building argument essay

What this handout is about

This handout will define what an argument is and explain why you need one in most of your academic essays.

Arguments are everywhere

You may be surprised to hear that the word “argument” does not have to be written anywhere in your assignment for it to be an important part of your task. In fact, making an argument—expressing a point of view on a subject and supporting it with evidence—is often the aim of academic writing. Your instructors may assume that you know this and thus may not explain the importance of arguments in class.

Most material you learn in college is or has been debated by someone, somewhere, at some time. Even when the material you read or hear is presented as a simple fact, it may actually be one person’s interpretation of a set of information. Instructors may call on you to examine that interpretation and defend it, refute it, or offer some new view of your own. In writing assignments, you will almost always need to do more than just summarize information that you have gathered or regurgitate facts that have been discussed in class. You will need to develop a point of view on or interpretation of that material and provide evidence for your position.

Consider an example. For nearly 2000 years, educated people in many Western cultures believed that bloodletting—deliberately causing a sick person to lose blood—was the most effective treatment for a variety of illnesses. The claim that bloodletting is beneficial to human health was not widely questioned until the 1800s, and some physicians continued to recommend bloodletting as late as the 1920s. Medical practices have now changed because some people began to doubt the effectiveness of bloodletting; these people argued against it and provided convincing evidence. Human knowledge grows out of such differences of opinion, and scholars like your instructors spend their lives engaged in debate over what claims may be counted as accurate in their fields. In their courses, they want you to engage in similar kinds of critical thinking and debate.

Argumentation is not just what your instructors do. We all use argumentation on a daily basis, and you probably already have some skill at crafting an argument. The more you improve your skills in this area, the better you will be at thinking critically, reasoning, making choices, and weighing evidence.

Making a claim

What is an argument? In academic writing, an argument is usually a main idea, often called a “claim” or “thesis statement,” backed up with evidence that supports the idea. In the majority of college papers, you will need to make some sort of claim and use evidence to support it, and your ability to do this well will separate your papers from those of students who see assignments as mere accumulations of fact and detail. In other words, gone are the happy days of being given a “topic” about which you can write anything. It is time to stake out a position and prove why it is a good position for a thinking person to hold. See our handout on thesis statements .

Claims can be as simple as “Protons are positively charged and electrons are negatively charged,” with evidence such as, “In this experiment, protons and electrons acted in such and such a way.” Claims can also be as complex as “Genre is the most important element to the contract of expectations between filmmaker and audience,” using reasoning and evidence such as, “defying genre expectations can create a complete apocalypse of story form and content, leaving us stranded in a sort of genre-less abyss.” In either case, the rest of your paper will detail the reasoning and evidence that have led you to believe that your position is best.

When beginning to write a paper, ask yourself, “What is my point?” For example, the point of this handout is to help you become a better writer, and we are arguing that an important step in the process of writing effective arguments is understanding the concept of argumentation. If your papers do not have a main point, they cannot be arguing for anything. Asking yourself what your point is can help you avoid a mere “information dump.” Consider this: your instructors probably know a lot more than you do about your subject matter. Why, then, would you want to provide them with material they already know? Instructors are usually looking for two things:

• Proof that you understand the material
• A demonstration of your ability to use or apply the material in ways that go beyond what you have read or heard.

This second part can be done in many ways: you can critique the material, apply it to something else, or even just explain it in a different way. In order to succeed at this second step, though, you must have a particular point to argue.

Arguments in academic writing are usually complex and take time to develop. Your argument will need to be more than a simple or obvious statement such as “Frank Lloyd Wright was a great architect.” Such a statement might capture your initial impressions of Wright as you have studied him in class; however, you need to look deeper and express specifically what caused that “greatness.” Your instructor will probably expect something more complicated, such as “Frank Lloyd Wright’s architecture combines elements of European modernism, Asian aesthetic form, and locally found materials to create a unique new style,” or “There are many strong similarities between Wright’s building designs and those of his mother, which suggests that he may have borrowed some of her ideas.” To develop your argument, you would then define your terms and prove your claim with evidence from Wright’s drawings and buildings and those of the other architects you mentioned.

Do not stop with having a point. You have to back up your point with evidence. The strength of your evidence, and your use of it, can make or break your argument. See our handout on evidence . You already have the natural inclination for this type of thinking, if not in an academic setting. Think about how you talked your parents into letting you borrow the family car. Did you present them with lots of instances of your past trustworthiness? Did you make them feel guilty because your friends’ parents all let them drive? Did you whine until they just wanted you to shut up? Did you look up statistics on teen driving and use them to show how you didn’t fit the dangerous-driver profile? These are all types of argumentation, and they exist in academia in similar forms.

Every field has slightly different requirements for acceptable evidence, so familiarize yourself with some arguments from within that field instead of just applying whatever evidence you like best. Pay attention to your textbooks and your instructor’s lectures. What types of argument and evidence are they using? The type of evidence that sways an English instructor may not work to convince a sociology instructor. Find out what counts as proof that something is true in that field. Is it statistics, a logical development of points, something from the object being discussed (art work, text, culture, or atom), the way something works, or some combination of more than one of these things?

Be consistent with your evidence. Unlike negotiating for the use of your parents’ car, a college paper is not the place for an all-out blitz of every type of argument. You can often use more than one type of evidence within a paper, but make sure that within each section you are providing the reader with evidence appropriate to each claim. So, if you start a paragraph or section with a statement like “Putting the student seating area closer to the basketball court will raise player performance,” do not follow with your evidence on how much more money the university could raise by letting more students go to games for free. Information about how fan support raises player morale, which then results in better play, would be a better follow-up. Your next section could offer clear reasons why undergraduates have as much or more right to attend an undergraduate event as wealthy alumni—but this information would not go in the same section as the fan support stuff. You cannot convince a confused person, so keep things tidy and ordered.

Counterargument

One way to strengthen your argument and show that you have a deep understanding of the issue you are discussing is to anticipate and address counterarguments or objections. By considering what someone who disagrees with your position might have to say about your argument, you show that you have thought things through, and you dispose of some of the reasons your audience might have for not accepting your argument. Recall our discussion of student seating in the Dean Dome. To make the most effective argument possible, you should consider not only what students would say about seating but also what alumni who have paid a lot to get good seats might say.

You can generate counterarguments by asking yourself how someone who disagrees with you might respond to each of the points you’ve made or your position as a whole. If you can’t immediately imagine another position, here are some strategies to try:

• Do some research. It may seem to you that no one could possibly disagree with the position you are arguing, but someone probably has. For example, some people argue that a hotdog is a sandwich. If you are making an argument concerning, for example, the characteristics of an exceptional sandwich, you might want to see what some of these people have to say.
• Talk with a friend or with your teacher. Another person may be able to imagine counterarguments that haven’t occurred to you.
• Consider your conclusion or claim and the premises of your argument and imagine someone who denies each of them. For example, if you argued, “Cats make the best pets. This is because they are clean and independent,” you might imagine someone saying, “Cats do not make the best pets. They are dirty and needy.”

Once you have thought up some counterarguments, consider how you will respond to them—will you concede that your opponent has a point but explain why your audience should nonetheless accept your argument? Will you reject the counterargument and explain why it is mistaken? Either way, you will want to leave your reader with a sense that your argument is stronger than opposing arguments.

When you are summarizing opposing arguments, be charitable. Present each argument fairly and objectively, rather than trying to make it look foolish. You want to show that you have considered the many sides of the issue. If you simply attack or caricature your opponent (also referred to as presenting a “straw man”), you suggest that your argument is only capable of defeating an extremely weak adversary, which may undermine your argument rather than enhance it.

It is usually better to consider one or two serious counterarguments in some depth, rather than to give a long but superficial list of many different counterarguments and replies.

Be sure that your reply is consistent with your original argument. If considering a counterargument changes your position, you will need to go back and revise your original argument accordingly.

Audience is a very important consideration in argument. Take a look at our handout on audience . A lifetime of dealing with your family members has helped you figure out which arguments work best to persuade each of them. Maybe whining works with one parent, but the other will only accept cold, hard statistics. Your kid brother may listen only to the sound of money in his palm. It’s usually wise to think of your audience in an academic setting as someone who is perfectly smart but who doesn’t necessarily agree with you. You are not just expressing your opinion in an argument (“It’s true because I said so”), and in most cases your audience will know something about the subject at hand—so you will need sturdy proof. At the same time, do not think of your audience as capable of reading your mind. You have to come out and state both your claim and your evidence clearly. Do not assume that because the instructor knows the material, he or she understands what part of it you are using, what you think about it, and why you have taken the position you’ve chosen.

Critical reading

Critical reading is a big part of understanding argument. Although some of the material you read will be very persuasive, do not fall under the spell of the printed word as authority. Very few of your instructors think of the texts they assign as the last word on the subject. Remember that the author of every text has an agenda, something that he or she wants you to believe. This is OK—everything is written from someone’s perspective—but it’s a good thing to be aware of. For more information on objectivity and bias and on reading sources carefully, read our handouts on evaluating print sources and reading to write .

Take notes either in the margins of your source (if you are using a photocopy or your own book) or on a separate sheet as you read. Put away that highlighter! Simply highlighting a text is good for memorizing the main ideas in that text—it does not encourage critical reading. Part of your goal as a reader should be to put the author’s ideas in your own words. Then you can stop thinking of these ideas as facts and start thinking of them as arguments.

When you read, ask yourself questions like “What is the author trying to prove?” and “What is the author assuming I will agree with?” Do you agree with the author? Does the author adequately defend her argument? What kind of proof does she use? Is there something she leaves out that you would put in? Does putting it in hurt her argument? As you get used to reading critically, you will start to see the sometimes hidden agendas of other writers, and you can use this skill to improve your own ability to craft effective arguments.

