is Ineffective Because There Is Too Much Fraud
• There is No More Free Journalism
• People Getting Addicted Isn't Caused by Entertainment
• Reality television fosters unrealistic expectations.
• Serving in the military is dangerously romanticized
• People's tax payments do not match the benefits they receive.
• Given the effects of COVID, further funding for mental health services is necessary.
• American Women Have the Same Chances as Men
• Pollution Prevention Is Not Realistic Under the Present Circumstances

Funny Argumentative Essay Topics

You may prefer to debate over funny topics. Here are some choices that will make humorous argumentative essay titles.

• Which is preferable, the night owl or the morning person?
• Do we have alien visitors, and if so, what do they want from us?
• Should the employer impose strict nap requirements?
• Is it OK to wear socks and flops together?
• Should scooters take the place of all public transportation?
• Can you eat pizza with a fork and knife?
• Should we mandate dancing breaks during the working day?
• Should we launch an initiative to promote cuddling as the new handshake?
• Is it moral to routinely tease your loved ones?
• Should we ban jeans and allow only pajamas to be worn in public?

If you want similar ideas for your next assignment, ask us - ' do my essay topics,' and we'll provide many more funny titles.

Feeling Overwhelmed by Constant Writing Process?

With our help, you can earn the grade you deserve without the stress and hassle of trying to do it all on your own.

Topics for Argumentative Speech

Here are some topics for argumentative speech from our speech writing service . With these options, you may as well confidently sign up for an inspirational TED talk!

• What Opinions Do You Have About Cancel Culture?
• Does being publicly shamed online prevent us from evolving and changing?
• Phone etiquette: Do you ever feel awkward using your phone among other people?
• How much, in your opinion, can we infer about our overall satisfaction from what is shared on social media?
• Should Schools Need a Course in Media Literacy?
• Does Teaching Happiness in Schools Make Sense?
• Are there any books that shouldn't be found in public or school libraries?
• What would you study if there was a unique school that taught you the things you truly wanted to learn?
• Should Every Young Person Learn How to Trade Stocks?
• Is Adversity a Prerequisite for Happiness?

Argument Topics on Social Media 

The most efficient argumentative essay title examples relate to social media and online trends. Try the following alternatives:

• Describe and analyze some of the issues that social media brings to society.
• Social media has gained increasing acceptance in classrooms over time. Discuss while pointing up positives and drawbacks.
• Describe the role that social media has had in the radicalization of society.
• Talk about some ethical issues that become moot when creating a social media account.
• Discuss how employing social media may assist in increasing your brand's overall value.
• The importance of social media in contemporary marketing and for kids and teens.
• What does social media weaponization entail?
• What are the psychological harms that social media causes?
• What impact does comedy have on mental health in online forums?
• What effects do social media have on how people communicate?

Argument Topics on Music

Maybe you'd enjoy an argumentative essay topic on music? Say no more! We have a special place for it in our hearts, and we couldn't wait to share them with you!

• Why Should a Musician Hire Another Person to Compose Music for Them?
• How the Making of Music Affects People's Thoughts
• Should performers utilize their platforms to speak out on social and political issues?
• Is live music more significant and true to its origins than recorded music?
• Can one use music as a means of expression and free speech?
• Is it morally required of musicians to utilize their platform to promote social and political change?
• Why music education should be a mandatory topic in schools.
• Why pursuing a profession in music is meaningful and beneficial.
• Why it's important to acknowledge and encourage the achievements made by women in music.
• Why it's important to promote and preserve vanishing musical traditions.

Health Argumentative Essay Topics

What about a health-related topic for argumentative essay? Choose one of the below and contribute to the meaningful conversation in medicine!

• Who carries out the main work, doctors or nurses?
• Oversleeping has no negative effects on the body.
• There should be restrictions on human medical testing.
• Physical and mental health demand different levels of care.
• Should the use of antibiotics be systematically and carefully regulated?
• Are health campaigns useful strategies for preventing and controlling disease?
• Should only those with healthy lives be eligible for organ transplants?
• Should the US proclaim obesity the biggest threat to the country's health?
• Should there be any regulation of US healthcare costs to increase access?
• Should genetic engineering be permitted as a kind of therapy for terminal illnesses?

Argument Topics on Science and Technology

For more up-to-date examples of argumentative essay topics, here are some ideas on science and technology:

• Do children's IQs differ depending on their socioeconomic status?
• Are humans becoming more or less lazy as a result of technology?
• Can we ever settle on Mars?
• Do technological advances imply a weakening of the force of nature?
• Can physicians ever be replaced by computers or robots?
• Should people work on AI development?
• Is the digitization of healthcare beneficial?
• Should people be allowed to own their own DNA?
• Will the use of robots improve our quality of life?
• What potential advancements in cloud storage are there?

Argument Topics on Sports

We couldn't possibly miss the argumentative essay example topics on sports. Sports are a huge part of our everyday life no matter nation or gender. Examine the topic ideas below; we're sure you'll find something inspiring:

• Why cheerleading belongs in the Olympic Games.
• Colleges should prioritize wellness initiatives above athletics.
• Are amateurs the only ones who practice non-contact versions of American football?
• What character traits are important in professional football?
• Could there be a place for women in the NFL?
• Is it appropriate for national teams to hire players from other nations?
• Why is women's soccer less well-liked than that played by men?
• Are the wages of soccer players too high?
• Is coordination more important in soccer than stamina?
• Is the current FIFA ranking system accurate?

Argument Topics on Government

As the government is a crucial part of our society, we believe exploring, criticizing, or favoring some political policies, figures, or systems can make the best topic for an essay:

• How should the government oversee online safety and privacy?
• Are protests and strikes effective ways to affect how the government works?
• Should more be done by the government to control and combat the rising issue of wealth inequality?
• Is choosing the president of the United States through the electoral college a successful process?
• Should the government be able to control and restrict access to weapons?
• Should more be done by the government to advance and defend the rights of underrepresented groups?
• Which political party do you favor in your nation and why?
• Offer advice on the finest and most efficient strategy to deal with corruption.
• Which political development or circumstance in the past year most affected you?
• Should the amount of money given to political campaigns be capped to prevent rich people from exerting too much influence?

Argument Topics on TV, Movies, Video Games

Last but not least, mainstream mediums of entertainment, TV, movies, or video games can also make some effective arguable topics:

• Do aggressive behavior and violence in society rise due to violent video games?
• Is it damaging when mental illness is portrayed in TV and film?
• Is the movie business doing enough to combat whitewashing?
• Is binge-watching television programs a safe pastime?
• Indie films: A subgenre or a way of thinking?
• The Ethics of Making Documentary Films
• Documentary Films: The Potential to Influence Humanity
• The Psychosocial Effects of Walt Disney's Heroes
• Are augmented reality and video games getting too immersive?
• Should parents be held accountable for watching their kids' graphic or violent media exposure?

Final Words

After researching a variety of excellent essay themes, you might wish to write a well-researched paper on your favorite. Don't forget that we are always ready to help you with all types of writing projects, from selecting an argumentative essay topic to perfecting the cause and effect essay structure . Contact us with your ' write a research paper for me ' request and let us take some of the pressure off your shoulders!

Spending Hours on Essays Just to Receive Mediocre Grades?

 With our writing services , you can rest assured that you will receive a well-written, compelling essay that will impress your professors.

Related Articles

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

50 Argumentative Essay Topics for Students

4-minute read

• 11th June 2022

The goal of an argumentative essay is to persuade the reader to understand and support your position on an issue by presenting your reasoning along with supporting evidence. It’s important to find the right balance between giving your opinions and presenting established research.

These essays discuss issues around a range of topics, including science, technology, politics, and healthcare. Whether you’re a teacher looking for essay topics for your students or a student tasked with developing an idea of your own, we’ve compiled a list of 50 argumentative essay topics to help you get started!

●  Does texting hinder interpersonal communication skills?

●  Should there be laws against using devices while driving?

●  Do violent video games teach or encourage people to behave violently?

●  Should social media sites be allowed to collect users’ data?

●  Should parents limit how long their children spend in front of screens?

●  Is AI helping or hurting society?

●  Should cyber-bullying carry legal consequences?

●  Should Supreme Court justices be elected?

●  Is war always a political decision?

●  Should people join a political party?

●  Is capitalism ethical?

●  Is the electoral college an effective system?

●  Should prisoners be allowed to vote?

●  Should the death penalty be legal?

●  Are governments around the world doing enough to combat global warming?

●  Is healthcare a fundamental human right?

●  Should vaccinations be mandated for children?

●  Are there any circumstances under which physician-assisted suicides should be legal?

●  Should parents be able to choose specific genetic modifications of their future children?

●  Should abortion be legal?

●  Is it ethical to perform medical experiments on animals?

●  Should patients who lead unhealthy lifestyles be denied organ transplants?

●  Should doctors be able to provide medical care to children against their parents’ wishes?

Mental Healthcare

●  What causes the stigma around mental health?

●  Discuss the link between insufficient access to mental health services and the high suicide rates among veterans.

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

●  Should cannabis be used as a treatment for patients with mental disorders?

●  Is there a link between social media use and mental disorders?

●  Discuss the effect of physical activity on mental health.

●  Should sports be segregated by gender?

●  Should male and female athletes be given the same pay and opportunities?

●  Are professional athletes overpaid?

●  Should college athletes be paid?

●  Should sports betting be legal?

●  Should online access to art such as music be free?

●  Should graffiti be considered art or vandalism?

●  Are there any circumstances under which books should be banned?

●  Should schools be required to offer art courses?

●  Is art necessary to society?

●  Should schools require uniforms?

●  Should reciting the Pledge of Allegiance be required in schools?

●  Do standardized tests effectively measure intelligence?

●  Should high school students take a gap year before pursuing higher education?

●  Should higher education be free?

●  Is there too much pressure on high school students to attend college?

●  Are children better off in two-parent households?

●  Should LGBTQ+ partners be allowed to adopt?

●  Should single people be able to adopt children as easily as couples?

●  Is it okay for parents to physically discipline their children?

●  Does helicopter parenting help or hurt children?

●  Should parents monitor their children’s Internet use?

Proofreading & Editing

An argument could also be made for the importance of proofreading your essay ! The reader can focus more on your message when your writing is clear, concise, and error-free, and they won’t question whether you’re knowledgeable on the issues you’re presenting. Once you have a draft ready, you can submit a free trial document to start working with our expert editors!

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

3-minute read

How to Insert a Text Box in a Google Doc

Google Docs is a powerful collaborative tool, and mastering its features can significantly enhance your...

2-minute read

How to Cite the CDC in APA

If you’re writing about health issues, you might need to reference the Centers for Disease...

5-minute read

Six Product Description Generator Tools for Your Product Copy

Introduction If you’re involved with ecommerce, you’re likely familiar with the often painstaking process of...

What Is a Content Editor?

Are you interested in learning more about the role of a content editor and the...

The Benefits of Using an Online Proofreading Service

Proofreading is important to ensure your writing is clear and concise for your readers. Whether...

6 Online AI Presentation Maker Tools

Creating presentations can be time-consuming and frustrating. Trying to construct a visually appealing and informative...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

The Edvocate

• Lynch Educational Consulting
• Dr. Lynch’s Personal Website
• Write For Us
• The Tech Edvocate Product Guide
• The Edvocate Podcast
• Terms and Conditions
• Privacy Policy
• Assistive Technology
• Best PreK-12 Schools in America
• Child Development
• Classroom Management
• Early Childhood
• EdTech & Innovation
• Education Leadership
• First Year Teachers
• Gifted and Talented Education
• Special Education
• Parental Involvement
• Policy & Reform
• Best Colleges and Universities
• Best College and University Programs
• HBCU’s
• Higher Education EdTech
• Higher Education
• International Education
• The Awards Process
• Finalists and Winners of The 2022 Tech Edvocate Awards
• Finalists and Winners of The 2021 Tech Edvocate Awards
• Finalists and Winners of The 2020 Tech Edvocate Awards
• Finalists and Winners of The 2019 Tech Edvocate Awards
• Finalists and Winners of The 2018 Tech Edvocate Awards
• Finalists and Winners of The 2017 Tech Edvocate Awards
• Award Seals
• GPA Calculator for College
• GPA Calculator for High School
• Cumulative GPA Calculator
• Grade Calculator
• Weighted Grade Calculator
• Final Grade Calculator
• The Tech Edvocate
• AI Powered Personal Tutor

College Minor: Everything You Need to Know

14 fascinating teacher interview questions for principals, tips for success if you have a master’s degree and can’t find a job, 14 ways young teachers can get that professional look, which teacher supplies are worth the splurge, 8 business books every teacher should read, conditional admission: everything you need to know, college majors: everything you need to know, 7 things principals can do to make a teacher observation valuable, 3 easy teacher outfits to tackle parent-teacher conferences, 100+ argumentative essay topics.

Are you a student looking for argumentative essay topics? If so, we have you covered. Below you will find a list of the best argumentative essay topics.

Argumentative Essay Topics (General)

• Do you think that abortion should be made illegal?
• Do you think that animal testing should be banned?
• Is the #metoo movement a great thing?
• Do you think that manufacturers are responsible for the effects of the chemicals used in creating their products?
• Do you think that illegal immigrants be granted residency?
• Is there a fake news problem? What is the source?
• Do you believe that “big pharma” has people’s best interests at heart?
• Is the death penalty a just punishment?
• Are there moral concerns that make genetic cloning illegal?
• What Do you think that people do to stop human trafficking?

Argumentative Essay Topics About Politics

• Which political party has the right ideology?
• What Do you think that be done to reduce income inequality?
• Is paying down the US deficit the most essential issue of our time?
• Do you believe that the Federal Reserve needs to stop printing money because it creates an unsustainable bubble?
• Is capitalism the best economic system?
• Is socialism the best economic system?
• Is America ready for a female president?
• Do you think that an elected leader represents the interests of their own political party, or is it best to try to compromise?
• What modern political decision has created the most change?
• Do you believe that campaign finance reform works?

Argumentative Essay Topics About Society & Culture

• When will LGTBQ individuals experience equality?
• Is healthcare a fundamental human right?
• Do you think that TV censors explicit content because programmers must produce family-friendly programming?
• Social media brings us together and pulls us apart; Do you believe that the great outweighs the bad or vice versa?
• Is a gap year time for exploration and reflection or a year-long vacation?
• Many states have begun to decriminalize the possession of certain drugs like marijuana; is this a great idea?
• Equality is part of lawmaking, but do you believe that it works in practice?
• Do you think that people have the right to own a gun?
• In cases of terminal illness, Do you think that a patient should be able to request medically assisted suicide?
• Do you think that smoking should be illegal?
• What is the best way to foster positive conversation about controversial issues?

Argumentative Essay Topics About History

• Many people think that we learn from the past, but there are many patterns in history. Do you think history repeats itself?
• How did the US Civil War make the nation best or worse?
• Thomas Jefferson made considerable contributions to the founding of America, both as a writer and a politician. However, he didn’t live a perfect life. Was he a hero?
• Do you believe that our modern perspective changes the “truth” of what happened during major historical events?
• Pick a past decade and discuss if lower socio-economic classes had opportunities at that time.
• Did the handling of Native Americans leave a moral stain on the US?
• Slavery was a foundational part of the American colonies and, later, the United States. So how did this injustice change the nation?
• What factors led to the rise of Naziism in Germany and to the Holocaust?
• The plague destroyed the population of Europe and changed the course of history. So what was its biggest lesson?

Argumentative Essay Topics for Kids in Elementary School

• Do you think that there be commercials in kids’ programs?
• Do you believe that homework help kids learn?
• Do you think that school should be all year?
• Do schools treat girls and boys the same way?
• Do you think that parents limit screen time?
• Do you think that school start before eight o’clock in the morning?
• Do you think that kids be able to vote in national elections?
• Is it best to read fiction or nonfiction?
• Is it best for kids to have distance learning or be in school?
• Do parents treat all their kids the same way, or do they treat the oldest and youngest differently?
• Do you think that kids have the same teacher every year or switch teachers each year?
• Do you think that video games be a sport?
• Are schools doing enough to stop bullying?
• Do you think that kids have homework on weekends?
• Is it best if three generations of a family live together?
• Are hot dogs bad for you?
• Do you think that school lunch should include vegetables, even if Many kids don’t like them?
• Is it okay to eat dessert before dinner?

Argumentative Essay Topics for Middle School

• Do you think that middle schoolers have jobs like babysitting or mowing lawns?
• Are beauty pageants a great idea?
• Are violent video games bad?
• Do you think that parents be able to say whether kids can dye their hair?
• Do you believe that social media do more harm than good?
• Do middle schoolers have too much homework?
• Do you think that teachers get paid more?
• Is life more challenging for your parent’s generation or yours’?
• Why is your favorite musical artist best than anyone else?
• Do you think that kids read age-appropriate books, or is it okay to read grown-up books?
• Do you think that there be ratings (like G, PG, and R) for movies?
• Is it best to ride the bus or walk to school?
• Is school lunch great for kids?
• Do you believe an hour of reading or an hour of exercising is better?
• Do you think that gym class should be required?
• Do you think that kids get paid for getting excellent grades?
• Is it best to have class over the computer or in person?
• Is cyberbullying as big of a problem as in-person bullying?
• Do you think that all cars be electric?

Argumentative Essay Topics for High School

• Do you think that people be allowed to burn the flag?
• Do you think that parents get in trouble for truancy if kids don’t go to school?
• Is social media bad for relationships?
• Do you think that businesses be required to hire for diversity?
• Are women and men treated equally?
• Do you think that the minimum wage should be raised?
• Do you think that everyone should go to college?
• Is climate change a real threat?
• Are wind farms benefitting the environment and economy?
• Do you think that people be allowed to wear fur of any kind?
• Is it a bad idea to use your DNA for genealogy?
• Do you think that parents should decide they don’t want medical treatment for their kids?
• Is the United States falling behind other nations in terms of education?
• Do the actions of a nation’s leader influence the actions of the people?
• Do you think that the electoral college should be abolished?
• Do you think that schools be required to offer art courses?
• Do you think that all new cars be electric?
• Will AI help the world or hurt it?
• Do you think that high school pupils work during the school year?
• Are there forms of personal expression that you think should be allowed in schools?

Argumentative Essay Topics for College

• Are men and women equally emotional?
• Are printed books best than e-readers?
• Do you think that the drinking age should be lowered?
• Are parents responsible for childhood obesity?
• Do you think that college should free?
• Do you think that beauty standards be more inclusive?
• Are all college majors equally essential?
• Is social media bad for kids?
• Has technology changed our definition of magic?
• Is it worth exploring space?
• Do you think that all internships be paid?
• Do you think that income should be tied to the cost of a degree?
• Is climate change the biggest threat to the world?
• Is feminism still essential?
• Has society made the needed reparations for slavery?
• Do you believe that elections should be decided by the popular vote?
• Should everyone be entitled to free health care?
• Do anti-discrimination laws protect disabled pupils?
• Is a degree from an online college or university as legitimate as a degree from a brick-and-mortar university?
• Is it a conflict of interest for an instructor or professor to require pupils to purchase his book?

100+ Persuasive Essay Topics

2023 best online doctorate in educational technology.

Matthew Lynch

Related articles more from author.

Asset-Based Mindsets for English Language Learners

How to Implement Depth of Knowledge in Mathematics

50 Back to School Tips for Teachers

What is the Average Teaching Salary by State?

What Companies Are in the Energy Field?

Education crisis extends across the united states.

Calculate for all schools

Your chance of acceptance, your chancing factors, extracurriculars, rebuttal essay topic suggestions.

I've got this assignment to write a rebuttal essay but I'm stumped trying to think of a good topic. Have any of you written rebuttal essays before? Can you throw some topic suggestions my way?

Of course! I'm happy to help you brainstorm some rebuttal essay topics. Rebuttal essays typically involve taking a stance against a popular opinion or belief in order to present a strong counter-argument. Here are a few topic suggestions for you to consider:

1. Remote work isn't the future: Remote work has become increasingly popular, but you could argue that it's not the future of work for everyone because it neglects the benefits of in-person collaboration and social interactions among colleagues.

2. Standardized tests are still relevant in college admissions: Despite the recent trend of test-optional policies, you might argue that standardized tests still provide valuable information about a student's academic potential and act as a leveling method among different educational backgrounds.

3. The importance of cursive handwriting in the digital age: While technology continues to evolve, you could advocate for the essential role of cursive handwriting in fostering fine motor skills, creativity, and the ability to focus.

4. The value of traditional libraries: You could argue that despite the rise of digital resources and e-books, traditional libraries play an indispensable role in fostering a sense of community, providing access to physical resources, and supporting hands-on learning.

5. The pros of playing video games: Video games often receive negative attention, but you could highlight the positive aspects, such as cognitive benefits, problem-solving skills, and social engagement.

6. The benefits of single-sex education: While mixed-gender education is popular, you could argue for the advantages of single-sex schooling, such as increased focus, reduced gender stereotypes, and tailored teaching methods.

7. The role of print media in the digital world: You could argue that despite the prevalence of digital media, print media still has significant value in terms of providing in-depth information, fostering authentic engagement, and supporting local journalism.

Remember to pick a topic you're genuinely interested in and passionate about, as this will make the research and writing process more enjoyable. Good luck with your rebuttal essay!

About CollegeVine’s Expert FAQ

CollegeVine’s Q&A seeks to offer informed perspectives on commonly asked admissions questions. Every answer is refined and validated by our team of admissions experts to ensure it resonates with trusted knowledge in the field.

• How It Works
• Prices & Discounts

A Student's Guide: Crafting an Effective Rebuttal in Argumentative Essays

Table of contents

Picture this – you're in the middle of a heated debate with your classmate. You've spent minutes passionately laying out your argument, backing it up with well-researched facts and statistics, and you think you've got it in the bag. But then, your classmate fires back with a rebuttal that leaves you stumped, and you realize your argument wasn't as bulletproof as you thought.

This scenario could easily translate to the world of writing – specifically, to argumentative essays. Just as in a real-life debate, your arguments in an essay need to stand up to scrutiny, and that's where the concept of a rebuttal comes into play.

In this blog post, we will unpack the notion of a rebuttal in an argumentative essay, delve into its importance, and show you how to write one effectively. We will provide you with step-by-step guidance, illustrate with examples, and give you expert tips to enhance your essay writing skills. So, get ready to strengthen your arguments and make your essays more compelling than ever before!

Understanding the Concept of a Rebuttal

In the world of debates and argumentative essays, a rebuttal is your opportunity to counter an opposing argument. It's your chance to present evidence and reasoning that discredits the counter-argument, thereby strengthening your stance.

Let's simplify this with an example . Imagine you're writing an argumentative essay on why school uniforms should be mandatory. One common opposing argument could be that uniforms curb individuality. Your rebuttal to this could argue that uniforms do not stifle individuality but promote equality, and help reduce distractions, thus creating a better learning environment.

Understanding rebuttals and their structure is the first step towards integrating them into your argumentative essays effectively. This process will add depth to your argument and demonstrate your ability to consider different perspectives, making your essay robust and thought-provoking.

Let's get into the nitty-gritty of how to structure your rebuttals and make them as effective as possible in the following sections.

The Structural Anatomy of a Rebuttal: How It Fits into Your Argumentative Essay

The potency of an argumentative essay lies in its structure, and a rebuttal is an integral part of this structure. It ensures that your argument remains balanced and considers opposing viewpoints. So, how does a rebuttal fit into an argumentative essay? Where does it go?

In a traditional argumentative essay structure, the rebuttal generally follows your argument and precedes the conclusion. Here's a simple breakdown:

Introduction : The opening segment where you introduce the topic and your thesis statement.

Your Argument : The body of your essay where you present your arguments in support of your thesis.

Rebuttal or Counterargument : Here's where you present the opposing arguments and your rebuttals against them.

Conclusion : The final segment where you wrap up your argument, reaffirming your thesis statement.

Understanding the placement of the rebuttal within your essay will help you maintain a logical flow in your writing, ensuring that your readers can follow your arguments and counterarguments seamlessly. Let's delve deeper into the construction of a rebuttal in the next section.

Components of a Persuasive Rebuttal: Breaking It Down

A well-crafted rebuttal can significantly fortify your argumentative essay. However, the key to a persuasive rebuttal lies in its construction. Let's break down the components of an effective rebuttal:

Recognize the Opposing Argument : Begin by acknowledging the opposing point of view. This helps you establish credibility with your readers and shows them that you're not dismissing other perspectives.

Refute the Opposing Argument : Now, address why you believe the opposing viewpoint is incorrect or flawed. Use facts, logic, or reasoning to dismantle the counter-argument.

Support Your Rebuttal : Provide evidence, examples, or facts that support your rebuttal. This not only strengthens your argument but also adds credibility to your stance.

Transition to the Next Point : Finally, provide a smooth transition to the next part of your essay. This could be another argument in favor of your thesis or your conclusion, depending on the structure of your essay.

Each of these components is a crucial building block for a persuasive rebuttal. By structuring your rebuttal correctly, you can effectively refute opposing arguments and fortify your own stance. Let's move to some practical applications of these components in the next section.

Building Your Rebuttal: A Step-by-Step Guide

Writing a persuasive rebuttal may seem challenging, especially if you're new to argumentative essays. However, it's less daunting when broken down into smaller steps. Here's a practical step-by-step guide on how to construct your rebuttal:

Step 1: Identify the Counter-Arguments

The first step is to identify the potential counter-arguments that could be made against your thesis. This requires you to put yourself in your opposition's shoes and think critically about your own arguments.

Step 2: Choose the Strongest Counter-Argument

It's not practical or necessary to respond to every potential counter-argument. Instead, choose the most significant one(s) that, if left unaddressed, could undermine your argument.

Step 3: Research and Collect Evidence 

Once you've chosen a counter-argument to rebut, it's time to research. Find facts, statistics, or examples that clearly refute the counter-argument. Remember, the stronger your evidence, the more persuasive your rebuttal will be.

Step 4: Write the Rebuttal

Using the components we outlined earlier, write your rebuttal. Begin by acknowledging the opposing argument, refute it using your evidence, and then transition smoothly to your next point.

Step 5: Review and Refine

Finally, review your rebuttal. Check for logical consistency, clarity, and strength of evidence. Refine as necessary to ensure your rebuttal is as persuasive and robust as possible.

Remember, practice makes perfect. The more you practice writing rebuttals, the more comfortable you'll become at identifying strong counter-arguments and refuting them effectively. Let's illustrate these steps with a practical example in the next section.

Practical Example: Constructing a Rebuttal

In this section, we'll apply the steps discussed above to construct a rebuttal. We'll use a hypothetical argumentative essay topic: "Should schools switch to a four-day school week?"

Thesis Statement : You are arguing in favor of a four-day school week, citing reasons such as improved student mental health, reduced operational costs for schools, and enhanced quality of education due to extended hours.

Identify Counter-Arguments : The opposition could argue that a four-day school week might lead to childcare issues for working parents or that the extended hours each day could lead to student burnout.

Choose the Strongest Counter-Argument : The point about childcare issues for working parents is potentially a significant concern that needs addressing.

Research and Collect Evidence : Research reveals that many community organizations offer affordable after-school programs. Additionally, some schools adopting a four-day week have offered optional fifth-day enrichment programs.

Write the Rebuttal : "While it's valid to consider the childcare challenges a four-day school week could impose on working parents, many community organizations provide affordable after-school programs. Moreover, some schools that have already adopted the four-day week offer an optional fifth-day enrichment program, demonstrating that viable solutions exist."

Review and Refine: Re-read your rebuttal, refine for clarity and impact, and ensure it integrates smoothly into your argument.

This is a simplified example, but it serves to illustrate the process of crafting a rebuttal. Let's move on to look at two full-length examples to further demonstrate effective rebuttals.

Case Study: Effective vs. Ineffective Rebuttal

Now that we've covered the theoretical and practical aspects, let's delve into two case studies. These examples will compare an effective rebuttal versus an ineffective one, so you can better understand what separates a compelling argument from a weak one.

Example 1: "Homework is unnecessary."

Ineffective Rebuttal : "I don't agree with you. Homework is important because it's part of the curriculum and it helps students study."

Effective Rebuttal : "Your concern about the overuse of homework is valid, considering the amount of stress students face today. However, research shows that homework, when thoughtfully assigned and not overused, can reinforce classroom learning, provide students with valuable time management skills, and help teachers evaluate student understanding."

The effective rebuttal acknowledges the opposing argument, uses evidence-backed reasoning, and strengthens the argument by showing the value of homework in the larger context of learning.

Example 2: "Standardized testing doesn't accurately measure student intelligence."

Ineffective Rebuttal : "I think you're wrong. Standardized tests have been around for a long time, and they wouldn't use them if they didn't work."

Effective Rebuttal : "Indeed, the limitations of standardized testing, such as potential cultural bias or the inability to measure creativity, are recognized issues. However, these tests are a tool—albeit an imperfect one—for comparing student achievement across regions and identifying areas where curriculum and teaching methods might need improvement. More comprehensive methods, blending standardized testing with other assessment forms, are promising approaches for future development."

The effective rebuttal in this instance acknowledges the flaws in standardized testing but highlights its role as a tool for larger educational system assessments and improvements.

Remember, an effective rebuttal is respectful, acknowledges the opposing viewpoint, provides strong counter-arguments, and integrates evidence. With practice, you will get better at crafting compelling rebuttals. In the next section, we will discuss some additional strategies to improve your rebuttal skills.

Final Thoughts

The art of constructing a compelling rebuttal is a crucial skill in argumentative essay writing. It's not just about presenting your own views but also about understanding, acknowledging, and effectively countering the opposing viewpoint. This makes your argument more robust and balanced, increasing its persuasive power.

However, developing this skill requires patience, practice, and a thoughtful approach. The techniques we've discussed in this guide can serve as a starting point, but remember that every argument is unique, and flexibility is key.

Always be ready to adapt and refine your rebuttal strategy based on the particular argument and evidence you're dealing with. And don't shy away from seeking feedback and learning from others - this is how we grow as writers and thinkers.

But remember, you're not alone on this journey. If you're ever struggling with writing your argumentative essay or crafting that perfect rebuttal, we're here to help. Our experienced writers at Writers Per Hour are well-versed in the nuances of argumentative writing and can assist you in achieving your academic goals.

So don't stress - embrace the challenge of argumentative writing, keep refining your skills, and remember that help is just a click away! In the next section, you'll find additional resources to continue learning and growing in your argumentative writing journey.

Additional Resources

As you continue to learn and develop your argumentative writing skills, having access to additional resources can be immensely beneficial. Here are some that you might find helpful:

Posts from Writers Per Hour Blog :

• How Significant Are Opposing Points of View in an Argument
• Writing a Hook for an Argumentative Essay
• Strong Argumentative Essay Topic Ideas
• Writing an Introduction for Your Argumentative Essay

External Resources :

• University of California Berkeley Student Learning Center: Writing Argumentative Essays
• Stanford Online Writing Center: Techniques of Persuasive Argument

Remember, mastery in argumentative writing doesn't happen overnight – it's a journey that requires patience, practice, and persistence. But with the right guidance and resources, you're already on the right path. And, of course, if you ever need assistance, our argumentative essay writing service  services are always ready to help you reach your academic goals. Happy writing!

Share this article

Achieve Academic Success with Expert Assistance!

Crafted from Scratch for You.

Ensuring Your Work’s Originality.

Transform Your Draft into Excellence.

Perfecting Your Paper’s Grammar, Style, and Format (APA, MLA, etc.).