Works consulted

We consulted these works while writing this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of resources on the handout’s topic, and we encourage you to do your own research to find additional publications. Please do not use this list as a model for the format of your own reference list, as it may not match the citation style you are using. For guidance on formatting citations, please see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial . We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.

Anson, Chris M., and Robert A. Schwegler. 2010. The Longman Handbook for Writers and Readers , 6th ed. New York: Longman.

Booth, Wayne C., Gregory G. Colomb, Joseph M. Williams, Joseph Bizup, and William T. FitzGerald. 2016. The Craft of Research , 4th ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Ede, Lisa. 2004. Work in Progress: A Guide to Academic Writing and Revising , 6th ed. Boston: Bedford/St Martin’s.

Gage, John T. 2005. The Shape of Reason: Argumentative Writing in College , 4th ed. New York: Longman.

Lunsford, Andrea A., and John J. Ruszkiewicz. 2016. Everything’s an Argument , 7th ed. Boston: Bedford/St Martin’s.

Rosen, Leonard J., and Laurence Behrens. 2003. The Allyn & Bacon Handbook , 5th ed. New York: Longman.

You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Make a Gift

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Argumentative Essays

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.

What is an argumentative essay?

The argumentative essay is a genre of writing that requires the student to investigate a topic; collect, generate, and evaluate evidence; and establish a position on the topic in a concise manner.

Please note : Some confusion may occur between the argumentative essay and the expository essay. These two genres are similar, but the argumentative essay differs from the expository essay in the amount of pre-writing (invention) and research involved. The argumentative essay is commonly assigned as a capstone or final project in first year writing or advanced composition courses and involves lengthy, detailed research. Expository essays involve less research and are shorter in length. Expository essays are often used for in-class writing exercises or tests, such as the GED or GRE.

Argumentative essay assignments generally call for extensive research of literature or previously published material. Argumentative assignments may also require empirical research where the student collects data through interviews, surveys, observations, or experiments. Detailed research allows the student to learn about the topic and to understand different points of view regarding the topic so that she/he may choose a position and support it with the evidence collected during research. Regardless of the amount or type of research involved, argumentative essays must establish a clear thesis and follow sound reasoning.

The structure of the argumentative essay is held together by the following.

• A clear, concise, and defined thesis statement that occurs in the first paragraph of the essay.

In the first paragraph of an argument essay, students should set the context by reviewing the topic in a general way. Next the author should explain why the topic is important ( exigence ) or why readers should care about the issue. Lastly, students should present the thesis statement. It is essential that this thesis statement be appropriately narrowed to follow the guidelines set forth in the assignment. If the student does not master this portion of the essay, it will be quite difficult to compose an effective or persuasive essay.

• Clear and logical transitions between the introduction, body, and conclusion.

Transitions are the mortar that holds the foundation of the essay together. Without logical progression of thought, the reader is unable to follow the essay’s argument, and the structure will collapse. Transitions should wrap up the idea from the previous section and introduce the idea that is to follow in the next section.

• Body paragraphs that include evidential support.

Each paragraph should be limited to the discussion of one general idea. This will allow for clarity and direction throughout the essay. In addition, such conciseness creates an ease of readability for one’s audience. It is important to note that each paragraph in the body of the essay must have some logical connection to the thesis statement in the opening paragraph. Some paragraphs will directly support the thesis statement with evidence collected during research. It is also important to explain how and why the evidence supports the thesis ( warrant ).

However, argumentative essays should also consider and explain differing points of view regarding the topic. Depending on the length of the assignment, students should dedicate one or two paragraphs of an argumentative essay to discussing conflicting opinions on the topic. Rather than explaining how these differing opinions are wrong outright, students should note how opinions that do not align with their thesis might not be well informed or how they might be out of date.

• Evidential support (whether factual, logical, statistical, or anecdotal).

The argumentative essay requires well-researched, accurate, detailed, and current information to support the thesis statement and consider other points of view. Some factual, logical, statistical, or anecdotal evidence should support the thesis. However, students must consider multiple points of view when collecting evidence. As noted in the paragraph above, a successful and well-rounded argumentative essay will also discuss opinions not aligning with the thesis. It is unethical to exclude evidence that may not support the thesis. It is not the student’s job to point out how other positions are wrong outright, but rather to explain how other positions may not be well informed or up to date on the topic.

• A conclusion that does not simply restate the thesis, but readdresses it in light of the evidence provided.

It is at this point of the essay that students may begin to struggle. This is the portion of the essay that will leave the most immediate impression on the mind of the reader. Therefore, it must be effective and logical. Do not introduce any new information into the conclusion; rather, synthesize the information presented in the body of the essay. Restate why the topic is important, review the main points, and review your thesis. You may also want to include a short discussion of more research that should be completed in light of your work.

A complete argument

Perhaps it is helpful to think of an essay in terms of a conversation or debate with a classmate. If I were to discuss the cause of World War II and its current effect on those who lived through the tumultuous time, there would be a beginning, middle, and end to the conversation. In fact, if I were to end the argument in the middle of my second point, questions would arise concerning the current effects on those who lived through the conflict. Therefore, the argumentative essay must be complete, and logically so, leaving no doubt as to its intent or argument.

The five-paragraph essay

A common method for writing an argumentative essay is the five-paragraph approach. This is, however, by no means the only formula for writing such essays. If it sounds straightforward, that is because it is; in fact, the method consists of (a) an introductory paragraph (b) three evidentiary body paragraphs that may include discussion of opposing views and (c) a conclusion.

Longer argumentative essays

Complex issues and detailed research call for complex and detailed essays. Argumentative essays discussing a number of research sources or empirical research will most certainly be longer than five paragraphs. Authors may have to discuss the context surrounding the topic, sources of information and their credibility, as well as a number of different opinions on the issue before concluding the essay. Many of these factors will be determined by the assignment.

Argumentative Essay Examples to Inspire You (+ Free Formula)

Table of contents

Meredith Sell

Have you ever been asked to explain your opinion on a controversial issue? 

• Maybe your family got into a discussion about chemical pesticides
• Someone at work argues against investing resources into your project
• Your partner thinks intermittent fasting is the best way to lose weight and you disagree

Proving your point in an argumentative essay can be challenging, unless you are using a proven formula.

Argumentative essay formula & example

In the image below, you can see a recommended structure for argumentative essays. It starts with the topic sentence, which establishes the main idea of the essay. Next, this hypothesis is developed in the development stage. Then, the rebuttal, or the refutal of the main counter argument or arguments. Then, again, development of the rebuttal. This is followed by an example, and ends with a summary. This is a very basic structure, but it gives you a bird-eye-view of how a proper argumentative essay can be built.

Writing an argumentative essay (for a class, a news outlet, or just for fun) can help you improve your understanding of an issue and sharpen your thinking on the matter. Using researched facts and data, you can explain why you or others think the way you do, even while other reasonable people disagree.

Free AI argumentative essay generator > Free AI argumentative essay generator >

What Is an Argumentative Essay?

An argumentative essay is an explanatory essay that takes a side.

Instead of appealing to emotion and personal experience to change the reader’s mind, an argumentative essay uses logic and well-researched factual information to explain why the thesis in question is the most reasonable opinion on the matter.  

Over several paragraphs or pages, the author systematically walks through:

• The opposition (and supporting evidence)
• The chosen thesis (and its supporting evidence)

At the end, the author leaves the decision up to the reader, trusting that the case they’ve made will do the work of changing the reader’s mind. Even if the reader’s opinion doesn’t change, they come away from the essay with a greater understanding of the perspective presented — and perhaps a better understanding of their original opinion.

All of that might make it seem like writing an argumentative essay is way harder than an emotionally-driven persuasive essay — but if you’re like me and much more comfortable spouting facts and figures than making impassioned pleas, you may find that an argumentative essay is easier to write. 

Plus, the process of researching an argumentative essay means you can check your assumptions and develop an opinion that’s more based in reality than what you originally thought. I know for sure that my opinions need to be fact checked — don’t yours?

So how exactly do we write the argumentative essay?

How do you start an argumentative essay

First, gain a clear understanding of what exactly an argumentative essay is. To formulate a proper topic sentence, you have to be clear on your topic, and to explore it through research.

Students have difficulty starting an essay because the whole task seems intimidating, and they are afraid of spending too much time on the topic sentence. Experienced writers, however, know that there is no set time to spend on figuring out your topic. It's a real exploration that is based to a large extent on intuition.

6 Steps to Write an Argumentative Essay (Persuasion Formula)

Use this checklist to tackle your essay one step at a time:

1. Research an issue with an arguable question

To start, you need to identify an issue that well-informed people have varying opinions on. Here, it’s helpful to think of one core topic and how it intersects with another (or several other) issues. That intersection is where hot takes and reasonable (or unreasonable) opinions abound. 

I find it helpful to stage the issue as a question.

For example: 

Is it better to legislate the minimum size of chicken enclosures or to outlaw the sale of eggs from chickens who don’t have enough space?

Should snow removal policies focus more on effectively keeping roads clear for traffic or the environmental impacts of snow removal methods?

Once you have your arguable question ready, start researching the basic facts and specific opinions and arguments on the issue. Do your best to stay focused on gathering information that is directly relevant to your topic. Depending on what your essay is for, you may reference academic studies, government reports, or newspaper articles.

‍ Research your opposition and the facts that support their viewpoint as much as you research your own position . You’ll need to address your opposition in your essay, so you’ll want to know their argument from the inside out.

2. Choose a side based on your research

You likely started with an inclination toward one side or the other, but your research should ultimately shape your perspective. So once you’ve completed the research, nail down your opinion and start articulating the what and why of your take. 

What: I think it’s better to outlaw selling eggs from chickens whose enclosures are too small.

Why: Because if you regulate the enclosure size directly, egg producers outside of the government’s jurisdiction could ship eggs into your territory and put nearby egg producers out of business by offering better prices because they don’t have the added cost of larger enclosures.

This is an early form of your thesis and the basic logic of your argument. You’ll want to iterate on this a few times and develop a one-sentence statement that sums up the thesis of your essay.

Thesis: Outlawing the sale of eggs from chickens with cramped living spaces is better for business than regulating the size of chicken enclosures.

Now that you’ve articulated your thesis , spell out the counterargument(s) as well. Putting your opposition’s take into words will help you throughout the rest of the essay-writing process. (You can start by choosing the counter argument option with Wordtune Spices .)

Counterargument: Outlawing the sale of eggs from chickens with too small enclosures will immediately drive up egg prices for consumers, making the low-cost protein source harder to afford — especially for low-income consumers.

There may be one main counterargument to articulate, or several. Write them all out and start thinking about how you’ll use evidence to address each of them or show why your argument is still the best option.

3. Organize the evidence — for your side and the opposition

You did all of that research for a reason. Now’s the time to use it. 

Hopefully, you kept detailed notes in a document, complete with links and titles of all your source material. Go through your research document and copy the evidence for your argument and your opposition’s into another document.

List the main points of your argument. Then, below each point, paste the evidence that backs them up.

If you’re writing about chicken enclosures, maybe you found evidence that shows the spread of disease among birds kept in close quarters is worse than among birds who have more space. Or maybe you found information that says eggs from free-range chickens are more flavorful or nutritious. Put that information next to the appropriate part of your argument. 

Repeat the process with your opposition’s argument: What information did you find that supports your opposition? Paste it beside your opposition’s argument.

You could also put information here that refutes your opposition, but organize it in a way that clearly tells you — at a glance — that the information disproves their point.

Counterargument: Outlawing the sale of eggs from chickens with too small enclosures will immediately drive up egg prices for consumers.

BUT: Sicknesses like avian flu spread more easily through small enclosures and could cause a shortage that would drive up egg prices naturally, so ensuring larger enclosures is still a better policy for consumers over the long term.

As you organize your research and see the evidence all together, start thinking through the best way to order your points.  

Will it be better to present your argument all at once or to break it up with opposition claims you can quickly refute? Would some points set up other points well? Does a more complicated point require that the reader understands a simpler point first?

Play around and rearrange your notes to see how your essay might flow one way or another.

4. Freewrite or outline to think through your argument

Is your brain buzzing yet? At this point in the process, it can be helpful to take out a notebook or open a fresh document and dump whatever you’re thinking on the page.

Where should your essay start? What ground-level information do you need to provide your readers before you can dive into the issue?

Use your organized evidence document from step 3 to think through your argument from beginning to end, and determine the structure of your essay.

There are three typical structures for argumentative essays:

• Make your argument and tackle opposition claims one by one, as they come up in relation to the points of your argument - In this approach, the whole essay — from beginning to end — focuses on your argument, but as you make each point, you address the relevant opposition claims individually. This approach works well if your opposition’s views can be quickly explained and refuted and if they directly relate to specific points in your argument.
• Make the bulk of your argument, and then address the opposition all at once in a paragraph (or a few) - This approach puts the opposition in its own section, separate from your main argument. After you’ve made your case, with ample evidence to convince your readers, you write about the opposition, explaining their viewpoint and supporting evidence — and showing readers why the opposition’s argument is unconvincing. Once you’ve addressed the opposition, you write a conclusion that sums up why your argument is the better one.
• Open your essay by talking about the opposition and where it falls short. Build your entire argument to show how it is superior to that opposition - With this structure, you’re showing your readers “a better way” to address the issue. After opening your piece by showing how your opposition’s approaches fail, you launch into your argument, providing readers with ample evidence that backs you up.

As you think through your argument and examine your evidence document, consider which structure will serve your argument best. Sketch out an outline to give yourself a map to follow in the writing process. You could also rearrange your evidence document again to match your outline, so it will be easy to find what you need when you start writing.

5. Write your first draft

You have an outline and an organized document with all your points and evidence lined up and ready. Now you just have to write your essay.

In your first draft, focus on getting your ideas on the page. Your wording may not be perfect (whose is?), but you know what you’re trying to say — so even if you’re overly wordy and taking too much space to say what you need to say, put those words on the page.

Follow your outline, and draw from that evidence document to flesh out each point of your argument. Explain what the evidence means for your argument and your opposition. Connect the dots for your readers so they can follow you, point by point, and understand what you’re trying to say.

As you write, be sure to include:

1. Any background information your reader needs in order to understand the issue in question.

2. Evidence for both your argument and the counterargument(s). This shows that you’ve done your homework and builds trust with your reader, while also setting you up to make a more convincing argument. (If you find gaps in your research while you’re writing, Wordtune Spices can source statistics or historical facts on the fly!)

Get Wordtune for free > Get Wordtune for free >

3. A conclusion that sums up your overall argument and evidence — and leaves the reader with an understanding of the issue and its significance. This sort of conclusion brings your essay to a strong ending that doesn’t waste readers’ time, but actually adds value to your case.

6. Revise (with Wordtune)

The hard work is done: you have a first draft. Now, let’s fine tune your writing.

I like to step away from what I’ve written for a day (or at least a night of sleep) before attempting to revise. It helps me approach clunky phrases and rough transitions with fresh eyes. If you don’t have that luxury, just get away from your computer for a few minutes — use the bathroom, do some jumping jacks, eat an apple — and then come back and read through your piece.

As you revise, make sure you …

• Get the facts right. An argument with false evidence falls apart pretty quickly, so check your facts to make yours rock solid.
• Don’t misrepresent the opposition or their evidence. If someone who holds the opposing view reads your essay, they should affirm how you explain their side — even if they disagree with your rebuttal.
• Present a case that builds over the course of your essay, makes sense, and ends on a strong note. One point should naturally lead to the next. Your readers shouldn’t feel like you’re constantly changing subjects. You’re making a variety of points, but your argument should feel like a cohesive whole.
• Paraphrase sources and cite them appropriately. Did you skip citations when writing your first draft? No worries — you can add them now. And check that you don’t overly rely on quotations. (Need help paraphrasing? Wordtune can help. Simply highlight the sentence or phrase you want to adjust and sort through Wordtune’s suggestions.)
• Tighten up overly wordy explanations and sharpen any convoluted ideas. Wordtune makes a great sidekick for this too 😉

Words to start an argumentative essay

The best way to introduce a convincing argument is to provide a strong thesis statement . These are the words I usually use to start an argumentative essay:

• It is indisputable that the world today is facing a multitude of issues
• With the rise of ____, the potential to make a positive difference has never been more accessible
• It is essential that we take action now and tackle these issues head-on
• it is critical to understand the underlying causes of the problems standing before us
• Opponents of this idea claim
• Those who are against these ideas may say
• Some people may disagree with this idea
• Some people may say that ____, however

When refuting an opposing concept, use:

• These researchers have a point in thinking
• To a certain extent they are right
• After seeing this evidence, there is no way one can agree with this idea
• This argument is irrelevant to the topic

Are you convinced by your own argument yet? Ready to brave the next get-together where everyone’s talking like they know something about intermittent fasting , chicken enclosures , or snow removal policies? 

Now if someone asks you to explain your evidence-based but controversial opinion, you can hand them your essay and ask them to report back after they’ve read it.

Share This Article:

How to Craft Your Ideal Thesis Research Topic

How to Craft an Engaging Elevator Pitch that Gets Results

Eight Steps to Craft an Irresistible LinkedIn Profile

Looking for fresh content, thank you your submission has been received.

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

7 Ways to Develop an Argument in an Essay

• 4-minute read
• 14th December 2016

Writing an essay is, fundamentally, a case of arguing a point. But unlike when two feuding wrestlers meet in the ring, ‘arguing’ here doesn’t mean shouting at someone you disagree with. Rather, you need to develop a clear and coherent argument step by step.

1. The Basic Structure of an Argument

At its most basic , an argument is a conclusion that follows logically from a set of premises. A premise is an idea or fact, while the conclusion is a claim that follows from a set of facts:

Premise One: Dwayne Johnson is a man.

Premise Two: All men are mortal.

Conclusion: Dwayne Johnson is mortal.

Here, for instance, we have to accept the conclusion as long as we accept the premises as true. Not all arguments are this simple, but the important thing is that your conclusion should clearly follow from the argument that precedes it.

2. Identify Your Claim

When developing an argument, your first step should be clearly identifying what you are arguing. This may require setting out a research question and/or hypotheses to be tested, but in shorter essays it will usually just involve explaining what you hope to prove.

3. Know the Main Points in Your Argument

Once you’ve set out what you’re arguing, the next step is to break it down into steps.

For instance, if your main claim is that Dwayne Johson revolutionised professional wrestling, you might want to focus on several different things: Johnson being part of the Anoa’i family, the popularity of the ‘People’s Elbow’ , and the enduring influence of The Rock.

Find this useful?

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

4. Structure Your Argument Carefully

The next step is linking the points in your argument. This means that you should discuss them in a logical order, drawing connections between them wherever possible.

For instance, in our essay about The Rock, we’d want to address each point in the order set out above, since Johnson’s connection to an established wrestling dynasty led to his career. His popularity then drew new people to wrestling, influencing the modern industry.

5. Use Evidence

Simply claiming that Dwayne Johnson revolutionised the world of professional wrestling isn’t enough. To argue convincingly, we’d need to provide evidence of how this happened.