Calculate the cost of your paper

Get ideas for your essay

English Current

ESL Lesson Plans, Tests, & Ideas

• North American Idioms
• Business Idioms
• Idioms Quiz
• Idiom Requests
• Proverbs Quiz & List
• Phrasal Verbs Quiz
• Basic Phrasal Verbs
• North American Idioms App
• A(n)/The: Help Understanding Articles
• The First & Second Conditional
• The Difference between 'So' & 'Too'
• The Difference between 'a few/few/a little/little'
• The Difference between "Other" & "Another"
• Check Your Level
• English Vocabulary
• Verb Tenses (Intermediate)
• Articles (A, An, The) Exercises
• Prepositions Exercises
• Irregular Verb Exercises
• Gerunds & Infinitives Exercises
• Discussion Questions
• Speech Topics
• Argumentative Essay Topics
• Top-rated Lessons
• Intermediate
• Upper-Intermediate
• Reading Lessons
• View Topic List
• Expressions for Everyday Situations
• Travel Agency Activity
• Present Progressive with Mr. Bean
• Work-related Idioms
• Adjectives to Describe Employees
• Writing for Tone, Tact, and Diplomacy
• Speaking Tactfully
• Advice on Monetizing an ESL Website
• Teaching your First Conversation Class
• How to Teach English Conversation
• Teaching Different Levels
• Teaching Grammar in Conversation Class
• Members' Home
• Update Billing Info.
• Cancel Subscription
• North American Proverbs Quiz & List
• North American Idioms Quiz
• Idioms App (Android)
• 'Be used to'" / 'Use to' / 'Get used to'
• Ergative Verbs and the Passive Voice
• Keywords & Verb Tense Exercises
• Irregular Verb List & Exercises
• Non-Progressive (State) Verbs
• Present Perfect vs. Past Simple
• Present Simple vs. Present Progressive
• Past Perfect vs. Past Simple
• Subject Verb Agreement
• The Passive Voice
• Subject & Object Relative Pronouns
• Relative Pronouns Where/When/Whose
• Commas in Adjective Clauses
• A/An and Word Sounds
• 'The' with Names of Places
• Understanding English Articles
• Article Exercises (All Levels)
• Yes/No Questions
• Wh-Questions
• How far vs. How long
• Affect vs. Effect
• A few vs. few / a little vs. little
• Boring vs. Bored
• Compliment vs. Complement
• Die vs. Dead vs. Death
• Expect vs. Suspect
• Experiences vs. Experience
• Go home vs. Go to home
• Had better vs. have to/must
• Have to vs. Have got to
• I.e. vs. E.g.
• In accordance with vs. According to
• Lay vs. Lie
• Make vs. Do
• In the meantime vs. Meanwhile
• Need vs. Require
• Notice vs. Note
• 'Other' vs 'Another'
• Pain vs. Painful vs. In Pain
• Raise vs. Rise
• So vs. Such
• So vs. So that
• Some vs. Some of / Most vs. Most of
• Sometimes vs. Sometime
• Too vs. Either vs. Neither
• Weary vs. Wary
• Who vs. Whom
• While vs. During
• While vs. When
• Wish vs. Hope
• 10 Common Writing Mistakes
• 34 Common English Mistakes
• First & Second Conditionals
• Comparative & Superlative Adjectives
• Determiners: This/That/These/Those
• Check Your English Level
• Grammar Quiz (Advanced)
• Vocabulary Test - Multiple Questions
• Vocabulary Quiz - Choose the Word
• Verb Tense Review (Intermediate)
• Verb Tense Exercises (All Levels)
• Conjunction Exercises
• List of Topics
• Business English
• Games for the ESL Classroom
• Pronunciation
• Teaching Your First Conversation Class
• How to Teach English Conversation Class

Argumentative Essays: The Counter-Argument & Refutation

An argumentative essay presents an argument for or against a topic. For example, if your topic is working from home , then your essay would either argue in favor of working from home (this is the for  side) or against working from home.

Like most essays, an argumentative essay begins with an introduction that ends with the writer's position (or stance) in the thesis statement .

Introduction Paragraph

(Background information....)

• Thesis statement : Employers should give their workers the option to work from home in order to improve employee well-being and reduce office costs.

This thesis statement shows that the two points I plan to explain in my body paragraphs are 1) working from home improves well-being, and 2) it allows companies to reduce costs. Each topic will have its own paragraph. Here's an example of a very basic essay outline with these ideas:

• Background information

Body Paragraph 1

• Topic Sentence : Workers who work from home have improved well-being .
• Evidence from academic sources

Body Paragraph 2

• Topic Sentence : Furthermore, companies can reduce their expenses by allowing employees to work at home .
• Summary of key points
• Restatement of thesis statement

Does this look like a strong essay? Not really . There are no academic sources (research) used, and also...

You Need to Also Respond to the Counter-Arguments!

The above essay outline is very basic. The argument it presents can be made much stronger if you consider the counter-argument , and then try to respond (refute) its points.

The counter-argument presents the main points on the other side of the debate. Because we are arguing FOR working from home, this means the counter-argument is AGAINST working from home. The best way to find the counter-argument is by reading research on the topic to learn about the other side of the debate. The counter-argument for this topic might include these points:

• Distractions at home > could make it hard to concentrate
• Dishonest/lazy people > might work less because no one is watching

Next, we have to try to respond to the counter-argument in the refutation (or rebuttal/response) paragraph .

The Refutation/Response Paragraph

The purpose of this paragraph is to address the points of the counter-argument and to explain why they are false, somewhat false, or unimportant. So how can we respond to the above counter-argument? With research !

A study by Bloom (2013) followed workers at a call center in China who tried working from home for nine months. Its key results were as follows:

• The performance of people who worked from home increased by 13%
• These workers took fewer breaks and sick-days
• They also worked more minutes per shift

In other words, this study shows that the counter-argument might be false. (Note: To have an even stronger essay, present data from more than one study.) Now we have a refutation.

Where Do We Put the Counter-Argument and Refutation?

Commonly, these sections can go at the beginning of the essay (after the introduction), or at the end of the essay (before the conclusion). Let's put it at the beginning. Now our essay looks like this:

Counter-argument Paragraph

• Dishonest/lazy people might work less because no one is watching

Refutation/Response Paragraph

• Study: Productivity  increased by 14%
• (+ other details)

Body Paragraph 3

• Topic Sentence : In addition, people who work from home have improved well-being .

Body Paragraph 4

The outline is stronger now because it includes the counter-argument and refutation. Note that the essay still needs more details and research to become more convincing.

Working from home may increase productivity.

Extra Advice on Argumentative Essays

It's not a compare and contrast essay.

An argumentative essay focuses on one topic (e.g. cats) and argues for or against it. An argumentative essay should not have two topics (e.g. cats vs dogs). When you compare two ideas, you are writing a compare and contrast essay. An argumentative essay has one topic (cats). If you are FOR cats as pets, a simplistic outline for an argumentative essay could look something like this:

• Thesis: Cats are the best pet.
• are unloving
• cause allergy issues
• This is a benefit >  Many working people do not have time for a needy pet
• If you have an allergy, do not buy a cat.
• But for most people (without allergies), cats are great
• Supporting Details

Use Language in Counter-Argument That Shows Its Not Your Position

The counter-argument is not your position. To make this clear, use language such as this in your counter-argument:

• Opponents might argue that cats are unloving.
• People who dislike cats would argue that cats are unloving.
• Critics of cats could argue that cats are unloving.
• It could be argued that cats are unloving.

These  underlined phrases make it clear that you are presenting  someone else's argument , not your own.

Choose the Side with the Strongest Support

Do not choose your side based on your own personal opinion. Instead, do some research and learn the truth about the topic. After you have read the arguments for and against, choose the side with the strongest support as your position.

Do Not Include Too Many Counter-arguments

Include the main (two or three) points in the counter-argument. If you include too many points, refuting these points becomes quite difficult.

If you have any questions, leave a comment below.

- Matthew Barton / Creator of Englishcurrent.com

Additional Resources :

• Writing a Counter-Argument & Refutation (Richland College)
• Language for Counter-Argument and Refutation Paragraphs (Brown's Student Learning Tools)

EnglishCurrent is happily hosted on Dreamhost . If you found this page helpful, consider a donation to our hosting bill to show your support!

23 comments on “ Argumentative Essays: The Counter-Argument & Refutation ”

Thank you professor. It is really helpful.

Can you also put the counter argument in the third paragraph

It depends on what your instructor wants. Generally, a good argumentative essay needs to have a counter-argument and refutation somewhere. Most teachers will probably let you put them anywhere (e.g. in the start, middle, or end) and be happy as long as they are present. But ask your teacher to be sure.

Thank you for the information Professor

how could I address a counter argument for “plastic bags and its consumption should be banned”?

For what reasons do they say they should be banned? You need to address the reasons themselves and show that these reasons are invalid/weak.

Thank you for this useful article. I understand very well.

Thank you for the useful article, this helps me a lot!

Thank you for this useful article which helps me in my study.

Thank you, professor Mylene 102-04

it was very useful for writing essay

Very useful reference body support to began writing a good essay. Thank you!

Really very helpful. Thanks Regards Mayank

Thank you, professor, it is very helpful to write an essay.

It is really helpful thank you

It was a very helpful set of learning materials. I will follow it and use it in my essay writing. Thank you, professor. Regards Isha

Thanks Professor

This was really helpful as it lays the difference between argumentative essay and compare and contrast essay.. Thanks for the clarification.

This is such a helpful guide in composing an argumentative essay. Thank you, professor.

This was really helpful proof, thankyou!

Thanks this was really helpful to me

This was very helpful for us to generate a good form of essay

thank you so much for this useful information.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

How to Write a Rebuttal Essay — An Easy Guide to Follow

Ever wondered how to write a rebuttal essay? Face this academic assignment for the first time and can’t find an understandable guide to follow? Don’t worry because here you’ll find a detailed guideline allowing you to set the record straight and understand what tips to follow while writing. We’ll take a look at all the aspects of writing, check what rebuttal in an essay is and list all tips to follow.

What Is a Rebuttal in an Essay — Simple Explanation

Academicians also call this form of writing a counter-argument essay. Its principal mission is to respond to some points made by a person. If you render a decision to answer one or another argument, you should present a rebuttal which is also known as a counter-argument. Otherwise stated, it is a simple attempt to disprove some statements by suggesting a counter-argument.

At a glance, this task seems to be quite challenging. However, rebuttal argument essay writing doesn’t take a massive amount of time. You just need to air your personal opinion on one or another situation.

Related essays:

• Economic recession essay
• Hamlet & formal structure
• The counter revolution and the 1960s essay
• Viacom Strategic Analysis essay

Nevertheless, your viewpoint should be based on your research and comprise a strong thesis statement. An excellent essay can even change the opinion of the intended audience. Thus, you need to be very attentive while writing and use only strong and double-checked arguments.

How to Do a Rebuttal in an Essay — Useful Tutorial

Firstly, you should conduct simple research before you start expressing your ideas. Don’t tend to procrastinate this task because it is tough to organize your thoughts when your deadline is dangerously close. If you don’t have a desire to spend the whole night poring over the books, it is better to start processing the literature as soon as possible. It would be great if you subdivide this task into a few sections. As a result, it will be easier to work!

The majority of academicians have not the slightest idea how to answer the question of how to start a rebuttal in an essay. In sober fact, you need to start with a strong introduction, comprising a thesis statement. Besides, your introductory part should explain what particular situation you are going to discuss. Your core audience should look it through and immediately understand what position you desire to explore.

You should create a list of claims and build your essay structure in the way allowing you to explain each claim one by one. Writing a rebuttal essay, you should follow a pre-written outline. As a result, you won’t face difficulties with the structure.

For instance, there is a particular situation, and you don’t agree with it. You wish to prove the targeted audience that your idea is correct. In this scenario, you need to state your opinion in a thesis statement and list all counter-arguments one by one.

Each rebuttal paragraph should be short and complete. Besides, you should avoid making too general statements because your targeted audience won’t understand what you mean. If you wish to air your proof-point, you should try to make more precise arguments. As a result, your readers won’t face difficulties trying to understand what you mean.

Rebuttal Essay Outline — Why Should You Create It

As well as any other academic paper, this one also should have a plan to follow. Your rebuttal essay outline is a sterling opportunity to organize your thoughts and create an approximate plan to follow. Commonly, your outline should look like this:

• Short but informative introduction with a thesis statement (just a few sentences).
• 3 or 5 body paragraphs presenting all counter-arguments.
• Strong conclusion where you should repeat your opinion once again.

For you not to forget some ideas, we highly recommend writing a list of all claims you wish to discuss in all paragraphs. Even if you are a seasoned writer who is engaged in this area and deals with creative assignments on a rolling basis, you won’t regret it. You’ll spend a few minutes creating the outline, but the general content of your essay will be considerably better.

Top-7 Rebuttal Essay Topics for Students

If you really can’t render a correct decision and pick a worthy topic, look through the rebuttal essay ideas published below. You can’t go wrong if you choose one of the below-listed ideas:

• Is it necessary to sentence juveniles to life imprisonment?
• Why are electro cars better for the environment?
• Distance learning is more effective than the traditional approach to education.
• Why should animal testing be forbidden?
• Modern drones can help police solve the crimes faster.
• Why should smoking marijuana be prohibited?
• Why should the screentime of kids be limited?

We hope our tips will help you catch the inspiration and create a compelling essay which will make your audience think of the discussed problem and even change their minds.

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Organizing Your Argument

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

How can I effectively present my argument?

In order for your argument to be persuasive, it must use an organizational structure that the audience perceives as both logical and easy to parse. Three argumentative methods —the  Toulmin Method , Classical Method , and Rogerian Method — give guidance for how to organize the points in an argument.

Note that these are only three of the most popular models for organizing an argument. Alternatives exist. Be sure to consult your instructor and/or defer to your assignment’s directions if you’re unsure which to use (if any).

Toulmin Method

The  Toulmin Method  is a formula that allows writers to build a sturdy logical foundation for their arguments. First proposed by author Stephen Toulmin in  The Uses of Argument (1958), the Toulmin Method emphasizes building a thorough support structure for each of an argument's key claims.

The basic format for the Toulmin Method  is as follows:

Claim:  In this section, you explain your overall thesis on the subject. In other words, you make your main argument.

Data (Grounds):  You should use evidence to support the claim. In other words, provide the reader with facts that prove your argument is strong.

Warrant (Bridge):  In this section, you explain why or how your data supports the claim. As a result, the underlying assumption that you build your argument on is grounded in reason.

Backing (Foundation):  Here, you provide any additional logic or reasoning that may be necessary to support the warrant.

Counterclaim:  You should anticipate a counterclaim that negates the main points in your argument. Don't avoid arguments that oppose your own. Instead, become familiar with the opposing perspective.   If you respond to counterclaims, you appear unbiased (and, therefore, you earn the respect of your readers). You may even want to include several counterclaims to show that you have thoroughly researched the topic.

Rebuttal:  In this section, you incorporate your own evidence that disagrees with the counterclaim. It is essential to include a thorough warrant or bridge to strengthen your essay’s argument. If you present data to your audience without explaining how it supports your thesis, your readers may not make a connection between the two, or they may draw different conclusions.

Example of the Toulmin Method:

Claim:  Hybrid cars are an effective strategy to fight pollution.

Data1:  Driving a private car is a typical citizen's most air-polluting activity.

Warrant 1:  Due to the fact that cars are the largest source of private (as opposed to industrial) air pollution, switching to hybrid cars should have an impact on fighting pollution.

Data 2:  Each vehicle produced is going to stay on the road for roughly 12 to 15 years.

Warrant 2:  Cars generally have a long lifespan, meaning that the decision to switch to a hybrid car will make a long-term impact on pollution levels.

Data 3:  Hybrid cars combine a gasoline engine with a battery-powered electric motor.

Warrant 3:  The combination of these technologies produces less pollution.

Counterclaim:  Instead of focusing on cars, which still encourages an inefficient culture of driving even as it cuts down on pollution, the nation should focus on building and encouraging the use of mass transit systems.

Rebuttal:  While mass transit is an idea that should be encouraged, it is not feasible in many rural and suburban areas, or for people who must commute to work. Thus, hybrid cars are a better solution for much of the nation's population.

Rogerian Method

The Rogerian Method  (named for, but not developed by, influential American psychotherapist Carl R. Rogers) is a popular method for controversial issues. This strategy seeks to find a common ground between parties by making the audience understand perspectives that stretch beyond (or even run counter to) the writer’s position. Moreso than other methods, it places an emphasis on reiterating an opponent's argument to his or her satisfaction. The persuasive power of the Rogerian Method lies in its ability to define the terms of the argument in such a way that:

• your position seems like a reasonable compromise.
• you seem compassionate and empathetic.

The basic format of the Rogerian Method  is as follows:

Introduction:  Introduce the issue to the audience, striving to remain as objective as possible.

Opposing View : Explain the other side’s position in an unbiased way. When you discuss the counterargument without judgement, the opposing side can see how you do not directly dismiss perspectives which conflict with your stance.

Statement of Validity (Understanding):  This section discusses how you acknowledge how the other side’s points can be valid under certain circumstances. You identify how and why their perspective makes sense in a specific context, but still present your own argument.

Statement of Your Position:  By this point, you have demonstrated that you understand the other side’s viewpoint. In this section, you explain your own stance.

Statement of Contexts : Explore scenarios in which your position has merit. When you explain how your argument is most appropriate for certain contexts, the reader can recognize that you acknowledge the multiple ways to view the complex issue.

Statement of Benefits:  You should conclude by explaining to the opposing side why they would benefit from accepting your position. By explaining the advantages of your argument, you close on a positive note without completely dismissing the other side’s perspective.

Example of the Rogerian Method:

Introduction:  The issue of whether children should wear school uniforms is subject to some debate.

Opposing View:  Some parents think that requiring children to wear uniforms is best.

Statement of Validity (Understanding):  Those parents who support uniforms argue that, when all students wear the same uniform, the students can develop a unified sense of school pride and inclusiveness.

Statement of Your Position : Students should not be required to wear school uniforms. Mandatory uniforms would forbid choices that allow students to be creative and express themselves through clothing.

Statement of Contexts:  However, even if uniforms might hypothetically promote inclusivity, in most real-life contexts, administrators can use uniform policies to enforce conformity. Students should have the option to explore their identity through clothing without the fear of being ostracized.

Statement of Benefits:  Though both sides seek to promote students' best interests, students should not be required to wear school uniforms. By giving students freedom over their choice, students can explore their self-identity by choosing how to present themselves to their peers.

Classical Method

The Classical Method of structuring an argument is another common way to organize your points. Originally devised by the Greek philosopher Aristotle (and then later developed by Roman thinkers like Cicero and Quintilian), classical arguments tend to focus on issues of definition and the careful application of evidence. Thus, the underlying assumption of classical argumentation is that, when all parties understand the issue perfectly, the correct course of action will be clear.

The basic format of the Classical Method  is as follows:

Introduction (Exordium): Introduce the issue and explain its significance. You should also establish your credibility and the topic’s legitimacy.

Statement of Background (Narratio): Present vital contextual or historical information to the audience to further their understanding of the issue. By doing so, you provide the reader with a working knowledge about the topic independent of your own stance.

Proposition (Propositio): After you provide the reader with contextual knowledge, you are ready to state your claims which relate to the information you have provided previously. This section outlines your major points for the reader.

Proof (Confirmatio): You should explain your reasons and evidence to the reader. Be sure to thoroughly justify your reasons. In this section, if necessary, you can provide supplementary evidence and subpoints.

Refutation (Refuatio): In this section, you address anticipated counterarguments that disagree with your thesis. Though you acknowledge the other side’s perspective, it is important to prove why your stance is more logical.  

Conclusion (Peroratio): You should summarize your main points. The conclusion also caters to the reader’s emotions and values. The use of pathos here makes the reader more inclined to consider your argument.  

Example of the Classical Method:  

Introduction (Exordium): Millions of workers are paid a set hourly wage nationwide. The federal minimum wage is standardized to protect workers from being paid too little. Research points to many viewpoints on how much to pay these workers. Some families cannot afford to support their households on the current wages provided for performing a minimum wage job .

Statement of Background (Narratio): Currently, millions of American workers struggle to make ends meet on a minimum wage. This puts a strain on workers’ personal and professional lives. Some work multiple jobs to provide for their families.

Proposition (Propositio): The current federal minimum wage should be increased to better accommodate millions of overworked Americans. By raising the minimum wage, workers can spend more time cultivating their livelihoods.

Proof (Confirmatio): According to the United States Department of Labor, 80.4 million Americans work for an hourly wage, but nearly 1.3 million receive wages less than the federal minimum. The pay raise will alleviate the stress of these workers. Their lives would benefit from this raise because it affects multiple areas of their lives.

Refutation (Refuatio): There is some evidence that raising the federal wage might increase the cost of living. However, other evidence contradicts this or suggests that the increase would not be great. Additionally,   worries about a cost of living increase must be balanced with the benefits of providing necessary funds to millions of hardworking Americans.

Conclusion (Peroratio): If the federal minimum wage was raised, many workers could alleviate some of their financial burdens. As a result, their emotional wellbeing would improve overall. Though some argue that the cost of living could increase, the benefits outweigh the potential drawbacks.

Choose Your Test

Sat / act prep online guides and tips, 3 strong argumentative essay examples, analyzed.

General Education

Need to defend your opinion on an issue? Argumentative essays are one of the most popular types of essays you’ll write in school. They combine persuasive arguments with fact-based research, and, when done well, can be powerful tools for making someone agree with your point of view. If you’re struggling to write an argumentative essay or just want to learn more about them, seeing examples can be a big help.

After giving an overview of this type of essay, we provide three argumentative essay examples. After each essay, we explain in-depth how the essay was structured, what worked, and where the essay could be improved. We end with tips for making your own argumentative essay as strong as possible.

What Is an Argumentative Essay?

An argumentative essay is an essay that uses evidence and facts to support the claim it’s making. Its purpose is to persuade the reader to agree with the argument being made.

A good argumentative essay will use facts and evidence to support the argument, rather than just the author’s thoughts and opinions. For example, say you wanted to write an argumentative essay stating that Charleston, SC is a great destination for families. You couldn’t just say that it’s a great place because you took your family there and enjoyed it. For it to be an argumentative essay, you need to have facts and data to support your argument, such as the number of child-friendly attractions in Charleston, special deals you can get with kids, and surveys of people who visited Charleston as a family and enjoyed it. The first argument is based entirely on feelings, whereas the second is based on evidence that can be proven.

The standard five paragraph format is common, but not required, for argumentative essays. These essays typically follow one of two formats: the Toulmin model or the Rogerian model.

• The Toulmin model is the most common. It begins with an introduction, follows with a thesis/claim, and gives data and evidence to support that claim. This style of essay also includes rebuttals of counterarguments.
• The Rogerian model analyzes two sides of an argument and reaches a conclusion after weighing the strengths and weaknesses of each.

3 Good Argumentative Essay Examples + Analysis

Below are three examples of argumentative essays, written by yours truly in my school days, as well as analysis of what each did well and where it could be improved.

Argumentative Essay Example 1

Proponents of this idea state that it will save local cities and towns money because libraries are expensive to maintain. They also believe it will encourage more people to read because they won’t have to travel to a library to get a book; they can simply click on what they want to read and read it from wherever they are. They could also access more materials because libraries won’t have to buy physical copies of books; they can simply rent out as many digital copies as they need.

However, it would be a serious mistake to replace libraries with tablets. First, digital books and resources are associated with less learning and more problems than print resources. A study done on tablet vs book reading found that people read 20-30% slower on tablets, retain 20% less information, and understand 10% less of what they read compared to people who read the same information in print. Additionally, staring too long at a screen has been shown to cause numerous health problems, including blurred vision, dizziness, dry eyes, headaches, and eye strain, at much higher instances than reading print does. People who use tablets and mobile devices excessively also have a higher incidence of more serious health issues such as fibromyalgia, shoulder and back pain, carpal tunnel syndrome, and muscle strain. I know that whenever I read from my e-reader for too long, my eyes begin to feel tired and my neck hurts. We should not add to these problems by giving people, especially young people, more reasons to look at screens.

Second, it is incredibly narrow-minded to assume that the only service libraries offer is book lending. Libraries have a multitude of benefits, and many are only available if the library has a physical location. Some of these benefits include acting as a quiet study space, giving people a way to converse with their neighbors, holding classes on a variety of topics, providing jobs, answering patron questions, and keeping the community connected. One neighborhood found that, after a local library instituted community events such as play times for toddlers and parents, job fairs for teenagers, and meeting spaces for senior citizens, over a third of residents reported feeling more connected to their community. Similarly, a Pew survey conducted in 2015 found that nearly two-thirds of American adults feel that closing their local library would have a major impact on their community. People see libraries as a way to connect with others and get their questions answered, benefits tablets can’t offer nearly as well or as easily.

While replacing libraries with tablets may seem like a simple solution, it would encourage people to spend even more time looking at digital screens, despite the myriad issues surrounding them. It would also end access to many of the benefits of libraries that people have come to rely on. In many areas, libraries are such an important part of the community network that they could never be replaced by a simple object.

The author begins by giving an overview of the counter-argument, then the thesis appears as the first sentence in the third paragraph. The essay then spends the rest of the paper dismantling the counter argument and showing why readers should believe the other side.

What this essay does well:

• Although it’s a bit unusual to have the thesis appear fairly far into the essay, it works because, once the thesis is stated, the rest of the essay focuses on supporting it since the counter-argument has already been discussed earlier in the paper.
• This essay includes numerous facts and cites studies to support its case. By having specific data to rely on, the author’s argument is stronger and readers will be more inclined to agree with it.
• For every argument the other side makes, the author makes sure to refute it and follow up with why her opinion is the stronger one. In order to make a strong argument, it’s important to dismantle the other side, which this essay does this by making the author's view appear stronger.
• This is a shorter paper, and if it needed to be expanded to meet length requirements, it could include more examples and go more into depth with them, such as by explaining specific cases where people benefited from local libraries.
• Additionally, while the paper uses lots of data, the author also mentions their own experience with using tablets. This should be removed since argumentative essays focus on facts and data to support an argument, not the author’s own opinion or experiences. Replacing that with more data on health issues associated with screen time would strengthen the essay.
• Some of the points made aren't completely accurate , particularly the one about digital books being cheaper. It actually often costs a library more money to rent out numerous digital copies of a book compared to buying a single physical copy. Make sure in your own essay you thoroughly research each of the points and rebuttals you make, otherwise you'll look like you don't know the issue that well.

Argumentative Essay Example 2

There are multiple drugs available to treat malaria, and many of them work well and save lives, but malaria eradication programs that focus too much on them and not enough on prevention haven’t seen long-term success in Sub-Saharan Africa. A major program to combat malaria was WHO’s Global Malaria Eradication Programme. Started in 1955, it had a goal of eliminating malaria in Africa within the next ten years. Based upon previously successful programs in Brazil and the United States, the program focused mainly on vector control. This included widely distributing chloroquine and spraying large amounts of DDT. More than one billion dollars was spent trying to abolish malaria. However, the program suffered from many problems and in 1969, WHO was forced to admit that the program had not succeeded in eradicating malaria. The number of people in Sub-Saharan Africa who contracted malaria as well as the number of malaria deaths had actually increased over 10% during the time the program was active.

One of the major reasons for the failure of the project was that it set uniform strategies and policies. By failing to consider variations between governments, geography, and infrastructure, the program was not nearly as successful as it could have been. Sub-Saharan Africa has neither the money nor the infrastructure to support such an elaborate program, and it couldn’t be run the way it was meant to. Most African countries don't have the resources to send all their people to doctors and get shots, nor can they afford to clear wetlands or other malaria prone areas. The continent’s spending per person for eradicating malaria was just a quarter of what Brazil spent. Sub-Saharan Africa simply can’t rely on a plan that requires more money, infrastructure, and expertise than they have to spare.

Additionally, the widespread use of chloroquine has created drug resistant parasites which are now plaguing Sub-Saharan Africa. Because chloroquine was used widely but inconsistently, mosquitoes developed resistance, and chloroquine is now nearly completely ineffective in Sub-Saharan Africa, with over 95% of mosquitoes resistant to it. As a result, newer, more expensive drugs need to be used to prevent and treat malaria, which further drives up the cost of malaria treatment for a region that can ill afford it.

Instead of developing plans to treat malaria after the infection has incurred, programs should focus on preventing infection from occurring in the first place. Not only is this plan cheaper and more effective, reducing the number of people who contract malaria also reduces loss of work/school days which can further bring down the productivity of the region.

One of the cheapest and most effective ways of preventing malaria is to implement insecticide-treated bed nets (ITNs).  These nets provide a protective barrier around the person or people using them. While untreated bed nets are still helpful, those treated with insecticides are much more useful because they stop mosquitoes from biting people through the nets, and they help reduce mosquito populations in a community, thus helping people who don’t even own bed nets.  Bed nets are also very effective because most mosquito bites occur while the person is sleeping, so bed nets would be able to drastically reduce the number of transmissions during the night. In fact, transmission of malaria can be reduced by as much as 90% in areas where the use of ITNs is widespread. Because money is so scarce in Sub-Saharan Africa, the low cost is a great benefit and a major reason why the program is so successful. Bed nets cost roughly 2 USD to make, last several years, and can protect two adults. Studies have shown that, for every 100-1000 more nets are being used, one less child dies of malaria. With an estimated 300 million people in Africa not being protected by mosquito nets, there’s the potential to save three million lives by spending just a few dollars per person.

Reducing the number of people who contract malaria would also reduce poverty levels in Africa significantly, thus improving other aspects of society like education levels and the economy. Vector control is more effective than treatment strategies because it means fewer people are getting sick. When fewer people get sick, the working population is stronger as a whole because people are not put out of work from malaria, nor are they caring for sick relatives. Malaria-afflicted families can typically only harvest 40% of the crops that healthy families can harvest. Additionally, a family with members who have malaria spends roughly a quarter of its income treatment, not including the loss of work they also must deal with due to the illness. It’s estimated that malaria costs Africa 12 billion USD in lost income every year. A strong working population creates a stronger economy, which Sub-Saharan Africa is in desperate need of.  

This essay begins with an introduction, which ends with the thesis (that malaria eradication plans in Sub-Saharan Africa should focus on prevention rather than treatment). The first part of the essay lays out why the counter argument (treatment rather than prevention) is not as effective, and the second part of the essay focuses on why prevention of malaria is the better path to take.

• The thesis appears early, is stated clearly, and is supported throughout the rest of the essay. This makes the argument clear for readers to understand and follow throughout the essay.
• There’s lots of solid research in this essay, including specific programs that were conducted and how successful they were, as well as specific data mentioned throughout. This evidence helps strengthen the author’s argument.
• The author makes a case for using expanding bed net use over waiting until malaria occurs and beginning treatment, but not much of a plan is given for how the bed nets would be distributed or how to ensure they’re being used properly. By going more into detail of what she believes should be done, the author would be making a stronger argument.
• The introduction of the essay does a good job of laying out the seriousness of the problem, but the conclusion is short and abrupt. Expanding it into its own paragraph would give the author a final way to convince readers of her side of the argument.

Argumentative Essay Example 3

There are many ways payments could work. They could be in the form of a free-market approach, where athletes are able to earn whatever the market is willing to pay them, it could be a set amount of money per athlete, or student athletes could earn income from endorsements, autographs, and control of their likeness, similar to the way top Olympians earn money.

Proponents of the idea believe that, because college athletes are the ones who are training, participating in games, and bringing in audiences, they should receive some sort of compensation for their work. If there were no college athletes, the NCAA wouldn’t exist, college coaches wouldn’t receive there (sometimes very high) salaries, and brands like Nike couldn’t profit from college sports. In fact, the NCAA brings in roughly $1 billion in revenue a year, but college athletes don’t receive any of that money in the form of a paycheck. Additionally, people who believe college athletes should be paid state that paying college athletes will actually encourage them to remain in college longer and not turn pro as quickly, either by giving them a way to begin earning money in college or requiring them to sign a contract stating they’ll stay at the university for a certain number of years while making an agreed-upon salary.  

Supporters of this idea point to Zion Williamson, the Duke basketball superstar, who, during his freshman year, sustained a serious knee injury. Many argued that, even if he enjoyed playing for Duke, it wasn’t worth risking another injury and ending his professional career before it even began for a program that wasn’t paying him. Williamson seems to have agreed with them and declared his eligibility for the NCAA draft later that year. If he was being paid, he may have stayed at Duke longer. In fact, roughly a third of student athletes surveyed stated that receiving a salary while in college would make them “strongly consider” remaining collegiate athletes longer before turning pro.

Paying athletes could also stop the recruitment scandals that have plagued the NCAA. In 2018, the NCAA stripped the University of Louisville's men's basketball team of its 2013 national championship title because it was discovered coaches were using sex workers to entice recruits to join the team. There have been dozens of other recruitment scandals where college athletes and recruits have been bribed with anything from having their grades changed, to getting free cars, to being straight out bribed. By paying college athletes and putting their salaries out in the open, the NCAA could end the illegal and underhanded ways some schools and coaches try to entice athletes to join.

People who argue against the idea of paying college athletes believe the practice could be disastrous for college sports. By paying athletes, they argue, they’d turn college sports into a bidding war, where only the richest schools could afford top athletes, and the majority of schools would be shut out from developing a talented team (though some argue this already happens because the best players often go to the most established college sports programs, who typically pay their coaches millions of dollars per year). It could also ruin the tight camaraderie of many college teams if players become jealous that certain teammates are making more money than they are.