In an academic essay, this usually means drawing upon past research (e.g. existing studies about wrestling) or experimental data (e.g. a questionnaire about the popularity of The Rock) to support each point we make. Without evidence, all we have is an unsupported claim.

6. Consider Counterarguments

Another aspect of developing your argument is considering possible counterarguments . This allows you to address potential objections to the point you’re making pre-emptively.

For instance, in the case of Johnson’s influence on wrestling, we might consider other factors that contributed to its popularity in the ‘90s and ‘00s. Or just how terrible his films are.

7. Have a Clear Conclusion

As with the basic argument at the start of this list, the conclusion of your essay should follow clearly from the preceding points (your ‘premises’). The crucial thing here is to show how your claim is supported by the evidence you’ve presented in your essay.

This requires more than just summarising your argument. Instead, try to explain how each point works with the others to contribute to your argument as a whole.

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Get help from a language expert. Try our proofreading services for free.

9-minute read

How to Use Infographics to Boost Your Presentation

Is your content getting noticed? Capturing and maintaining an audience’s attention is a challenge when...

8-minute read

Why Interactive PDFs Are Better for Engagement

Are you looking to enhance engagement and captivate your audience through your professional documents? Interactive...

7-minute read

Seven Key Strategies for Voice Search Optimization

Voice search optimization is rapidly shaping the digital landscape, requiring content professionals to adapt their...

How to Ace Slack Messaging for Contractors and Freelancers

Effective professional communication is an important skill for contractors and freelancers navigating remote work environments....

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...

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

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

3 Chapter 3: Building a Basic Argument

Arguments are formed of many different components, frequently involving the use of evidence to support claims. However, there are typically only five pieces to an academic argument, and almost any sentence in a college-level paper should serve on of the following roles.

PRIMARY CLAIM

The purpose of an argument—the central idea on which the rhetor is attempting to change the mind of the receivers—is the primary claim of the argument. Often, a primary claim is called a thesis statement, although not every thesis-based approach is created equal. Additionally, while thesis statements frequently come in the beginning of the paper, some academic writing places its primary claim later in the work.

Overview:  The primary claim in an argument tells us the nature and scope of that argument. Most importantly, it determines its receivership. For example, an argument that “the death penalty should be abolished” is not written for those that already dislike the death penalty. Instead, this argument needs to reach out to those that support the death penalty. In other words, coming up with a primary claim tells a writer who he or she is arguing with. A paper that asserts “North America is not the same continent as Australia” has no place in academic writing, because very few people would disagree. An argument is only appropriate to an academic paper if there are people who might disagree and who might do so for understandable reasons.

Application:  In academic writing, ideally, the primary claim emerges only  after  research has been done and the student knows what evidence is available. This is because the argument should be the conclusion of the critical thinking process. A student should begin with a topic, and then the student should decide two things: what arguments exist regarding the topic and which position is best supported by the available evidence. Constructing arguments from the evidence is usually a lot more educational than constructing an argument from personal opinion.

One of the advantages from a research-first approach is that it means students will become informed about their subjects and about those with a variety of beliefs before they begin writing. In other words, they get a head start on understanding their audiences.

What to Avoid:  While many students will have been taught to come up with a thesis statement first, with the next stage to be looking for sources to support that thesis statement, all this really does is reinforce whatever biases or prejudices the student had in the first place. For example, if Student A were to begin a paper thinking that “speed limits should be raised” and were then to go out and just find a handful of sources that agree, then the student has not learned anything. All that has happened is the student has shown that a few other people agree. With more than 7 billion people on the planet, finding a few friends might be nice, but it’s not really educational.

SUPPORTING CLAIM

A supporting claim is any argument that, if accepted, will make it easier to prove the primary claim. Sometimes, this involves making a distinct argument that only helps to prepare an audience. More often, it involves establishing a piece of fact (also see evidence) or advocating for a judgment of value.

Overview:  Most of the time, the real conflict is not over whether or not a single claim is valid. Instead, the conflict is over related issues. For example, whether or not handguns are effective in self-defense is often debated. What an audience believes about this claim will play a key role in determining whether or not the audience supports laws that allow people to carry concealed handguns. Frequently, under-developed and ‘short’ essays suffer because they simply list supporting claims as if they are universally accepted truths. Instead, a meaningful argument has to establish its supporting claims, as well, in order to establish validity and sway readers.

Application:  In academic writing, supporting claims do most of the real work. Once a supporting claim has been proven, it becomes easier to convince a receiver to accept the primary claim. For example, if Student A is writing a paper on why his or her school needs to build a new parking deck, then a reasonable supporting claim might be “there is not enough parking on campus.”

Student writers need to remember that a supporting claim is, itself, an argument. Evidence needs to be presented in support of the argument and rival viewpoints need to be considered. It is equally important to remember the importance of supporting claims when looking at other writing. If an article or a website makes a series of claims and all of those claims are based on a faulty premise, then the validity of the whole chain of arguments is called into question.

What to Avoid:  As noted above, supporting claims require evidence and logic just as much as any other part of a paper. Therefore, when a student simply lists reasons why he or she supports the primary claim, s/he is not making an argument. Avoid this type of ‘listing’ in favor of treating each supporting claim as a chance to explain the reasons why the claim is a valid position.

At the same time, try not to assume that a ‘supporting claim’ is the same thing as a topic sentence for a paragraph. A truly contentious supporting claim might require multiple paragraphs of discussion.  Likewise, a truly complex paragraph might include more than one supporting claim.

BACKGROUND STATEMENTS

Not  everything  is an argument for everyone. Often, there are basic facts or even value positions that the writer and the readers both agree on. Finding this common ground is an essential component of nearly any argument, and establishing the common ground as such is an important part of any piece of academic writing.

Overview: Often, background statements are observations of the  status quo  or simple moral statements that most people will take as a given. For example, observing that ‘the legal drinking age in the United States is 21’ or that ‘Springfield is the capital of Illinois’ are both  background statements.  Claiming that the drinking age should be lowered is going to be a matter of debate with many audiences. However, simply observing what it is at the moment is likely to be easier to find agreement on. Even something like ‘murder is wrong,’ which is actually a moral stance that has all sorts of exceptions and quibbles built in for most people, is likely to garner general agreement from many readers.

Application: In academic writing and college-level arguments, a background statement helps to establish what is and what is not being argued. A student writer might begin with a statement such as “the Declaration of Independence was written in 1776.” In doing so, the writer is letting readers know that this fact is being taken for granted. Likewise, a student in another class might assert that “the religions of the world disagree on many issues.” This claim could, truthfully, be debated. However, most readers will likely agree with such a claim without asking for a lot of evidence.

In more advanced writing, though, more specific claims might be taken for granted. Part of the purpose behind having students write academic papers is that it helps them to understand what academic audiences do and do not accept in the form of assumption. Readers of biology papers, for example, seldom expect the paper to  prove  the legitimacy of germ theory; such papers thus focus on their main subject matter. As is usually the class, the reader’s expectation is what matters.

What to Avoid:  Most importantly, don’t assume that just because something seems to be obviously true that it is, in fact, something that most readers will agree with. Instead, student writers should explore the topic they are writing about and learn what is and what is not commonly agreed upon.

Many students fail to grasp one of the most important aspects of academic writing—the essays and papers in a college-level course often exist to force a student to evaluate or reevaluate some piece of knowledge or some bit of opinion that has been assumed to be true (see Writing to Learn). In other words, the student isn’t the person who gets to decide what basic facts are taken for granted; the community that the student is addressing makes that decision and the student is supposed to adapt.

ELABORATIONS

If you’ve ever found yourself having a conversation and then providing an example or a more detailed explanation of whatever you  just said , then you have engaged in elaboration. Most writers do not say something just once—instead, they repeat themselves multiple times, changing the words and the sentence structure in order to help people to understand their points.

Overview:  When reading a text book or an instruction manual, most readers pause and think ‘ huh?’  at least once or twice. The problem is not that the textbook is flawed (it might be, but not because it makes a student think!) Instead, the problem is that there is almost always some degree of interference. Complex subjects are difficult to understand on the first pass. Even well-written sentences sometimes need additional details added to them so that readers know exactly how to take them. As a result, good writers try to do two things that are a little contradictory: they try to avoid cluttering their writing with needless words and they try to add explanations (more words) to their writing in order to make it easier to understand.

Application:  Chances are that student writers will face a consistent challenge—page requirements. It is possible, certainly, to convey a minimum amount of information in a minimum number of words. Answering a question about  when  the Civil War happened is relatively straightforward. Answering the question about  why  it happened takes more effort.

Remember that the goal of many writing assignments is not the paper itself. It is the thought that goes into the paper. Therefore, just like a math teacher is going to ask students to show their work, so that the teacher knows both whether or not the students guessed and where any mistakes occurred, a teacher scoring a paper wants to know what led student writers to make the claims that they make. Student writers need to show their work by  elaborating  upon their thought process.

Additionally, however, many readers need to be convinced. Sometimes, this is going to involve a writer going into detail in order to explain the causes behind the Civil War. Other times, it might require that the student writer make sure to provide examples of times and places that  other wars  happened for comparison. Both cases of elaboration, however, involve the student thinking about the topic of the paper and then putting it into greater context. In this way, the need for elaboration explains those page requirements.

What to Avoid:  Don’t make the mistake of assuming that directly repeating a sentence and just using a thesaurus to change a few words is elaboration. Each new sentence needs to do something new. A follow-up can expand or narrow the scope of the previous one, or it can provide an example, or it can provide background on a subject. In any case, don’t assume that  more words  is elaboration if you don’t know what you are elaborating on.

CONCESSIONS

Just as many people claim that the best way to win a fight is not to have one, sometimes the most effective means of making an argument is by limiting its scope. A concession gives ground to those who disagree with the writer in some fashion, thereby reducing the ability of readers to disagree with the writer.