They also argue that paying college athletes actually means only a small fraction would make significant money. Out of the 350 Division I athletic departments, fewer than a dozen earn any money. Nearly all the money the NCAA makes comes from men’s football and basketball, so paying college athletes would make a small group of men--who likely will be signed to pro teams and begin making millions immediately out of college--rich at the expense of other players.

Those against paying college athletes also believe that the athletes are receiving enough benefits already. The top athletes already receive scholarships that are worth tens of thousands per year, they receive free food/housing/textbooks, have access to top medical care if they are injured, receive top coaching, get travel perks and free gear, and can use their time in college as a way to capture the attention of professional recruiters. No other college students receive anywhere near as much from their schools.

People on this side also point out that, while the NCAA brings in a massive amount of money each year, it is still a non-profit organization. How? Because over 95% of those profits are redistributed to its members’ institutions in the form of scholarships, grants, conferences, support for Division II and Division III teams, and educational programs. Taking away a significant part of that revenue would hurt smaller programs that rely on that money to keep running.

While both sides have good points, it’s clear that the negatives of paying college athletes far outweigh the positives. College athletes spend a significant amount of time and energy playing for their school, but they are compensated for it by the scholarships and perks they receive. Adding a salary to that would result in a college athletic system where only a small handful of athletes (those likely to become millionaires in the professional leagues) are paid by a handful of schools who enter bidding wars to recruit them, while the majority of student athletics and college athletic programs suffer or even shut down for lack of money. Continuing to offer the current level of benefits to student athletes makes it possible for as many people to benefit from and enjoy college sports as possible.

This argumentative essay follows the Rogerian model. It discusses each side, first laying out multiple reasons people believe student athletes should be paid, then discussing reasons why the athletes shouldn’t be paid. It ends by stating that college athletes shouldn’t be paid by arguing that paying them would destroy college athletics programs and cause them to have many of the issues professional sports leagues have.

• Both sides of the argument are well developed, with multiple reasons why people agree with each side. It allows readers to get a full view of the argument and its nuances.
• Certain statements on both sides are directly rebuffed in order to show where the strengths and weaknesses of each side lie and give a more complete and sophisticated look at the argument.
• Using the Rogerian model can be tricky because oftentimes you don’t explicitly state your argument until the end of the paper. Here, the thesis doesn’t appear until the first sentence of the final paragraph. That doesn’t give readers a lot of time to be convinced that your argument is the right one, compared to a paper where the thesis is stated in the beginning and then supported throughout the paper. This paper could be strengthened if the final paragraph was expanded to more fully explain why the author supports the view, or if the paper had made it clearer that paying athletes was the weaker argument throughout.

3 Tips for Writing a Good Argumentative Essay

Now that you’ve seen examples of what good argumentative essay samples look like, follow these three tips when crafting your own essay.

#1: Make Your Thesis Crystal Clear

The thesis is the key to your argumentative essay; if it isn’t clear or readers can’t find it easily, your entire essay will be weak as a result. Always make sure that your thesis statement is easy to find. The typical spot for it is the final sentence of the introduction paragraph, but if it doesn’t fit in that spot for your essay, try to at least put it as the first or last sentence of a different paragraph so it stands out more.

Also make sure that your thesis makes clear what side of the argument you’re on. After you’ve written it, it’s a great idea to show your thesis to a couple different people--classmates are great for this. Just by reading your thesis they should be able to understand what point you’ll be trying to make with the rest of your essay.

#2: Show Why the Other Side Is Weak

When writing your essay, you may be tempted to ignore the other side of the argument and just focus on your side, but don’t do this. The best argumentative essays really tear apart the other side to show why readers shouldn’t believe it. Before you begin writing your essay, research what the other side believes, and what their strongest points are. Then, in your essay, be sure to mention each of these and use evidence to explain why they’re incorrect/weak arguments. That’ll make your essay much more effective than if you only focused on your side of the argument.

#3: Use Evidence to Support Your Side

Remember, an essay can’t be an argumentative essay if it doesn’t support its argument with evidence. For every point you make, make sure you have facts to back it up. Some examples are previous studies done on the topic, surveys of large groups of people, data points, etc. There should be lots of numbers in your argumentative essay that support your side of the argument. This will make your essay much stronger compared to only relying on your own opinions to support your argument.

Summary: Argumentative Essay Sample

Argumentative essays are persuasive essays that use facts and evidence to support their side of the argument. Most argumentative essays follow either the Toulmin model or the Rogerian model. By reading good argumentative essay examples, you can learn how to develop your essay and provide enough support to make readers agree with your opinion. When writing your essay, remember to always make your thesis clear, show where the other side is weak, and back up your opinion with data and evidence.

What's Next?

Do you need to write an argumentative essay as well? Check out our guide on the best argumentative essay topics for ideas!

You'll probably also need to write research papers for school. We've got you covered with 113 potential topics for research papers.

Your college admissions essay may end up being one of the most important essays you write. Follow our step-by-step guide on writing a personal statement to have an essay that'll impress colleges.

Christine graduated from Michigan State University with degrees in Environmental Biology and Geography and received her Master's from Duke University. In high school she scored in the 99th percentile on the SAT and was named a National Merit Finalist. She has taught English and biology in several countries.

Student and Parent Forum

Our new student and parent forum, at ExpertHub.PrepScholar.com , allow you to interact with your peers and the PrepScholar staff. See how other students and parents are navigating high school, college, and the college admissions process. Ask questions; get answers.

Ask a Question Below

Have any questions about this article or other topics? Ask below and we'll reply!

Improve With Our Famous Guides

• For All Students

The 5 Strategies You Must Be Using to Improve 160+ SAT Points

How to Get a Perfect 1600, by a Perfect Scorer

Series: How to Get 800 on Each SAT Section:

Score 800 on SAT Math

Score 800 on SAT Reading

Score 800 on SAT Writing

Series: How to Get to 600 on Each SAT Section:

Score 600 on SAT Math

Score 600 on SAT Reading

Score 600 on SAT Writing

Free Complete Official SAT Practice Tests

What SAT Target Score Should You Be Aiming For?

15 Strategies to Improve Your SAT Essay

The 5 Strategies You Must Be Using to Improve 4+ ACT Points

How to Get a Perfect 36 ACT, by a Perfect Scorer

Series: How to Get 36 on Each ACT Section:

36 on ACT English

36 on ACT Math

36 on ACT Reading

36 on ACT Science

Series: How to Get to 24 on Each ACT Section:

24 on ACT English

24 on ACT Math

24 on ACT Reading

24 on ACT Science

What ACT target score should you be aiming for?

ACT Vocabulary You Must Know

ACT Writing: 15 Tips to Raise Your Essay Score

How to Get Into Harvard and the Ivy League

How to Get a Perfect 4.0 GPA

How to Write an Amazing College Essay

What Exactly Are Colleges Looking For?

Is the ACT easier than the SAT? A Comprehensive Guide

Should you retake your SAT or ACT?

When should you take the SAT or ACT?

Stay Informed

Get the latest articles and test prep tips!

Looking for Graduate School Test Prep?

Check out our top-rated graduate blogs here:

GRE Online Prep Blog

GMAT Online Prep Blog

TOEFL Online Prep Blog

Holly R. "I am absolutely overjoyed and cannot thank you enough for helping me!”

From the editor: NPR's Uri Berliner paid a big price for speaking out; we owe him a listen

Andy Warhol predicted everyone will be famous for 15 minutes. For former NPR staffer Uri Berliner, the spotlight burned hot for more than a week.

The reverberations in newsrooms across the country, I predict, will last a lot longer.

For those unfamiliar, Berliner was a senior business editor at National Public Radio. In an April 9 essay published in The Free Press , he criticized NPR for losing its way during the Trump presidency, blaming a lack of viewpoint diversity and an increasing lean toward advocacy journalism. As examples, he cited the network’s reporting on Trump’s ties to Russia, which he deemed unbalanced, and said NPR initially treated the discovery of Hunter Biden’s laptop as a distraction.

"An open-minded spirit no longer exists within NPR, and now, predictably, we don’t have an audience that reflects America," Berliner wrote.

NPR’s critics and a host of conservative pundits celebrated Berliner as a whistleblower. On his Truth Social platform, Trump called NPR a “liberal disinformation machine” and demanded the government pull its funding. NPR went into full damage-control mode. Morning Edition host Steve Inskeep took to his Substack and wrote what amounted to a line-by-line rebuttal , offering a master’s class in impeaching a witness.

Eight days later, Berliner resigned , ending his 25-year career at NPR.

As a journalist who spent five years working for another Washington-based national news outlet, USA TODAY, and one who often writes in this publication about the need for the press to rebuild trust , I’d like to share some thoughts on Berliner’s essay and the aftermath. But first, some disclaimers. My opinions are my own, based on my experiences; I don’t speak for my employer or my colleagues, past or present. Also, I serve on the board of Cincinnati Public Radio, which airs NPR programming locally. And finally, this is a complicated and nuanced topic for me to cover in a 900-word column. (Berliner’s essay was 3,500 words, for comparison.) I encourage you to read Berliner’s piece in its entirety , along with Inskeep’s response and the letter from NPR President and CEO Katherine Maher to all staff , which was published on NPR’s website. With that out of the way …

From the editor: Candid reflection from an ‘enemy of the people’

Berliner’s essay certainly can be picked apart, but it shouldn’t be dismissed. It’s overarching clarion call rang true for me, reminding me of times when the political polarization of our country uncomfortably seeped into the newsrooms I’ve worked in.

At USA TODAY, I was one of the editors who oversaw a report in 2016 that analyzed Trump’s involvement in more than 3,500 lawsuits over three decades , an unprecedented number for a presidential candidate. One high-ranking editor, who is no longer with the organization, took things a step too far in my opinion when she said in a planning meeting that she hoped the story would derail Trump’s campaign. She, of course, was entitled to her own political viewpoint, but those of us who choose this profession must put personal convictions aside and present the facts without judgement − which ultimately the story did, a testimony to the professionalism of the reporters who did the heavy lifting and worked to present a balanced report. But the "unspoken consensus" that Berliner described at NPR can easily take over a newsroom if left unchallenged.

My concern with Berliner’s essay is that it leads the reader to believe the introspection he calls for isn’t happening at NPR. Based on the response from Maher and NPR staffers I know personally, it has been, and I can vouch that it’s happening in the company that employs me, as well. In 2021, The Enquirer participated in an effort called Re-engaging the Right , during which hundreds of conservative news consumers were interviewed so we could better understand perceptions of bias and how to restore trust. We learned a lot, and I hope it’s evident in our political reporting today. But we’re not perfect, and I always appreciate it when readers take the time to point out where we’ve fallen short.  

One of my takeaways from the Re-engaging the Right feedback was that national news organizations often fail the sniff test when accused of promoting an agenda. Here’s an exercise you can try to illustrate the point.

Go to NPR.org and search “immigrant.” When I did so this week, the first story that came up was about a proposal in Massachusetts to allow migrants to work legally , regardless of their immigration status. The rest of the search results also could be described as sympathetic to migrants. Do the same at FoxNews.com. The top result when I searched was a story about an illegal immigrant charged with a sex crime in Connecticut , and the next five items also were crime stories involving immigrants. Try this exercise with other politicized search terms, and you’ll see a similar pattern. Viewed individually, the stories are factual and stand up to review. But taken as a whole, it’s obvious which way each news source leans politically, and that’s a problem.

It's too soon to arrive at a final thought on the Berliner dust-up, but one thing is clear: NPR and other news organizations should resist the urge to circle the wagons and err on the side of listening. There are lessons to be learned.

Enquirer Executive Editor Beryl Love writes a biweekly column that takes you behind the scenes at The Enquirer. Occasionally, he shares his thoughts on local issues, particularly as they pertain to a free press and open government. Love also serves as regional editor for the USA TODAY Network Ohio. Email him at [email protected]. He can’t respond personally to every email, but he reads them all.

Supreme Court immunity case: Updates of oral arguments in Trump's fight for immunity

Lawyers for the former president argue trump can't be criminally charged for any action he took in office..

• Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith has charged Trump with conspiring to overturn his 2020 loss to Joe Biden.
• Trump is currently on trial in New York, charged with covering up hush money payments made to to porn star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election.
• Trump is the first former president to face criminal trial.

Can presidents get away with murder?

Nine Supreme Court justices heard Donald Trump’s arguments today that yes, maybe they can. 

The former president's lawyers say all presidents are immune from prosecution for anything they do in office – even murder, bribery, and corruption . The only way to hold one criminally accountable, Trump's attorneys will argue today, is if a president is first impeached in the House of Representatives and then convicted by two-thirds of the Senate. 

Here are USA TODAY's live updates from Trump’s remarkable stand at the Supreme Court .

The case is submitted

The historic arguments wrapped up after more than two-and-a-half hours of debate with Trump’s attorney, John Sauer, forgoing his opportunity for a final rebuttal after the Justice Department made its case.

Prep for the polls: See who is running for president and compare where they stand on key issues in our Voter Guide

“I have nothing further,” Sauer said.

And with that, Chief Justice John Roberts declared that the case is submitted.

--Maureen Groppe

Jackson pushes for quick, narrow decision

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson appeared to be trying to convince her colleagues to decide the case quickly and narrowly.

If the court wanted to use the case to decide all the possible times when a president does or doesn’t have immunity, she asked the Justice Department, “is this the right vehicle to hammer out that test?”

“I don’t see any need in this case for the court to embark on that analysis,” Justice Department Michael Dreeben responded.

Barrett looks for way for Trump trial to proceed

Justice Amy Coney Barrett asks the Justice Department whether the government can get to trial faster by prosecuting only on the Trump acts that his lawyer agrees are private conduct so are not immune.

Michael Dreeben, the Justice Department attorney, said Trump’s official and private acts are part of an “integrated conspiracy.”

But he added that a trial could proceed by allowing the government to introduce anything considered an official act as information that has relevance even if not a crime itself.

Does presidential motive matter?

Justice Neil Gorsuch pressed the Justice Department on whether the court should consider the motive of a president when deciding whether a presidential act deserves immunity. Everything a president does can be seen through the prism of his interest in getting re-elected, he said.

Michael Dreeben, the Justice Department’s attorney, said motive doesn’t have to be considered for a core presidential act – such as a veto, or appointment – which is protected from prosecution.

“None is involved in this case,” Dreeben said.

Gorsuch said he’s not asking so much about Trump’s case but whether accusations about a president’s motives can be a future basis for prosecution.

“We’re writing a rule for the ages,” Gorsuch said.

Dreeben said wanting to get re-elected is not an illegal motive.

“And you don’t have to worry about prosecuting presidents for that,” he said.

Ham sandwiches, grand juries and solar eclipses: Alito has questions

Justice Samuel Alito asked Justice Department attorney Michael Dreeben if a former president should be left to the mercy of prosecutors, noting the old saying on the pliability of grand juries: That grand jurors would indict a ham sandwich if a prosecutor asked them to.

Alito asked Dreeben if he knew of a single case in which a federal prosecutor had asked a grand jury to indict a suspect “and the grand jury refused to do so.” 

Drebeen said it had happened. 

“Every once in  a while there’s an eclipse too,” Alito replied. No prosecutor wants to indict without sufficient evidence, Drebeen said, because the case would end in an acquittal. 

--Dan Morrison

More: What does 'SCOTUS' mean? Here's a brief rundown on the country's highest court.

Trump back in New York courtroom

As attorneys at the Supreme Court argued over a president’s ability to escape prosecution for official acts, Donald Trump returned to the Manhattan courtroom where he is on trial on charges he doctored business records to cover up a $130,000 hush money payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels. Trump entered the courtroom at 11:22 a.m. ET, taking a look at reporters in the audience as he walked past them to the defense table.

– Aysha Bagchi

Trump named unindicted co-conspirator in Arizona election case

Former President Donald Trump was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Arizona fake elector case unsealed yesterday. The indictment charges 18 state Republicans and former Trump aides including former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, former New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani and attorney John Eastman.

The defendants are charged with crimes including conspiracy and forgery for falsely claiming they were presidential electors and that Trump won the state in the 2020 election. Trump was identified as “unindicted coconspirator 1" in the indictment.

--Bart Jansen

All That Jazz: Demonstrators drum, clang, and sing their views of Trump

As justices and lawyers solemnly discussed the finer points of law inside the Supreme Court, the scene outside featured the clang of bells, the shrill of whistles, the throb of electric music, and the chants of demonstrators - most of them anti-Trump.