Overview:  Concessions serve both ‘logical’ and ‘rhetorical’ functions. On one hand, conceding ground limits what the writer has to prove. For example, the claim “Americans are healthier than ever before” might be tough to prove. However, the claim “Many Americans are healthier than they were 10 years ago” is a little easier. The writer only needs to research a decade instead of a couple of centuries, and the word ‘many’ keeps the writer from having to prove that  all  Americans are healthier.

Additionally, agreeing with a reader is a way to help establish a bond or common ground. For example, in an argument about obesity, the writer might concede “recently, many people have begun to make an effort to cut back on junk food.” This allows the reader to nod and agree before the next sentence “However, not enough people are making this change” advances the actual argument. The writer concedes that  some  people are doing better, just not everybody.

Application:  College-level arguments require concessions. Students must constantly limit the scope of their arguments, for a number of reasons. Sometimes, the student just doesn’t have the ability to argue some facts (e.g. a student might concede that fatty acids can counteract some of the harms of obesity, simply because the student does not understand how this might or might not work). At other times, the student might make a concession to avoid a headache (e.g. that same obesity paper might concede that low-fat foods are getting more popular, just because it’s not worth the time it would take to find out actual growth rates in low-fat-food sales). Yet another form of concession comes for the sake of narrowing an argument down to a manageable size (e.g. the paper concedes that exercise is just as important as diet, but then focuses on diet as ‘an important half of the equation’).

Students have to be willing to make concessions in order to present more balanced, more persuasive, and more contained arguments

What to Avoid:  Avoid making unqualified statements and imbalanced arguments. Words like  all ,  every ,  never , and  best  are typically out of place in academic writing. Words like  most ,  seldom , and  superior  will often work better. Additionally, students should avoid making arguments that give readers no choice but to agree with a radical position or to reject it—frequently, the readers will reject it. As an aside, students should probably avoid sources that make unqualified arguments, themselves.

Writing Academic Arguments Copyright © by Joshua P. Sunderbruch. All Rights Reserved.

Share This Book

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.

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!”

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

4 Ordering Evidence, Building an Argument

When you’re given a writing assignment in an English or History class, you’re being called on to interpret, evaluate, appreciate, condemn, praise – but, above all, to think . An essay, in that sense, is just like being called on in class. You’re being asked to say something thoughtful about the topic at hand. So just as you would in a face-to-face conversation, you’ll want to stick to the point and offer your response in a way that is understandable and that puts your ideas in the best possible light. If you try to keep the same guidelines in mind for your writing that you use instinctively when you’re talking, then your paper will read like a genuine human discussion rather than like an empty political TV commercial. Your readers will appreciate this very much!

By now you’ve (hopefully!) taken notes, reviewed them to find what interests you, identified a topic, and developed it into a tentative thesis. You’ve begun rereading specific areas of your texts or researching other sources for ideas that relate to your thesis. So the time has come to start building these ideas into an argument.

You may recall in our brief look at the different types of arguments, that there are appeals to emotion and appeals to reason. The type of writing we’re talking about here may make an occasional reference to emotion (especially if you’re writing about a controversial issue), but the argument should be logical.

The two forms of logical arguments you’ll probably end up using, depending on the material and the assignment, will be deductive and inductive. A deductive argument might begin with evidence from texts or from previous interpretations, and lead to a specific conclusion in a format like this: “if A is true, and B is true, then C ought to be true.” In the real world A and B are almost never absolutes that no one is going to challenge, so your conclusion is always going to be tentative. An inductive argument would begin with specific data and try to generalize from them, to a conclusion about the broader world. Its conclusion would also be tentative, but that’s no reason not to argue your point strongly and with conviction.

As you read and research, your goal is to find the building blocks of your argument: factual data, prior interpretations you can comment on, etc. As you prepare to write, you’ll want to organize your argument into a series of points that develop your thesis and that build on each other to support your conclusion. Ernest Hemingway once said that good prose is architecture, not interior decorating. By that we guess he meant that it is constructed, composed on a solid foundation – it’s graceful, but not primarily designed to be pretty. Since we’re using an architectural metaphor, we might also want to remember architect Louis Sullivan’s advice: “form follows function.” The mechanical structure that supports your ideas does not necessarily have to be apparent to the reader. But it has to be there. Its purpose is to help shape your argument so that the reader can understand and follow it. Without it, your reader would quickly become lost, wandering through a random pile of “Oh, by the way” points that lead nowhere.

There are a lot of ways to organize your argument. People have used – and some still use – index cards very effectively, even on multi-volume book projects. Other people use the outlining capabilities of applications like Word, or the note card-like interfaces of tools such as Scrivener. Still others are completely satisfied with a pen and a yellow legal pad. However you choose to do it, the object of this part of the game is to arrange your points into an argument that fits them and supports your thesis.

It might help at this point to begin a rough outline. Your main points will become the topic sentences that will control your middle paragraphs. They’re contained in, or at least implied by, your thesis statement. They will give coherence to your argument by connecting with each other as well as with the thesis sentence in your first paragraph and with the concluding sentence in your last paragraph. So you could start by writing these controlling ideas down in a preliminary outline. Do this if it feels comfortable to you.

If you feel you just want to get on with the writing, another possibility might be to write your rough draft first, and then try to outline it. Either way an outline, no matter how sketchy, helps to ensure that your essay is going somewhere and not just bouncing around or spinning in circles. Remember you are still going to reread, reconsider, add, subtract, rearrange, revise. At this point everything is tentative. A logical outline could be just the control you need to turn a rough draft into an essay that’s a model of clarity and readability. This is expository, analytical writing; your reader is not looking for baroque flourishes (we return to the architecture metaphor once again!). Whether you develop your argument by defining, describing, exemplifying, classifying, comparing, or contrasting, your reader is looking for insights.

Even when you make a logical argument that appeals to your reader’s reason rather than to emotion, your essay’s success is often not simply a question of your argument being either “right” or “wrong.” Your argument will be more valid and persuasive if developed cogently and communicated effectively. Just as you look for author biases in texts, your reader naturally assumes that your interpretations cannot be completely impartial or “objective.” However, they can and should be interesting and plausible if expressed in a clear and readable manner. That’s what “good prose” is. But remember: this is the goal of your final draft, so don’t expect it to happen all at once. Work toward it.

Settling on a useful structure, you should keep in mind that

• Your purpose is: first, to set up a writer-reader relationship; second, to make your argument understandable, interesting, persuasive.
• Your organization will emphasize the material you think is important by controlling the sequence in which information is revealed.

The shape you give your “building” depends ultimately on you, the builder. But don’t forget that architects design structures for other people : your reader has to find a home in it as well. The basic model that has worked pretty well in high school and college classes looks like this:

• General introduction: get your reader’s interest right away; briefly provide only necessary background ( Don’t summarize!). Make your topic clear; focus on a specific statement of thesis.
• Organize supporting ideas into coherent paragraphs with clear topic sentences.
• Create meaningful and smooth transitions between paragraphs. Try to vary your sentences so they are not monotonous.
• Support every assertion you make with evidence from the text or data.
• Connect ideas in conclusion. You might want to move from a specific statement back to a general discussion, reversing the order of your first paragraph, while adding a “so what” statement. This creates symmetry.

Abandoning the architecture metaphor for a moment, you could also think of this essay structure as a journey.  You and your reader meet in the introduction, you go out together and have an adventure in the body paragraphs, and then you come back and reflect on what it meant in the conclusion.

Of course this is not the only way to structure an essay . Different goals lead to different journeys; to different buildings, if we return to architecture. If you’re building a different building and it’s working – that is, if your readers find your writing interesting and effective – then by all means stick to it and build on it, improving it all the time. Your readers and instructor will give you the necessary feedback. Whatever you’re building, it will ultimately need to communicate your thoughts to your audience. Organization helps, so your instructor will be looking for (judging, grading) criteria such as: logical sequence; theme keeps moving; good paragraph structure; smooth transitions; main ideas given proper emphasis; all generalizations supported; all paragraphs come out of the thesis and lead to the conclusion.

A Short Handbook for writing essays in the Humanities and Social Sciences Copyright © 2019 by Salvatore F. Allosso and Dan Allosso is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Are you seeking one-on-one college counseling and/or essay support? Limited spots are now available. Click here to learn more.

Argumentative Essay Examples & Analysis

July 20, 2023

Writing successful argumentative or persuasive essays is a sort of academic rite of passage: every student, at some point in their academic career, will have to do it. And not without reason—writing a good argumentative essay requires the ability to organize one’s thoughts, reason logically, and present evidence in support of claims. They even require empathy, as authors are forced to inhabit and then respond to viewpoints that run counter to their own. Here, we’ll look at some argumentative essay examples and analyze their strengths and weaknesses.

What is an argumentative essay?

Before we turn to those argumentative essay examples, let’s get precise about what an argumentative essay is. An argumentative essay is an essay that advances a central point, thesis, or claim using evidence and facts. In other words, argumentative essays are essays that argue on behalf of a particular viewpoint. The goal of an argumentative essay is to convince the reader that the essay’s core idea is correct.

Good argumentative essays rely on facts and evidence. Personal anecdotes, appeals to emotion , and opinions that aren’t grounded in evidence just won’t fly. Let’s say I wanted to write an essay arguing that cats are the best pets. It wouldn’t be enough to say that I love having a cat as a pet. That’s just my opinion. Nor would it be enough to cite my downstairs neighbor Claudia, who also has a cat and who also prefers cats to dogs. That’s just an anecdote.