“The whole world is watching!” a crowd of demonstrators chanted at one point. A small brass band serenaded the crowd of three-to-four dozen with jazz-like tunes.

In addition to attacking Trump, the crowd also weighed in on other issues, particularly abortion rights and the campaign between Trump and President Joe Biden. “Feminists vs. Fascists,” said one sign.

The two sides exchanged a few f-bombs, but nothing serious broke out and the dozen or so police officers who watched the proceedings had little to do.

-- David Jackson

Roberts asks what protects against political prosecutions

Chief Justice John Roberts pressed on whether there are enough protections against retaliatory or harassing prosecutions for presidents.

Dreeben, the Justice Department’s lawyer, said politically driven prosecutions would violate the Constitution.

The chilling effect of prosecutions is one of Trump’s main arguments for why presidents should have immunity.

Who are the conservative Supreme Court justices?  

There are six conservative-leaning justices, making up the majority of the Supreme Court bench : Chief Justice John Roberts, along with Justices Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett and Clarence Thomas. 

Thomas is the longest serving of the group, nominated by former President George H. W. Bush in 1991. Former President George W. Bush nominated Roberts and Alito in 2005, while former President Donald Trump nominated Kavanaugh, Gorsuch and Barrett. 

– Savannah Kuchar  

More: Who are the current Supreme Court justices? Get to know the bench in 2024.

Thomas raises the 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba 

Apparently picking up on Justice Elena Kagan’s earlier questions touching on a military coup in the U.S., Justice Clarence Thomas asked why past presidents haven’t faced criminal charges for fomenting coups in foreign countries, using Operation Mongoose, the failed 1961 CIA attempt to overthrow Fidel Castro in Cuba, as an example.

“There were no prosecutions” after the so-called Bay of Pigs affair, Thomas said. (President John F. Kennedy, who ordered the operation, was assassinated before the end of his first term.)

Michael Dreeben, arguing for the Justice Department, replied that U.S. law has a “public authority defense” that protects a president from prosecution for overseas acts. The defense “would prevent it from being a violation of law.” 

–Dan Morrison

Who are the liberal Supreme Court justices?  

There are three liberal-leaning justices on the Supreme Court bench: Justices Sonya Sotomayor, Ketanji Brown Jackson and Elena Kagan. 

Sotomayor and Kagan were nominees of former President Barack Obama, while Jackson was nominated by President Joe Biden in 2022, becoming the first Black woman to serve as a justice on the Supreme Court. 

J ustice Department: `Such presidential immunity has no foundation in the Constitution’

Opening his argument for the Justice Department, Michael Dreeben said the Supreme Court has never recognized absolute criminal immunity for any public official.

But Trump, Dreeben said, is asking that presidents be protected from prosecution for bribery, treason, sedition, murder and for conspiring to use fraud to overturn an election.

“Such presidential immunity has no foundation in the Constitution,” Dreeben said. “The framers knew too well the danger of a king who could do no wrong.”

Immunity for official acts versus private

Although Trump’s lawyer concedes that presidents can be prosecuted for private acts, Justice Ketanji  Brown Jackson pressed why that should be different for official acts.

“If there’s no threat to criminal prosecution, what prevents the president from doing whatever he wants?” she asked.

Sauer said the president is required to follow the law for his official acts. But the question is whether the punishment for not doing so is impeachment or criminal prosecution.

 Jackson asked how Trump's argument didn't "risk turning the oval office into the center of criminality in this country." 

--Maureen Groppe and Dan Morrison

How to watch today’s Supreme Court case live  

Cameras are not allowed inside the nation’s highest court, so there is no televised coverage of today’s oral arguments. 

But the justices and lawyers can be listened to live on USA TODAY’s broadcast or via C-SPAN. 

Coup could be an official act, Trump lawyer says

Trump lawyer D. John Sauer, speaking in a notable rasp, found himself cornered by Justice Elena Kagan as she pushed him to draw a line between a president’s official and unofficial acts.

Kagan asked Sauer whether a president could officially order the military to stage a coup at the end of their term. “Is it an official act?”

“It could well be,” Sauer replied. 

“It certainly sounds very bad,” Kagan said. 

Sauer said the Constitution and the military’s code of justice prevents “that very extreme hypothetical.”

Can presidents self pardon?

Justice Neil Gorsuch raised the issue of whether presidents can pardon themselves.

“Happily,” Gorsuch said of that issue, “it’s never been presented to us.”

Sauer, Trump’s lawyers, said if the court agrees with him that presidents have absolute immunity, they will never have to decide if presidents can self pardon.

Should trial be further delayed for fact finding?

The Justice Department has urged the court not to delay the trial further even if the justices find presidents have immunity in some  circumstances.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor appeared to side with that position, pressing Trump’s lawyer on why fact-finding questions about immunity in Trump’s particular case can’t be done at trial.

Sauer said it would be difficult to do that.

Sotomayor asks about fake electors

Justice Sonia Sotomayor asked Trump’s lawyer why he can claim that Trump’s actions were part of his official duties instead of being done for personal gain. Trump, she said, created a fraudulent list of presidential electors.

“Is that plausible that that would be within his right to do?” she asked.

Sauer, Trump’s lawyer, disputed Sotomayor’s characterization that Trump was doing anything fraudulent with the electors he was pushing.

“This was being done on an alternative basis,” Sauer said.

-- Maureen Groppe

Justice Alito stands up for Navy SEALs

Amid a blizzard of hypothetical questions over whether a president can order Navy SEALs to assassinate a rival, Justice Samuel Alito took a moment to stand up for the armed forces. 

 “I don’t want to slander SEAL Team Six,” Alito said. “They are honorable officers, bound by the military code of justice not to obey an illegal order.”

Sotomayor: 'Fundamentally evil' acts must be prosecuted

Challenging former President Donald Trump’s argument that a president is entitled to complete immunity, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said, “there are some things that are so fundamentally evil that they have to be protected against.”

“Immunity says even if you did it for personal gain,” Sotomayor told attorney D. John Sauer, president’s actions, including murder and bribery, ”cannot be prosecuted.”

-- Dan Morrison

Sotomayor brings up assassination of political rival

Justice Sonia Sotomayor goes right to a key issue that came up during the appeals court review: does a president have immunity if he orders the assassination of a political rival?

Sauer, Trump’s lawyer, said that depends on the situation, but it could well be an official act for which a president is immune.

Sotomayor said Trump wants the court to find that presidents are entitled to use the trappings of their office for total personal gain without facing criminal liability.

Kangaroo masks and revolutionary war hats

More than two dozen demonstrators organized by the group Women’s March protested Trump’s immunity claim, and criticized the Supreme Court for even considering the matter.

“We’re here to demand that they wrap this up,” said Amanda Chavez Barnes, senior program director for Women’s March, protesting that the court’s decision to take up the case delayed Trump’s trial on Jan. 6-related charges.

Some of the protesters wore kangaroo masks in order to mock the “Kangaroo Court.” They rang cowbells, banged on small drums, and chanted slogans like “lock him up!”

Just a few Trump supporters counter-demonstrated. Matthew Atwood, 62, a local DJ and classical pianist, mounted a sign describing other people as “the real authoritarians.” Wearing a Revolutionary War-style uniform, Atwood described himself as “pro-American.”

He also sought to engage the anti-Trump faction in debate, asking members of three crowd at one point, “are you better off now than you were three years ago?”

“Yes we are,” replied a Trump opponent.

Trump lawyer: Without immunity, `there can be no presidency as we know it.’

In his opening argument, Trump lawyer John Sauer told the justices presidents should be immune from prosecution because otherwise “there can be no presidency as we know it.”

No president has ever been prosecuted for their official acts, he said.

Without immunity, he continued, the threat of prosecution will “distort the president’s decision making.”

Every president will face defacto blackmail and distortion from his political rivals while he’s still in office, Sauer said.

Could Supreme Court presidential immunity arguments impact Trump's New York case?

Early this month, New York trial Judge Juan Merchan rejected an argument from Trump to delay Trump's New York criminal trial until after the Supreme Court rules on the scope of presidential immunity in Trump's federal election interference case. Merchan said Trump raised the immunity defense in his New York case too late.

If Trump is found guilty in the New York criminal trial, he could challenge Merchan's immunity ruling on appeal, and potentially point to a Supreme Court immunity ruling as a basis for re-trying the New York case.

Where is Donald Trump today?

Trump held a campaign event en route to the courthouse in New York, stopping at a nearby construction site to speak with supportive union members .

Reporters asked the former president about the Supreme Court’s immunity hearing, but his comments were drowned out by the cheers of his audience.

What are the charges against Trump?

Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith indicted Trump last August on four charges, to which he’s  pleaded not guilty.

Trump is charged with conspiring to try to steal the 2020 election and remain in power by spreading lies about election fraud that fueled the Capitol attack on Jan. 6, 2021. Trump is also charged with obstructing Congress because the riot interrupted lawmakers counting Electoral College votes to certify that President Joe Biden won the election.

Protesting 'fake news' and tyranny

Outside the Supreme Court, protestors who traveled from Minnesota, Florida, and other states to register their support and concern about the historic Trump case.“Absolute Immunity = Absolute Tyranny,” reads the sign carried by Demitri Morgan, 38, who said he traveled from his home in Montana for the high court hearing.

Another hand-painted sign says “Loser.”

“Yo, fake news! What’s up with fake news?,” chanted Jim Whalen, 61, an ad salesman who said he came up from his home in West Palm Beach, Fla.-- David Jackson

Trump immunity argument ‘ridiculous’: Schumer

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., called former President Donald Trump’s immunity argument “ridiculous” and said the Supreme Court shouldn’t have agreed to hear the case.

“Today, SCOTUS hears Trump’s ridiculous claim of total immunity. He's obviously not immune,” Schumer wrote on X , formerly Twitter. “SCOTUS is only protecting Trump and slowing his trial. SCOTUS should not have taken this case or frozen the district court.”

What is presidential immunity?

The Supreme Court ruled in 1982 that presidents are immune both while in office and after from civil damages for official acts, including those on the “outer perimeter of a president’s official responsibilities.”

In 1997, the court said presidents can be sued for their private acts.

The court has also said presidents have no broad immunity from complying with subpoenas in criminal cases brought by states or the federal government.

The Justice Department has long argued that presidents can’t be criminally prosecuted while in office.

But the court has never weighed in on whether former presidents are immune from criminal prosecution.

What is Donald Trump trying to do with his Supreme Court immunity argument?

Donald Trump is trying to quash federal charges that he conspired to overturn the 2020 election after his bitter loss to President Joe Biden .

Without sweeping immunity, a president “will always be concerned, and even paralyzed, by the prospect of wrongful prosecution and retaliation after they leave office,” Trump wrote on Truth Social Sunday.

Is Donald Trump at the Supreme Court today?

The presumptive Republican nominee won’t be at the Supreme Court for today’s blockbuster arguments.

Trump is on trial in New York , charged with doctoring records to hide $130,000 in hush money paid to an adult film star . Trump also faces two other criminal indictments.

The judge in his New York trial told him he was required to be in court , which meant he was not able to attend his historic hearing.

Significance of being the first president to face criminal charges

What should the justices make of the fact that Donald Trump is the first president – former or current – to face criminal charges?

Trump’s lawyers say it’s evidence that presidents can’t be prosecuted.

“The long history of not prosecuting Presidents for official acts, despite ample motive and opportunity to do so over the years, demonstrates that the newly discovered alleged power to do so does not exist,” they wrote in their main brief previewing their oral argument.

Special counsel Jack Smith counters that the fact that no previous president has been prosecuted underscores the unprecedented nature of Trump’s alleged crimes.

Recent ruling: Supreme Court snubbed House Republicans who dodged metal detectors after Jan. 6

Justices Seem Ready to Limit the 2020 Election Case Against Trump

Such a ruling in the case, on whether the former president is immune from prosecution, would probably send it back to a lower court and could delay any trial until after the November election.

• Share full article

Charlie Savage and Alan Feuer

Charlie Savage reported from Washington, and Alan Feuer from New York.

Here are four takeaways from the Supreme Court hearing on Trump’s claim to immunity.

The Supreme Court heard arguments on Thursday about Donald J. Trump’s claim that the federal charges accusing him of plotting to overturn the 2020 election must be thrown out because he is immune from being prosecuted for any official act he took as president.

Here are some takeaways.

Several justices seemed to want to define some level of official act as immune.

Although Mr. Trump’s claim of near-absolute immunity was seen as a long shot intended primarily to slow the proceedings, several members of the Republican-appointed majority seemed to indicate that some immunity was needed. Some of them expressed worry about the long-term consequences of leaving future former presidents open to prosecution for their official actions.

Among others, Justice Brett Kavanaugh compared the threat of prosecution for official acts to how a series of presidents were “hampered” by independent counsel investigations, criticizing a 1984 ruling that upheld a now-defunct law creating such prosecutors as one of the Supreme Court’s biggest mistakes. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. criticized an appeals court ruling rejecting immunity for Mr. Trump, saying he was concerned that it “did not get into a focused consideration of what acts we are talking about or what documents are talking about.”

“It’s a serious constitutional question whether a statute can be applied to the president’s official acts. So wouldn’t you always interpret the statute not to apply to the president, even under your formulation, unless Congress had spoken with some clarity?” “I don’t think across the board that as serious constitutional question exists on applying any criminal statute to the president.” “The problem is the vague statute — obstruction and 371, conspiracy to defraud the United States can be used against a lot of presidential activities historically with a creative prosecutor who wants to go after a president.” “I think that the question about the risk is very serious. And obviously it is a question that this court has to evaluate. For the executive branch, our view is that there is a balanced protection that better serves the interests of the Constitution that incorporates both accountability and protection for the president.”

The Democrat-appointed justices — Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson — asked questions indicating greater concern about opening the door for presidents to commit official crimes with impunity.

“This is what you’re asking us to say, which is that a president is entitled not to make a mistake — but more than that, a president is entitled for total personal gain to use the trappings of his office. That’s what you’re trying to get us to hold — without facing criminal liability.” “Your honor, I would say three things in response to that. First, the doctrine that immunity does not turn on the allegedly improper motivation or purpose is something that this court has reaffirmed in at least nine or 10 —” “That’s absolute immunity. But qualified immunity does say that whatever act you take has to be within what a reasonable person would do. I’m having a hard time thinking that creating false documents, that submitting false documents, that ordering the assassination of a rival, that accepting a bribe, and countless other laws that could be broken for personal gain, that anyone would say that it would be reasonable for a president or any public official to do that.”

The arguments signaled further delay and complications for a Trump trial.

If the Supreme Court does place limits on the ability of prosecutors to charge Mr. Trump over his official actions, it could alter the shape of his trial.

A decision to send all or part of the case back to the lower courts could further slow progress toward a trial, increasing the odds that it does not start before Election Day.

Of the matters listed in the indictment, some — like working with private lawyers to gin up slates of fraudulent electors — seem like the private actions of a candidate. Others — like pressuring the Justice Department and Vice President Mike Pence to do things — seem more like official acts he took in his role as president.

At one point, Justice Amy Coney Barrett suggested that prosecutors could simply drop Mr. Trump’s arguably official actions from their case and proceed to a swift trial focused only on his private actions. And D. John Sauer, the lawyer for Mr. Trump, told the court that no evidence of Mr. Trump’s official actions should be allowed into the trial.

But Michael R. Dreeben, a Justice Department lawyer arguing on behalf of the special counsel’s office, said the indictment laid out an “integrated conspiracy” in which Mr. Trump took the official actions to bolster the chances that his other efforts to overturn the election would succeed.

He argued that even if the court holds that Mr. Trump has immunity from liability for his official actions, prosecutors should still be allowed to present evidence about them to the jury because the actions are relevant to assessing his larger knowledge and intentions — just as speech that is protected by the First Amendment can still be used as evidence in a conspiracy case.

The hearing revolved around two very different ways of looking at the issue.

Looming over the hearing was a sweeping moral question: What effect might executive immunity have on the future of American politics?

Not surprisingly, the two sides saw things very differently.

Mr. Sauer claimed that without immunity, all presidents would be paralyzed by the knowledge that once they were out of office, they could face an onslaught of charges from their rivals based on the tough calls they had to make while in power. He pictured a dystopian world of ceaseless tit-for-tat political prosecutions that would destroy the “presidency as we know it.”