For the essay to have a chance at succeeding, I’d have to use evidence to support my argument. Maybe there are studies that compare the cost of cat ownership to dog ownership and conclude that cat ownership is less expensive. Perhaps there’s medical data that shows that more people are allergic to dogs than they are to cats. And maybe there are surveys that show that cat owners are more satisfied with their pets than are dog owners. I have no idea if any of that is true. The point is that successful argumentative essays use evidence from credible sources to back up their points.

Argumentative essay structure

Important to note before we examine a few argumentative essay examples: most argumentative essays will follow a standard 5-paragraph format. This format entails an introductory paragraph that lays out the essay’s central claim. Next, there are three body paragraphs that each advance sub-claims and evidence to support the central claim. Lastly, there is a conclusion that summarizes the points made. That’s not to say that every good argumentative essay will adhere strictly to the 5-paragraph format. And there is plenty of room for flexibility and creativity within the 5-paragraph format. For example, a good argumentative essay that follows the 5-paragraph template will also generally include counterarguments and rebuttals.

Introduction Example

Now let’s move on to those argumentative essay examples, and examine in particular a couple of introductions. The first takes on a common argumentative essay topic —capital punishment.

The death penalty has long been a divisive issue in the United States. 24 states allow the death penalty, while the other 26 have either banned the death penalty outright or issued moratoriums halting the practice. Proponents of the death penalty argue that it’s an effective deterrent against crime. Time and time again, however, this argument has been shown to be false. Capital punishment does not deter crime. But not only that—the death penalty is irreversible, which allows our imperfect justice system no room for error. Finally, the application of the death penalty is racially biased—the population of death row is over 41% Black , despite Black Americans making up just 13% of the U.S. population. For all these reasons, the death penalty should be outlawed across the board in the United States.

Why this introduction works: First, it’s clear. It lays out the essay’s thesis: that the death penalty should be outlawed in the United States. It also names the sub-arguments the author is going to use to support the thesis: (1), capital punishment does not deter crime, (2), it’s irreversible, and (3), it’s a racially biased practice. In laying out these three points, the author is also laying out the structure of the essay to follow. Each of the body paragraphs will take on one of the three sub-arguments presented in the introduction.

Argumentative Essay Examples (Continued)

Something else I like about this introduction is that it acknowledges and then refutes a common counterargument—the idea that the death penalty is a crime deterrent. Notice also the flow of the first two sentences. The first flags the essay’s topic. But it also makes a claim—that the issue of capital punishment is politically divisive. The following sentence backs this claim up. Essentially half of the country allows the practice; the other half has banned it. This is a feature not just of solid introductions but of good argumentative essays in general—all the essay’s claims will be backed up with evidence.

How it could be improved: Okay, I know I just got through singing the praises of the first pair of sentences, but if I were really nitpicking, I might take issue with them. Why? The first sentence is a bit of a placeholder. It’s a platitude, a way for the author to get a foothold in the piece. The essay isn’t about how divisive the death penalty is; it’s about why it ought to be abolished. When it comes to writing an argumentative essay, I always like to err on the side of blunt. There’s nothing wrong with starting an argumentative essay with the main idea: Capital punishment is an immoral and ineffective form of punishment, and the practice should be abolished .

Let’s move on to another argumentative essay example. Here’s an introduction that deals with the effects of technology on the brain:

Much of the critical discussion around technology today revolves around social media. Critics argue that social media has cut us off from our fellow citizens, trapping us in “information silos” and contributing to political polarization. Social media also promotes unrealistic and unhealthy beauty standards, which can lead to anxiety and depression. What’s more, the social media apps themselves are designed to addict their users. These are all legitimate critiques of social media, and they ought to be taken seriously. But the problem of technology today goes deeper than social media. The internet itself is the problem. Whether it’s on our phones or our laptops, on a social media app, or doing a Google search, the internet promotes distracted thinking and superficial learning. The internet is, quite literally, rewiring our brains.

Why this introduction works: This introduction hooks the reader by tying a topical debate about social media to the essay’s main subject—the problem of the internet itself. The introduction makes it clear what the essay is going to be about; the sentence, “But the problem of technology…” signals to the reader that the main idea is coming. I like the clarity with which the main idea is stated, and, as in the previous introduction, the main idea sets up the essay to follow.

How it could be improved: I like how direct this introduction is, but it might be improved by being a little more specific. Without getting too technical, the introduction might tell the reader what it means to “promote distracted thinking and superficial learning.” It might also hint as to why these are good arguments. For example, are there neurological or psychological studies that back this claim up? A simple fix might be: Whether it’s on our phones or our laptops, on a social media app, or doing a Google search, countless studies have shown that the internet promotes distracted thinking and superficial learning . The body paragraphs would then elaborate on those points. And the last sentence, while catchy, is a bit vague.

Body Paragraph Example

Let’s stick with our essay on capital punishment and continue on to the first body paragraph.

Proponents of the death penalty have long claimed that the practice is an effective deterrent to crime. It might not be pretty, they say, but its deterrent effects prevent further crime. Therefore, its continued use is justified. The problem is that this is just not borne out in the data. There is simply no evidence that the death penalty deters crime more than other forms of punishment, like long prison sentences. States, where the death penalty is still carried out, do not have lower crime rates than states where the practice has been abolished. States that have abandoned the death penalty likewise show no increase in crime or murder rates.

Body Paragraph (Continued)

For example, the state of Louisiana, where the death penalty is legal, has a murder rate of 21.3 per 100,000 residents. In Iowa, where the death penalty was abolished in 1965, the murder rate is 3.2 per 100,000. In Kentucky the death penalty is legal and the murder rate is 9.6; in Michigan where it’s illegal, the murder rate is 8.7. The death penalty simply has no bearing on murder rates. If it did, we’d see markedly lower murder rates in states that maintain the practice. But that’s not the case. Capital punishment does not deter crime. Therefore, it should be abolished.

Why this paragraph works: This body paragraph is successful because it coheres with the main idea set out in the introduction. It supports the essay’s first sub-argument—that capital punishment does not deter crime—and in so doing, it supports the essay’s main idea—that capital punishment should be abolished. How does it do that? By appealing to the data. A nice feature of this paragraph is that it simultaneously debunks a common counterargument and advances the essay’s thesis. It also supplies a few direct examples (murder rates in states like Kentucky, Michigan, etc.) without getting too technical. Importantly, the last few sentences tie the data back to the main idea of the essay. It’s not enough to pepper your essay with statistics. A good argumentative essay will unpack the statistics, tell the reader why the statistics matter, and how they support or confirm the essay’s main idea.

How it could be improved: The author is missing one logical connection at the end of the paragraph. The author shows that capital punishment doesn’t deter crime, but then just jumps to their conclusion. They needed to establish a logical bridge to get from the sub-argument to the conclusion. That bridge might be: if the deterrent effect is being used as a justification to maintain the practice, but the deterrent effect doesn’t really exist, then , in the absence of some other justification, the death penalty should be abolished. The author almost got there, but just needed to make that one final logical connection.

Conclusion Example

Once we’ve supported each of our sub-arguments with a corresponding body paragraph, it’s time to move on to the conclusion.

It might be nice to think that executing murderers prevents future murders from happening, that our justice system is infallible and no one is ever wrongly put to death, and that the application of the death penalty is free of bias. But as we have seen, each of those thoughts are just comforting fictions. The death penalty does not prevent future crime—if it did, we’d see higher crime rates in states that’ve done away with capital punishment. The death penalty is an irreversible punishment meted out by an imperfect justice system—as a result, wrongful executions are unavoidable. And the death penalty disproportionately affects people of color. The death penalty is an unjustifiable practice—both practically and morally. Therefore, the United States should do away with the practice and join the more than 85 world nations that have already done so.

Why this conclusion works: It concisely summarizes the points made throughout the essay. But notice that it’s not identical to the introduction. The conclusion makes it clear that our understanding of the issue has changed with the essay. It not only revisits the sub-arguments, it expounds upon them. And to put a bow on everything, it restates the thesis—this time, though, with a little more emotional oomph.

How it could be improved: I’d love to see a little more specificity with regard to the sub-arguments. Instead of just rehashing the second sub-argument—that wrongful executions are unavoidable—the author could’ve included a quick statistic to give the argument more weight. For example: The death penalty is an irreversible punishment meted out by an imperfect justice system—as a result, wrongful executions are unavoidable. Since 1973, at least 190 people have been put to death who were later found to be innocent.

An argumentative essay is a powerful way to convey one’s ideas. As an academic exercise, mastering the art of the argumentative essay requires students to hone their skills of critical thinking, rhetoric, and logical reasoning. The best argumentative essays communicate their ideas clearly and back up their claims with evidence.

• College Success
• High School Success

Dane Gebauer

Dane Gebauer is a writer and teacher living in Miami, FL. He received his MFA in fiction from Columbia University, and his writing has appeared in Complex Magazine and Sinking City Review .

• 2-Year Colleges
• Application Strategies
• Best Colleges by Major
• Best Colleges by State
• Big Picture
• Career & Personality Assessment
• College Essay
• College Search/Knowledge
• Costs & Financial Aid
• Data Visualizations
• Dental School Admissions
• Extracurricular Activities
• Graduate School Admissions
• High Schools
• Homeschool Resources
• Law School Admissions
• Medical School Admissions
• Navigating the Admissions Process
• Online Learning
• Outdoor Adventure
• Private High School Spotlight
• Research Programs
• Summer Program Spotlight
• Summer Programs
• Teacher Tools
• Test Prep Provider Spotlight

“Innovative and invaluable…use this book as your college lifeline.”

— Lynn O'Shaughnessy

Nationally Recognized College Expert

College Planning in Your Inbox

Join our information-packed monthly newsletter.