If a president can be charged, put on trial and imprisoned for his most controversial decisions as soon as he leaves office, that looming threat will distort the president’s decision-making precisely when bold and fearless action is most needed. Every current president will face de facto blackmail and extortion by his political rivals while he is still in office. The implications of the court’s decision here extend far beyond the facts of this case. Could President George W. Bush have been sent to prison for obstructing an official proceeding or allegedly lying to Congress to induce war in Iraq? Could President Obama be charged with murder for killing U.S. citizens abroad by drone strike? Could President Biden someday be charged with unlawfully inducing immigrants to enter the country illegally for his border policies? The answer to all these questions is no.

Envisioning the opposite scenario, Mr. Dreeben worried that any form of blanket immunity would place presidents entirely outside of the rule of law and encourage them to commit crimes, including “bribery, treason, sedition, even murder,” with impunity.

“The framers knew too well the dangers of a king who could do no wrong,” he said.

This court has never recognized absolute criminal immunity for any public official. Petitioner, however, claims that a former president has permanent criminal immunity for his official acts unless he was first impeached and convicted. His novel theory would immunize former presidents for criminal liability; for bribery, treason, sedition, murder and here, conspiring to use fraud to overturn the results of an election and perpetuate himself in power. Such presidential immunity has no foundation in the Constitution. The framers knew too well the dangers of a king who could do no wrong.

Both sides found advocates for their positions on the court.

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. clearly seemed worried that without some form of criminal immunity, former presidents would be vulnerable to partisan warfare as their successors used the courts to go after them once they were out of office. And that, he added, could lead to endless cycles of retribution that would be a risk to “stable, democratic society.”

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson appeared more concerned that if presidents were in fact shielded by immunity, they would be unbounded by the law and could turn the Oval Office into what she described as “the seat of criminality.”

If someone with those kinds of powers, the most powerful person in the world with the greatest amount of authority, could go into office knowing that there would be no potential penalty for committing crimes, I’m trying to understand what the disincentive is from turning the Oval Office into the seat of criminal activity in this country? If the potential for criminal liability is taken off the table, wouldn’t there be a significant risk that future presidents would be emboldened to commit crimes with abandon while they’re in office? It’s right now the fact that we’re having this debate, because O.L.C. has said that presidents might be prosecuted. Presidents from the beginning of time have understood that that’s a possibility. That might be what has kept this office from turning into the kind of crime center that I’m envisioning. But once we say no criminal liability, Mr. President, you can do whatever you want, I’m worried that we would have a worse problem than the problem of the president feeling constrained to follow the law while he’s in office.

What happens next?

There did not seem to be a lot of urgency among the justices — especially the conservative ones — to ensure that the immunity question was resolved quickly. That left open the possibility that Mr. Trump could avoid being tried on charges of plotting to overturn the last election until well after voters went to the polls to decide whether to choose him as president in this election.

And if he is elected, any trial could be put off while he is in office, or he could order the charges against him dropped.

It could take some time for the court to do its own analysis of what presidential acts should qualify for the protections of immunity. And even if the justices determine that at least some of the allegations against Mr. Trump are fair game for prosecution, if they do not issue a ruling until late June or early July, it could be difficult to hold a trial before November.

That would become all but impossible if the court took a different route and sent the analysis back to the trial judge, Tanya S. Chutkan. If Judge Chutkan were ordered to hold further hearings on which of the indictment’s numerous allegations were official acts of Mr. Trump’s presidency and which were private acts he took as a candidate for office, the process could take months and last well into 2025.

Aishvarya Kavi

Reporting from Washington

A spectacle outside the Supreme Court for Trump’s defenders and detractors.

Just as the Supreme Court began considering on Thursday morning whether former President Donald J. Trump was entitled to absolute immunity, rap music started blaring outside the court.

The lyrics, laced with expletives, denounced Mr. Trump, and several dozen demonstrators began chanting, “Trump is not above the law!”

Mr. Trump was not in Washington on Thursday morning — in fact, he was in another courtroom , in New York. But the spectacle that pierced the relative tranquillity outside the court was typical of events that involve him: demonstrations, homemade signs, police, news media, and lots and lots of curious onlookers.

One man, Stephen Parlato, a retired mental health counselor from Boulder, Colo., held a roughly 6-foot-long sign with a blown-up photo of Mr. Trump scowling that read, “Toxic loser.” The back of the sign featured the famous painting by Cassius Marcellus Coolidge of dogs playing poker, adorned with the words, “Faith erodes … in a court with no binding ethics code.” He made the sign at FedEx, he said.

The Supreme Court’s decision to even hear the case, which has delayed Mr. Trump’s election interference trial , was “absurd,” he said.

“I’m a child of the late ’60s and early ’70s and the Vietnam War,” said Mr. Parlato, dressed in a leather jacket and cowboy hat. “I remember protesting that while in high school. But this is very different. I’m here because I’m terrified of the possibility of a second Trump presidency.”

Inside the court, Jack Smith sat to the far right of the lawyer arguing on behalf of his team of prosecutors, Michael R. Dreeben, a leading expert in criminal law who has worked for another special counsel who investigated Mr. Trump, Robert S. Mueller III.

Among those in attendance were Jane Sullivan Roberts, who is married to Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., and Ashley Estes Kavanaugh, who is married to Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh.

In an orderly line outside along the side of the court, people were calmly waiting to listen to the arguments from the court’s public gallery. More than 100 people, many of them supporters of Mr. Trump, were in line as of 8:30 a.m. Reagan Pendarvis, 19, who had been waiting there since the middle of the night, said the first person in line had gotten there more than a day before the arguments began.

Mr. Pendarvis, a sophomore at the University of California, San Diego who is living in Washington for the spring semester, was wearing a black suit and bright red bow tie. He said he had been struggling to keep warm since he took his place in line.

Mr. Pendarvis, a supporter of Mr. Trump, said he thought that the cases brought against the former president were an uneven application of the law.

“I think a lot of the cases, especially that happen for Donald Trump, don’t really happen for Democrats on the other side,” he said. “That’s just my take on it.”

David Bolls, 42, and his brother, Jonathan, 43, both of Springfield, Va., also in line for the arguments, also contended that the prosecutions against Mr. Trump were an abuse of judicial power.

“For me, I want to see an even application of justice,” David Bolls said.

For others in line, the Supreme Court’s deliberations were not the main draw. Ellen Murphy, a longtime Washington resident, was trying to sell buttons she designs, though she acknowledged that it was unlikely she would be allowed in with all of her merchandise.

Dozens of the buttons, which said, “Immunize democracy now” and “Trump is toast” over a toaster with two slices of bread, were pinned to a green apron she was wearing.

“We lose our democracy,” Ms. Murphy said, “if the president can do whatever he wants just because he’s president.”

Eileen Sullivan contributed reporting.

Advertisement

Adam Liptak

What’s next: Much will turn on how quickly the court acts.

The justices heard arguments in the immunity case at a special session, the day after what had been the last scheduled argument of its term. Arguments heard in late April almost always yield decisions near the end of the court’s term, in late June or early July.

But a ruling in early summer, even if it categorically rejected Mr. Trump’s position, would make it hard to complete his trial before the election. Should Mr. Trump win at the polls, there is every reason to think he would scuttle the prosecution.

In cases that directly affected elections — in which the mechanisms of voting were at issue — the court has sometimes acted with unusual speed.

In 2000, in Bush v. Gore, the court issued its decision handing the presidency to George W. Bush the day after the justices heard arguments.

In a recent case concerning Mr. Trump’s eligibility to appear on Colorado’s primary ballot, the justices moved more slowly, but still at a relatively brisk pace. The court granted Mr. Trump’s petition seeking review just two days after he filed it , scheduled arguments for about a month later and issued its decision in his favor about a month after that.

In United States v. Nixon, the 1974 decision that ordered President Richard M. Nixon to comply with a subpoena for audiotapes of conversations with aides in the White House, the court also moved quickly , granting the special prosecutor’s request to bypass the appeals court a week after it was filed.

The court heard arguments about five weeks later — compared with some eight weeks in Mr. Trump’s immunity case. It issued its decision 16 days after the argument , and the trial was not delayed.

Abbie VanSickle

The oral argument lasted nearly three hours, as the justices tangled with a lawyer for the former president and a Justice Department lawyer. A majority of the justices appeared skeptical of the idea of sweeping presidential immunity. However, several of them suggested an interest in drawing out what actions may be immune and what may not — a move that could delay the former president’s trial if the Supreme Court asks a lower court to revisit the issues.

Many of the justices seemed to be considering the idea that presidents should enjoy some form of protection against criminal prosecution. The devil, however, will be in the details: How should that protection extend?

And that question will have profound relevance not only for future presidents, but much more immediately for Donald Trump. The court could decide to draw those rules itself in a broad way for history. Or it could send this case back to a lower court to set the rules of what form immunity could take. If the case is sent back for further proceedings, it could have a dramatic effect on the timing of Trump’s trial, pushing it well past the election in November.

Looking back, one of the main points of discussion turned on the question of which situation would be worse: a world in which presidents, shorn of any legal protections against prosecution, were ceaselessly pursued in the courts by their rivals in a never-ending cycle of political retribution, or allowing presidents to be unbounded by criminal law and permitted to do whatever they wanted with impunity.

Charlie Savage

Sauer, Trump’s attorney, declines to offer a rebuttal. The argument is over.

If the court finds that there is some immunity for official actions, one of the most important questions will be whether prosecutors can still present evidence to the jury of Trump’s official actions (like pressuring the Justice Department and Vice President Mike Pence to do certain things) as evidence that helps illuminate Trump’s knowledge and intent for his private acts as a candidate. Dreeben says the jury needs to understand the whole “integrated conspiracy” but prosecutors would accept a jury instruction in which the judge would say they cannot impose liability for the official actions but may consider them as evidence of his knowledge and intent for the other actions. That’s how courts handle protected speech that is evidence to a larger conspiracy, he notes.

Justice Barrett picks up the question of timing again. She suggests that if prosecutors want to take Trump quickly to trial, they could simply drop those parts of the indictment that seem to be his official acts as president and proceed with only those parts of the indictment that reflect Trump’s private actions taken as a candidate for office. Dreeben is not wild about that idea.

Dreeben suggests that allegations in the “private acts bucket,” as Justice Jackson just called it, would include things like the scheme to create fake electors and the way in which Trump fomented a mob of his supporters to violently attack the Capitol on Jan. 6.

Justice Barrett seems to signal that she is less likely to find that presidents have blanket immunity for their official acts. When Dreeben says the system needs to balance the effective functioning of the presidency and accountability for a former president under the rule of law, and the existing system does that pretty well or maybe needs a few ancillary rules but that is different from the “radical proposal” put forward by Trump’s legal team, she says: “I agree.”

Dreeben, in a balancing act that seems to acknowledge that the court is looking for some form of criminal immunity for presidents, says he is trying to do two things at once, neither of them easy. He wants to design a system to find some rules that preserve the “effective functioning of the presidency” but that still allows for “accountability” if presidents violated the law.

Kavanaugh asks Dreeben about Obama’s drone strike that killed an American citizen suspected of terrorism, Anwar al-Awlaki, which Trump’s lawyer invoked in his opening. Dreeben notes that the Office of Legal Counsel analyzed the question and found that the murder statute did not apply to presidents when they were acting under public authority, so authorizing the strike was lawful. This is the way the system can function, he said — the Justice Department analyzes laws carefully and with established principles.

Justice Kavanaugh signals that he is likely to find that presidents must have immunity for their official actions. He talks about how the threat of prosecution by independent counsels (under a law that lapsed in 1999) hampered Presidents Reagan, George H.W. Bush and Clinton, and says a 1984 ruling upholding that structure as constitutional was one of the Supreme Court’s biggest mistakes. (Notably, Kavanaugh was a prosecutor on the staff of independent counsel Ken Starr during his investigation into President Bill Clinton, before becoming a White House lawyer under President George W. Bush.)

Dreeben tries to push back on Kavanaugh’s argument by saying that even after Watergate, even after all of the independent counsel investigations mentioned above, the legal system has survived without “having gone off on a runaway train” of actual criminal prosecutions against former presidents.

The Supreme Court rejected Bill Clinton’s claim of immunity.

In Clinton v. Jones in 1997, the Supreme Court unanimously allowed a sexual harassment suit against President Bill Clinton to proceed while he was in office, discounting concerns that it would distract him from his official responsibilities. Both of his appointees, Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer, voted against him.

“The president is subject to judicial process in appropriate circumstances,” Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the court, adding, “We have never suggested that the president, or any other official, has an immunity that extends beyond the scope of any action taken in an official capacity.”

The case was in one sense harder than the one against Mr. Trump, as it involved a sitting president. In another sense, though, it was easier, as it concerned an episode said to have taken place before Mr. Clinton took office (Paula Jones, an Arkansas state employee, said Mr. Clinton had made lewd advances in a hotel room when he was governor of the state).

The case is best remembered for a prediction in Justice Stevens’s majority opinion that “it appears to us highly unlikely to occupy any substantial amount of petitioner’s time.” In fact, it led to Mr. Clinton’s impeachment.

In the same paragraph, Justice Stevens made a second prediction.

“In the more than 200-year history of the Republic, only three sitting presidents have been subjected to suits for their private actions,” he wrote. “If the past is any indicator, it seems unlikely that a deluge of such litigation will ever engulf the presidency.”

Suits against Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman were dismissed, and one against President John F. Kennedy involving a car accident during his 1960 campaign was settled. The case against Mr. Clinton added a fourth.

Justice Stevens, who died in 2019, failed to anticipate the enormous volume of civil and criminal litigation in which Mr. Trump and his businesses have been named as defendants.

We are now over the two-hour mark of the Supreme Court’s arguments in the Trump immunity case. The Justice Department lawyer has continued to face skeptical questions from many of the court’s conservatives, several of whom appear particularly focused on how to draw the line between a president’s core powers and non-core powers. In other words, what actions by a president might be shielded from prosecution and what would not. The questioning suggests that some of the justices may favor a ruling that could lead to more lower-court proceedings, perhaps delaying the trial.

The Supreme Court’s relatively new process (coming out of Covid) of letting each justice ask questions at the end in order of seniority has an interesting consequence, as seen here. Dreeben kept wanting to say these things about government legal memos and to go into the details about the actions Trump is accused of taking, but the Republican-appointed justices kept cutting him off. It’s the turn of Kagan, a Democratic appointee, to ask any final questions she wants, and she is letting him talk on and on.

Much of the discussion this morning has swirled around the question of whether, without immunity, presidents will be hounded by their rivals with malicious charges after leaving office. Alito and other conservatives on the court seem concerned that the Trump prosecutions will open the door to endless attacks against future presidents.

The other main topic of discussion has been whether presidents enjoy some form of immunity for carrying out their official duties and, if so, how those official actions are defined. That’s an important question for the Trump election case because Trump has claimed he was acting in his role as president when, by his own account, he sought to root out fraud in the 2020 vote count. It’s also important for a different reason: the justices could send the official acts question back to a lower court to sort out, and that process could take a long time, delaying the case's trial until after this year’s election.

Justice Alito suggests that there is a risk to our stable democracy if presidents who lose close elections would not be allowed to retire in peace but could face prosecution. He has essentially flipped the situation under consideration upside down: that Trump is being prosecuted for having used fraud to remain in power after losing a close election.

A part of this exchange between Justice Alito and the Justice Department's lawyer, Dreeben, gets at a pressure point in American-style democracy and the rule of law. One of the safeguards against illegitimate prosecutions of ex-presidents, Dreeben says, is that if the Justice Department has advised the president that doing something would be lawful, the department could not later turn around and prosecute the now-former president for relying on that advice and doing that thing.

Alito points out that this creates an incentive for presidents to appoint attorneys general who will just tell them that anything they want to do would be legal. Indeed — that is a critique of the Office of Legal Counsel system, in which politically appointed lawyers decide what the law means for the executive branch.

An example: During the George W. Bush administration, memos about post-9/11 surveillance and torture were written by a politically appointed lawyer with idiosyncratically broad views of a president’s supposed power, as commander in chief, to authorize violations of surveillance and torture laws. The Justice Department later withdrew those memos as espousing a false view of the law, but held that officials who had taken action based on those memos could not be charged with crimes.

Justice Alito suggests there are not enough legal safeguards in place to protect presidents against malicious prosecution if they don’t have some form of immunity. He tells Dreeben that the grand jury process isn’t much of a protection because prosecutors, as the saying goes, can indict a ham sandwich. When Dreeben tries to argue that prosecutors sometimes don’t indict people who don’t deserve it, Alito dismissively says, “Every once in a while there’s an eclipse too.”