Think of yourself as a member of a jury, listening to a lawyer who is presenting an opening argument. You'll want to know very soon whether the lawyer believes the accused to be guilty or not guilty, and how the lawyer plans to convince you. Readers of academic essays are like jury members: before they have read too far, they want to know what the essay argues as well as how the writer plans to make the argument. After reading your thesis statement, the reader should think, "This essay is going to try to convince me of something. I'm not convinced yet, but I'm interested to see how I might be."

An effective thesis cannot be answered with a simple "yes" or "no." A thesis is not a topic; nor is it a fact; nor is it an opinion. "Reasons for the fall of communism" is a topic. "Communism collapsed in Eastern Europe" is a fact known by educated people. "The fall of communism is the best thing that ever happened in Europe" is an opinion. (Superlatives like "the best" almost always lead to trouble. It's impossible to weigh every "thing" that ever happened in Europe. And what about the fall of Hitler? Couldn't that be "the best thing"?)

A good thesis has two parts. It should tell what you plan to argue, and it should "telegraph" how you plan to argue—that is, what particular support for your claim is going where in your essay.

Steps in Constructing a Thesis

First, analyze your primary sources.  Look for tension, interest, ambiguity, controversy, and/or complication. Does the author contradict himself or herself? Is a point made and later reversed? What are the deeper implications of the author's argument? Figuring out the why to one or more of these questions, or to related questions, will put you on the path to developing a working thesis. (Without the why, you probably have only come up with an observation—that there are, for instance, many different metaphors in such-and-such a poem—which is not a thesis.)

Once you have a working thesis, write it down.  There is nothing as frustrating as hitting on a great idea for a thesis, then forgetting it when you lose concentration. And by writing down your thesis you will be forced to think of it clearly, logically, and concisely. You probably will not be able to write out a final-draft version of your thesis the first time you try, but you'll get yourself on the right track by writing down what you have.

Keep your thesis prominent in your introduction.  A good, standard place for your thesis statement is at the end of an introductory paragraph, especially in shorter (5-15 page) essays. Readers are used to finding theses there, so they automatically pay more attention when they read the last sentence of your introduction. Although this is not required in all academic essays, it is a good rule of thumb.

Anticipate the counterarguments.  Once you have a working thesis, you should think about what might be said against it. This will help you to refine your thesis, and it will also make you think of the arguments that you'll need to refute later on in your essay. (Every argument has a counterargument. If yours doesn't, then it's not an argument—it may be a fact, or an opinion, but it is not an argument.)

This statement is on its way to being a thesis. However, it is too easy to imagine possible counterarguments. For example, a political observer might believe that Dukakis lost because he suffered from a "soft-on-crime" image. If you complicate your thesis by anticipating the counterargument, you'll strengthen your argument, as shown in the sentence below.

Some Caveats and Some Examples

A thesis is never a question.  Readers of academic essays expect to have questions discussed, explored, or even answered. A question ("Why did communism collapse in Eastern Europe?") is not an argument, and without an argument, a thesis is dead in the water.

A thesis is never a list.  "For political, economic, social and cultural reasons, communism collapsed in Eastern Europe" does a good job of "telegraphing" the reader what to expect in the essay—a section about political reasons, a section about economic reasons, a section about social reasons, and a section about cultural reasons. However, political, economic, social and cultural reasons are pretty much the only possible reasons why communism could collapse. This sentence lacks tension and doesn't advance an argument. Everyone knows that politics, economics, and culture are important.

A thesis should never be vague, combative or confrontational.  An ineffective thesis would be, "Communism collapsed in Eastern Europe because communism is evil." This is hard to argue (evil from whose perspective? what does evil mean?) and it is likely to mark you as moralistic and judgmental rather than rational and thorough. It also may spark a defensive reaction from readers sympathetic to communism. If readers strongly disagree with you right off the bat, they may stop reading.

An effective thesis has a definable, arguable claim.  "While cultural forces contributed to the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe, the disintegration of economies played the key role in driving its decline" is an effective thesis sentence that "telegraphs," so that the reader expects the essay to have a section about cultural forces and another about the disintegration of economies. This thesis makes a definite, arguable claim: that the disintegration of economies played a more important role than cultural forces in defeating communism in Eastern Europe. The reader would react to this statement by thinking, "Perhaps what the author says is true, but I am not convinced. I want to read further to see how the author argues this claim."

A thesis should be as clear and specific as possible.  Avoid overused, general terms and abstractions. For example, "Communism collapsed in Eastern Europe because of the ruling elite's inability to address the economic concerns of the people" is more powerful than "Communism collapsed due to societal discontent."

Copyright 1999, Maxine Rodburg and The Tutors of the Writing Center at Harvard University

Argument Essay: Building an Argument Essay

• Introduction
• Building an Argument Essay
• Explore & Research
• Document & Outline
• Write & Share
• Bibliography

One step at a time...

You will be using the 6 step research model from badgerlink to "build an argument". just follow the steps. all the resources you will need to complete your essay can be found here., research process.

Step 1: Explore 

T hink about ways to approach your topic.

Step 2: Research

Find ways to search for resources on your topic.

Step 3: Document

Figure out how you record what you find.

Step 4: Outline

Plan how to arrange your information.

Step 5: Write

Use the research gathered to write your paper.

Step 6: Share

Finish your paper and turn it in.

Building an Argument

ACTIVITY: Trace an Argument

Reading argument essay examples is a great way to understand the elements and structure of a well-written piece. Read one of the following arguments and trace the argument using the graphic organizer.

• << Previous: Introduction
• Next: Explore & Research >>
• Last Updated: Jul 20, 2017 2:48 PM
• URL: https://uwsslec.libguides.com/argumentessay

Primary links

Building Strong Arguments

For essays, speeches, debates, meetings, or intense discussions, you may need to organize your thoughts and defend them against people who might not agree with you. To do your best in these situations, follow the process outlined in the next few pages. Remember that arguments stem from a claim or position supported by compelling evidence—evidence that persuades the reader or listener to accept a point of view.

The Seven C’s of Building an Argument

When you need to build an argument, use the seven C’s to develop and support a position about a specific topic:

• Consider the situation. Think of all aspects of the communication situation What are the subject and purpose of your message? What medium will you use? Who is the receiver? What is the context? (See the next page .)
• Clarify your thinking. Think about the pros and cons of each side of the issue, and do some preliminary research so that you understand the subject well. (See the next page. )
• Construct a claim. Write a single statement that gives your position and the main reason that you hold that position. (See page 104. )
• Collect evidence. Research the issue in depth, using primary, secondary, and tertiary sources. Investigate to make sure your claim holds up, and change it if it doesn’t. Gather a variety of key evidence to support your claim. (See page 104 .)
• Consider key objections. Think about other viewpoints related to the argument. What reasons could people cite to support opposing positions? What major problems could they see with your argument? Decide how you will answer those objections—by countering them (saying why they are unimportant) or by conceding them (saying they are important but can be overcome). (See page 105 .)
• Craft your argument. Use your claim statement and the evidence you have gathered to argue persuasively for your position. Appeal to the needs of your reader, and answer any key objections. (See page 106 .)
• Confirm your main point. Wrap up your argument by stating your claim in a new way, connecting it to real life and to the future.

Your Turn Which step in the process outlined above corresponds to the questioning phase of the inquiry process? Which steps correspond to planning? Which steps relate to research? In what ways does building an argument require the inquiry process?

1. Consider the situation.

Before you can build a strong argument, you need to analyze the communication situation . Ask yourself the following questions:

• As sender, what role do I have?
• What subject is my message about?
• What purpose do I have?
• What medium am I using?
• Who is the receiver? How can I convince that person?
• What is the context? When and where will the message arrive?

Sender: I'm writing less as a high school student and more as a concerned American citizen.

Message Subject: I'm writing about the national debt.

Message Purpose: I'm calling for spending cuts and tax increases to address the debt.

Medium: This should be a letter to the editor, so it can reach a general audience.

Receiver: My audience is all Americans who are worried about federal fiscal responsibility.

Context: This message will appear in a newspaper locally, and it could be picked up by a wire service to appear in national papers.

Your Turn Think of the topics you are studying in your classes. Which topic do you feel most strongly about? What position would you most like to argue for? Analyze your communication situation by answering the questions above.

2. Clarify your thinking.

Before you can convince others, you must be clear in your own mind about your position. What are you trying to prove? Why do you feel the way you do? What kind of proof do you have? In addition, you should consider both sides of the issue. To do this, set up a pro-con chart like the one shown here:

Your Turn Create a pro-con chart, arguing for and against your position. Thoroughly explore both pros and cons. You will need to understand all perspectives to make a convincing case.

3. Constructing a Claim

After you have thoroughly investigated an issue, you are ready to construct a claim about it. Arguments develop three types of claims :

To formulate a claim, name your subject and express the truth, value, or policy you want to promote.

4. Collecting Evidence

After stating a claim, you must support it. Different types of details provide different types of support:

Your Turn (1) Use the formula above to construct a truth, a value, and a policy claim about a subject you feel strongly about. (2) Choose one of your claims and research it. Write down one of each of the four types of supporting details listed in the chart above.

5. Considering Key Objections

Any debatable issue has at least two, and often many, points of view. When you build an argument, you need to consider alternate positions. Just as you have gathered support for your position, those with other perspectives will have gathered objections. Start by identifying them.

Your Turn Reverse your thinking. Imagine that you strongly oppose the claim you made and researched on the previous pages. List at least three serious objections to your previous position.

Answering Objections

Ignoring the objections to your argument weakens rather than strengthens it. You need to face objections head-on . The following strategies have been applied to each of the example objections above.

Your Turn Answer each of the objections to your own claim that you listed in the previous “Your Turn” activity. Either rebut the objection, recognize part of it but overcome the rest, or concede and move on .