If you are just joining in, the justices are questioning the Justice Department lawyer, Michael Dreeben, about the government’s argument that former President Trump is not absolutely immune from prosecution on charges that he plotted to subvert the 2020 election. Dreeben has faced skeptical questions from several of the conservative justices, including both Justices Alito and Kavanaugh, who have suggested that the fraud conspiracy statute being used against the former president is vague. That statute is central to the government’s case against Trump.

Justice Alito now joins Justice Kavanaugh in suggesting that the fraud conspiracy statute is very vague and broadly drawn. That is bad news for the indictment brought against Trump by Jack Smith, the special counsel.

The scope and viability of this fraud statute, which is absolutely central to the Trump indictment, wasn’t on the menu of issues seemingly at play in this hearing. Kavanaugh and Alito appear to have gone out of their way to question its use in the Trump case.

Justice Sotomayor points out that under the Trump team’s theory that a criminal statute has to clearly state that it applies to the presidency for it to cover a president’s official actions, there would essentially be no accountability at all. Because only a tiny handful of laws mention the president, that means a president could act contrary to them without violating them. As a result, the Senate could not even impeach a president for violating criminal statutes, she says — because he would not be violating those laws if they don’t apply to the president.

Dreeben is under heavy fire from the court’s conservatives.

The precedent most helpful to Trump: Nixon v. Fitzgerald.

In 1982, in Nixon v. Fitzgerald , the Supreme Court ruled that former President Richard M. Nixon had absolute immunity from civil lawsuits — ones brought by private litigants seeking money — for conduct “within the ‘outer perimeter’ of his official responsibility.”

The ruling is helpful to former President Donald J. Trump, establishing as it does that immunity can be expansive, lives on after a president leaves office and extends to the very limits of what may be said to be official conduct.

But the decision also falls well short of dictating the outcome in the case that is being argued on Thursday, which concerns a criminal prosecution, not a civil suit.

The 1982 case arose from a lawsuit brought by an Air Force analyst, A. Ernest Fitzgerald, who said he was fired in 1970 in retaliation for his criticism of cost overruns. By the time the Supreme Court acted, Nixon had been out of office for several years.

“In view of the special nature of the president’s constitutional office and functions,” Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. wrote for the majority 5-to-4 decision, “we think it appropriate to recognize absolute presidential immunity from damages liability” for Nixon’s official conduct, broadly defined.

But the decision drew a sharp line between civil suits, which it said can be abusive and harassing, and criminal prosecutions like the one Mr. Trump is facing.

“In view of the visibility of his office and the effect of his actions on countless people, the president would be an easily identifiable target for suits for civil damages,” Justice Powell wrote, adding, “The court has recognized before that there is a lesser public interest in actions for civil damages than, for example, in criminal prosecutions.”

Chief Justice Warren E. Burger underscored the point in a concurring opinion. “The immunity is limited to civil damages claims,” he wrote.

Even in the context of civil suits, Nixon v. Fitzgerald conferred immunity only on conduct within the “outer perimeter” of a president’s official duties. Jack Smith, the special counsel, has said that Mr. Trump’s efforts to subvert democracy are well outside that line.

The Justice Department has already granted sitting presidents immunity while they are in office.

Former President Donald J. Trump’s claim that former presidents must enjoy “complete immunity” from prosecution for any crimes they committed in office would significantly expand the temporary immunity that sitting presidents already have.

Nothing in the Constitution or federal statutes says that presidents are shielded from being prosecuted while in office, and no court has ever ruled that way. But political appointees in the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, whose interpretations are binding on the executive branch, have declared that the Constitution implicitly establishes such immunity.

This argument boils down to practicalities of governance: The stigma of being indicted and the burden of a trial would unduly interfere with a president’s ability to carry out his duties, Robert G. Dixon Jr. , then the head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, wrote in a memo in September 1973 . This would prevent the executive branch “from accomplishing its constitutional functions” in a way that cannot “be justified by an overriding need,” he added.

Mr. Dixon, an appointee of President Richard M. Nixon, wrote his memo against the backdrop of the Watergate scandal, when Mr. Nixon faced a criminal investigation by a special counsel, Archibald Cox. The next month, Nixon’s solicitor general, Robert H. Bork , in a court brief , similarly argued for an “inference” that the Constitution makes sitting presidents immune from indictment and trial.

(That same month, Mr. Nixon had Mr. Cox fired in the so-called Saturday Night Massacre. Mr. Nixon’s attorney general and deputy attorney general resigned rather than carry out his orders to oust the prosecutor; Mr. Nixon then turned to Mr. Bork, the department’s No. 3, who proved willing to do it. Amid a political backlash, Mr. Nixon was forced to allow a new special counsel, Leon Jaworski , to resume the investigation.)

The question arose again a generation later, when President Bill Clinton faced an investigation by Kenneth Starr, an independent counsel, into the Whitewater land deal that morphed into an inquiry into his affair with Monica Lewinsky, a White House intern. Randolph D. Moss , Mr. Clinton’s appointee to lead the Office of Legal Counsel, reviewed the Justice Department’s 1973 opinions and reaffirmed their conclusions .

Legal scholars, as well as staff for prosecutors investigating presidents, have disputed the legitimacy of that constitutional theory. In 1974, Mr. Jaworski received a memo from his staff saying he could, in fact, indict Mr. Nixon while he was in office, and he later made that case in a court brief .

And in a 56-page memo in 1998, Ronald Rotunda, a prominent conservative constitutional scholar whom Mr. Starr hired as a consultant on his legal team, rejected the view that presidents are immune from prosecution while in office. Mr. Starr later said that he had concluded that he could indict Mr. Clinton.

“It is proper, constitutional, and legal for a federal grand jury to indict a sitting president for serious criminal acts that are not part of, and are contrary to, the president’s official duties,” Mr. Rotunda wrote. “In this country, no one, even President Clinton, is above the law.”

Mr. Starr commissioned the Rotunda memo as he was drafting a potential indictment of Mr. Clinton, and Mr. Starr decided that he could charge the president while in office. In the end, however, both Mr. Jaworski and Mr. Starr decided to let congressional impeachment proceedings play out and did not try to bring indictments while Mr. Nixon and Mr. Clinton remained in office.

The question may never be definitively tested in the courts. In 1999, Congress allowed a law that created independent counsels like Mr. Starr — prosecutors who do not report to the attorney general — to expire, and the Justice Department issued regulations to allow for the appointment of semiautonomous special counsels for inquiries into potential high-level wrongdoing in the executive branch.

Special counsels are, however, bound by Justice Departments policies and practices — including the Office of Legal Counsel’s proclamation that sitting presidents are temporarily immune from criminal indictment or trial.

Alan Feuer and Charlie Savage

Is there such a thing as executive immunity?

There are no direct precedents on the broad question of whether presidents have criminal immunity for their official actions.

The Supreme Court has held that presidents are absolutely immune from civil lawsuits related to their official acts , in part to protect them against ceaseless harassment and judicial scrutiny of their day-to-day decisions. The court has also held that presidents can be sued over their personal actions .

The Supreme Court has further found that while presidents are sometimes immune from judicial subpoenas requesting internal executive branch information, that privilege is not absolute. Even presidents, the court has decided, can be forced to obey a subpoena in a criminal case if the need for information is great enough.

But until Mr. Trump wound up in court, the Supreme Court has never had a reason to decide whether former presidents are protected from being prosecuted for official actions. The Justice Department has long maintained that sitting presidents are temporarily immune from prosecution because criminal charges would distract them from their constitutional functions. But since Mr. Trump is not in office, that is not an issue.

The closest the country has come to the prosecution of a former president over official actions came in 1974, when Richard M. Nixon resigned to avoid being impeached over the Watergate scandal. But a pardon by his successor, President Gerald R. Ford, protected Nixon from indictment by the Watergate special prosecutor.

Mr. Smith’s team has argued that Ford’s pardon — and Nixon’s acceptance of it — demonstrates that both men understood that Nixon was not already immune. Mr. Trump’s team has sought to counter that point by arguing — inaccurately — that Nixon faced potential criminal charges only over private actions, like tax fraud. But the special prosecutor weighed charging Nixon with abusing his office to obstruct justice.

Mr. Trump’s team has argued that denying his claims risks unleashing a routine practice of prosecuting former presidents for partisan reasons. But Mr. Smith’s team has argued that if courts endorse Mr. Trump’s theory, then future presidents who are confident of surviving impeachment could, with impunity, commit any number of crimes in connection with their official actions.

“Such a result would severely undermine the compelling public interest in the rule of law and criminal accountability,” prosecutors wrote.

Hypothetical questions test the limits of Trump’s immunity claim.

An exchange during an appeals court argument in January about a hypothetical political assassination tested former President Donald J. Trump’s claim that he is absolutely immune from prosecution for his official conduct.

His lawyer, D. John Sauer, has urged the justices to consider only what he is actually accused of: plotting to subvert the 2020 election. But hypothetical questions are routine at the Supreme Court, and they have a way of illuminating the contours and implications of legal theories.

That is what happened in January, when Judge Florence Y. Pan of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia had to press Mr. Sauer to get an answer to a hypothetical question: Are former presidents absolutely immune from prosecution, even for murders they ordered while in office?

“I asked you a yes-or-no question,” Judge Pan said. “Could a president who ordered SEAL Team 6 to assassinate a political rival, who was not impeached, would he be subject to criminal prosecution?”

Mr. Sauer said his answer was a “qualified yes,” by which he meant no. He explained that prosecution would be permitted only if the president were first impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate.

Impeachments of presidents are rare: There have been four in the history of the Republic, two of them of Mr. Trump. The number of convictions, which require a two-thirds majority of the Senate: zero.

Mr. Sauer’s statement called to mind a 2019 federal appeals court argument over whether Mr. Trump could block state prosecutors from obtaining his tax and business records. He maintained that he was immune not only from prosecution but also from criminal investigation so long as he was president.

At that time, Judge Denny Chin of the Second Circuit pressed William S. Consovoy, a lawyer for Mr. Trump, asking about his client’s famous statement that he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue without losing political support.

“Local authorities couldn’t investigate?” Judge Chin asked, adding: “Nothing could be done? That’s your position?”

“That is correct,” said Mr. Consovoy. “That is correct.”

This headline followed: “If Trump Shoots Someone on 5th Ave., Does He Have Immunity? His Lawyer Says Yes.”

For his part, Mr. Sauer does not seem eager to revisit the question about assassinations. Indeed, in asking the Supreme Court to hear Mr. Trump’s appeal, Mr. Sauer urged the justices not to be distracted by “lurid hypotheticals” that “almost certainly never will occur.”

What counts as an official act as president?

Another issue that has come up in lower courts in this case was what counted as an official act for a president, as opposed to a private action that was not connected to his constitutional responsibilities.

If the justices want to dispose of the dispute without definitively ruling on whether presidents are immune from prosecution for official acts, they could do so by finding that the specific steps former President Donald J. Trump took to remain in office that are cited in the federal indictment were not official actions. If so, the broader immunity question would not matter, and the prosecution could proceed.

The acts by Mr. Trump cited in the indictment include using deceit to organize fake slates of electors and to try to get state officials to subvert legitimate election results; trying to get the Justice Department and Vice President Mike Pence to help fraudulently alter the results; directing his supporters to the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021; and exploiting the violence and chaos of their ensuing riot.

In its court filings, Mr. Trump’s team has sought to reframe those accusations not only as official actions, but innocuous or even admirable ones.

“All five types of conduct alleged in the indictment constitute official acts,” they wrote. “They all reflect President Trump’s efforts and duties, squarely as chief executive of the United States, to advocate for and defend the integrity of the federal election, in accord with his view that it was tainted by fraud and irregularity.”

Mr. Smith’s team has argued that they should be seen as the efforts of a person seeking office, not of an officeholder carrying out government responsibilities.

“Those alleged acts were carried out by and on behalf of the defendant in his capacity as a candidate, and the extensive involvement of private attorneys and campaign staff in procuring the fraudulent slates as alleged in the indictment underscores that those activities were not within the outer perimeter of the office of the presidency,” they wrote.

Judge Tanya S. Chutkan, who is overseeing Mr. Trump’s case in Federal District Court in Washington, issued her ruling rejecting Mr. Trump’s immunity claim without including any detailed analysis of whether his acts were “official.”

If the Supreme Court were to send the matter back to her to take a stab at answering that question before restarting the appeals process, Mr. Trump will, at a minimum, have used up additional valuable time that could help push any trial past the election.

Noah Weiland and Alan Feuer

Here are the lawyers arguing before the Supreme Court.

The two lawyers arguing before the Supreme Court on Thursday have each played a role in some of the defining legal battles stemming from Mr. Trump’s term in office.

Arguing the case for the special counsel Jack Smith will be Michael Dreeben, who worked for a different special counsel’s office that scrutinized Mr. Trump’s presidency: Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation into links between Russia and associates of Mr. Trump. Mr. Dreeben, one of the nation’s leading criminal law experts, has made more than 100 oral arguments before the Supreme Court, including when he served as deputy solicitor general.

On Mr. Mueller’s team, he handled pretrial litigation, defending the scope of the investigation and preventing the office from losing cases on appeal. He also helped with a second part of Mr. Mueller’s investigation, examining whether Mr. Trump had tried to obstruct the inquiry in his dealings with associates involved in the case.

Mr. Dreeben, who was heavily involved in the writing of Mr. Mueller’s final report on his investigation, supported an interpretation of presidential power that emphasized limits on what a president could do while exercising his or her powers, according to “Where Law Ends,” a book written by Andrew Weissmann, another prosecutor on Mr. Mueller’s team.

After Mr. Mueller’s investigation concluded, Mr. Dreeben took a teaching position at Georgetown University’s law school and returned to private practice at O’Melveny, arguing in front of the Supreme Court on behalf of the city of Austin over a First Amendment dispute about the placement of digital billboards.

Opposing Mr. Dreeben in front of the Supreme Court will be D. John Sauer, a lawyer based in St. Louis who once served as the solicitor general of Missouri. Mr. Sauer joined Mr. Trump’s legal team late last year to handle appellate matters, including his challenge to a gag order imposed on him in the election case in Washington.

As Missouri’s solicitor general, Mr. Sauer took part in a last-ditch effort to keep Mr. Trump in power after his defeat in the 2020 election, filing a motion on behalf of his state and five others in support of an attempt by Texas to have the Supreme Court toss out the results of the vote count in several key swing states.

He also joined in an unsuccessful bid with Texas in asking the Supreme Court to stop the Biden administration from rescinding a Trump-era immigration program that forces certain asylum seekers arriving at the southwestern border to await approval in Mexico.

When he left the solicitor general’s office last January, Mr. Sauer, who once clerked for Justice Antonin Scalia, returned to his private firm, the James Otis Law Group. The firm is named after a prominent Revolutionary War-era lawyer who built a career out of challenging abuses by British colonial forces.

To justify his defense in the immunity case, Trump turns to a familiar tactic.

When the Supreme Court considers Donald J. Trump’s sweeping claims of executive immunity on Thursday, it will break new legal ground, mulling for the first time the question of whether a former president can avoid being prosecuted for things he did in office.

But in coming up with the argument, Mr. Trump used a tactic on which he has often leaned in his life as a businessman and politician: He flipped the facts on their head in an effort to create a different reality.

At the core of his immunity defense is a claim that seeks to upend the story told by federal prosecutors in an indictment charging him with plotting to overturn the 2020 election. In that indictment, prosecutors described a criminal conspiracy by Mr. Trump to subvert the election results and stay in power.

In Mr. Trump’s telling, however, those same events are official acts that he undertook as president to safeguard the integrity of the race and cannot be subject to prosecution.

In many ways, Mr. Trump’s immunity claim is breathtaking. In one instance, his lawyers went so far as to say that a president could not be prosecuted even for using the military to assassinate a rival unless he was first impeached.

But the wholesale rewriting of the government’s accusations — which first appeared six months ago in Mr. Trump’s motion to dismiss the election interference case — may be the most audacious part of his defense. It was certainly a requisite step his lawyers had to take to advance the immunity argument.

Other courts have ruled that presidents enjoy limited immunity from civil lawsuits for things they did as part of the formal responsibilities of their job. To extend that legal concept to criminal charges, Mr. Trump’s lawyers needed to reframe all of the allegations lodged against him in the election interference case as official acts of his presidency rather than as the actions of a candidate misusing his power.