6. Crafting Your Argument

Your Turn Think about the audience for the position (claim) you chose to work with on pages 103-104 . How receptive or resistant are they? Which of the structures above would you use to craft your argument? Or would you use a different structure? Explain your answer.

Using Persuasive Appeals

Classical rhetoric, or the art of persuasion, prescribes three ways to appeal to your audience:

• Appeal to ethos —demonstrate that you are an ethical and trustworthy source.
• Appeal to logos —use logic to argue for your position.
• Appeal to pathos —move the person emotionally to connect with your position.

The most persuasive arguments may use all three types of appeals—but always responsibly. Each of these appeals can be abused, as you will see in the section on logical fallacies ( pages 108–112 ).

Your Turn You’ve learned about using logic (logos) to connect with the reader. Now consider what your audience wants or needs in order to make an emotional connection (pathos). How does your position help them get what they need, want, or expect?

7. Confirming Your Main Point

Complete your argument by stating your main point in a new way and connecting it to the future. Leave your audience with a strong final thought.

Using Socratic Questions to Examine Arguments

You’ve learned how to build a compelling argument. There’s also a technique for examining arguments and deepening thinking.

The Greek philosopher Socrates examined arguments through questions, pushing students to use logic to deduce answers. Socratic questions are especially useful for probing the thinking of opponents in a debate.

Socratic Questions

• Could you please rephrase that statement?
• How would you summarize your position?
• Are you saying that ________________?
• What are the assumptions underlying that statement?
• Is that statement based on the belief that ________________?
• Could you explain how/why ________________?
• Can you demonstrate how this premise is true?
• What evidence supports this claim?
• Are you implying/concluding that ________________?
• What analogy could you use to express that idea?
• How would ________________ respond to that idea?
• How do you answer the objection that ________________?
• What will result from that position?
• How can we apply that idea in a broader context?
• What is the value of that idea, and why?
• Why are we asking this question?
• How does this question connect to the situation?
• How can we reframe this question?

Your Turn With a partner, discuss a current issue that you are studying in class. Use Socratic questions occasionally to deepen the discussion. Which questions were most helpful? Which were least helpful? Why?

Additional Resources

Newsletter Article: Making Your Claim

Web Page: Counter-Argument

Web Page: What is a counter-argument?

Web Page: Ethos, Pathos, Logos

Web Page: Socrates

Web Page: Socratic Questioning

© 2014 Thoughtful Learning

Understanding the Core Arguments of Federalist 51: Balancing Power for Liberty

This essay about Federalist 51 explains the key arguments made by James Madison regarding the necessity of checks and balances within the government. It discusses Madison’s belief that a balanced government can effectively govern while protecting individual liberties by preventing any one branch from gaining excessive power. The essay highlights the importance of separating powers among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches and emphasizes the role of ambition counteracting ambition to maintain equilibrium. Additionally, it addresses the federal system, which divides power between national and state governments, further safeguarding against tyranny. The essay underscores Madison’s understanding of human nature and the need for a self-regulating government.

How it works

The compilation known as the Federalist Papers, a compendium of treatises crafted by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, holds a pivotal stance in sculpting the bedrock of the American Constitution. Amidst these narratives, Federalist 51, authored by Madison, emerges as a beacon for its profound disquisition on the imperative of checks and balances within governance. This discourse delves into the intricate tapestry of how governmental structure must endow adequate checks and balances amidst its divergent echelons. It stands as an eloquent treatise underlining the indispensability of a system meticulously fashioned to forestall any single branch’s ascendancy, thereby safeguarding individual liberties.

Madison inaugurates Federalist 51 by positing that the crux of ensuring an equitable governance lies in enabling it to regulate the governed while concurrently mandating self-restraint upon itself. This aphorism encapsulates the quintessence of the American constitutional paradigm. The crux is to craft a government potent enough to govern efficaciously yet sufficiently circumscribed to safeguard individual freedoms. This delicate equipoise is attained through the tripartite division of authority among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches, ensuring each branch possesses both discrete and intersecting functions to thwart power concentration.

One of Madison’s most compelling contentions underscores the exigency of ancillary precautions. He concedes that while the populace constitutes the primary bulwark against governmental overreach, additional safeguards are imperative to uphold the system’s integrity. This is where the concept of checks and balances assumes prominence. By dispersing authority among disparate branches, and within the legislature itself, the government is structured such that its sundry constituents can counterbalance one another. For instance, the bicameral configuration of Congress, comprising the House of Representatives and the Senate, is tailored to disseminate authority and foment deliberation, thus stymieing impetuous and potentially despotic legislation.

Madison further expounds on the doctrine of ambition counteracting ambition. This ingenious stratagem capitalizes on mankind’s innate proclivity towards ambition to engender equilibrium within governance. By delineating each branch as largely autonomous and furnishing them with requisite means to defend their own prerogatives, Madison ensures no single branch can facilely assert dominion over others. This internal friction, though ostensibly counterproductive, serves as a bulwark against tyranny. Each branch’s ambition to safeguard its own authority and mandates acts as a check on the others, fostering an equilibrium that safeguards individual rights.

Another salient facet of Federalist 51 lies in the accentuation of the federal framework, which not only horizontally segregates authority among governmental branches but also vertically apportions it between national and state governments. This dual sovereignty functions as an additional bulwark against power consolidation. By endowing state governments with authority, Madison contends, the Constitution guarantees that disparate tiers of governance can mutually check one another. This federal configuration permits a plethora of interests to be represented and obviates unchecked authority by any singular entity.

Madison’s elucidations in Federalist 51 transcend the structural contours of governance; they epitomize a profound cognizance of human nature and the potential for power abuse. His advocacy for a governance apparatus capable of self-regulation stems from a pragmatic appraisal of human conduct. He acknowledges that humans are fallible beings, and thus, a system reliant solely on virtue is inherently frail. By embedding checks and balances within the governmental framework, Madison fashions a resilient apparatus for upholding liberty and justice.

In denouement, Federalist 51 furnishes a profound and pragmatic modus operandi for governance that resonates even in contemporary times. Madison’s delineations on separation of powers, checks and balances, and federalism constitute foundational precepts guarding against the specter of majority tyranny and safeguarding individual liberties. His discernment of human nature’s intricacies and the necessity for a governance system capable of self-regulation sans transgressing its limits underscore his visionary comprehension of political theory. Federalist 51 not only proffers a blueprint for balanced governance but also serves as a perennial testament to the import of safeguarding liberty through judicious and deliberate institutional design.

Cite this page

Understanding the Core Arguments of Federalist 51: Balancing Power for Liberty. (2024, Jun 01). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/understanding-the-core-arguments-of-federalist-51-balancing-power-for-liberty/

"Understanding the Core Arguments of Federalist 51: Balancing Power for Liberty." PapersOwl.com , 1 Jun 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/understanding-the-core-arguments-of-federalist-51-balancing-power-for-liberty/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Understanding the Core Arguments of Federalist 51: Balancing Power for Liberty . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/understanding-the-core-arguments-of-federalist-51-balancing-power-for-liberty/ [Accessed: 5 Jun. 2024]

"Understanding the Core Arguments of Federalist 51: Balancing Power for Liberty." PapersOwl.com, Jun 01, 2024. Accessed June 5, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/understanding-the-core-arguments-of-federalist-51-balancing-power-for-liberty/

"Understanding the Core Arguments of Federalist 51: Balancing Power for Liberty," PapersOwl.com , 01-Jun-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/understanding-the-core-arguments-of-federalist-51-balancing-power-for-liberty/. [Accessed: 5-Jun-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Understanding the Core Arguments of Federalist 51: Balancing Power for Liberty . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/understanding-the-core-arguments-of-federalist-51-balancing-power-for-liberty/ [Accessed: 5-Jun-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

Microsoft Research Forum

Quarterly Brief | June 2024

The Next Era of AI Research

Research advances are driving real-world impact faster than ever, with the latest advances in AI transforming the way we all live, work, and think.

In this episode, researchers dive into the importance of globally inclusive and equitable AI, share updates on AutoGen and MatterGen, explore novel use cases for AI, and more. Read more about this episode below, and register (opens in new tab) for the series.

“Today we are seeing so much AI research happening at the speed of conversation, to the point where even our top researchers feel that their heads are spinning, but working together, providing openness, providing greater access, we can see that we’ve made tremendous progress.” – Peter Lee, CVP, Microsoft Research & Incubations

@ the Forum

DIVE INTO OUR COLLECTION OF RESEARCH TALKS AND UPDATES

Keynote: Building Globally Equitable AI

Jacki O’Neill discusses the importance of creating globally equitable generative AI and will address the technical and socio-technical challenges that must be tackled to positively transform work futures worldwide.

Panel Discussion: Generative AI for Global Impact

Microsoft researchers discuss the challenges and opportunities of making AI more inclusive and impactful for everyone – from data that represents a broader range of communities and cultures, to novel use cases for AI that are globally relevant.

Lightning talks & essays

Informative talks and thought-provoking essays from researchers across Microsoft about fundamental AI advances, the impact of AI on health and natural sciences, the intersection of AI and society, and more.

Insights into the Challenges and Opportunities of Large Multi-Modal Models for Blind and Low Vision Users: A Case Study on CLIP

Presented by Daniela Massiceti

Driving Industry Evolution: Exploring the Impact of Generative AI on Sector Transformation

Presented by Jiang Bian

MatterGen: A Generative Model for Materials Design

Presented by Tian Xie

AutoGen Update: Complex Tasks and Agents

Presented by Adam Fourney

Beyond the Forum

Research Forum is just a snapshot of the great work happening across the research community at Microsoft. Explore these links to learn more about the work of our researchers and their collaborators, the bold new ideas they’re exploring, and the impact they’ll achieve.

Microsoft Research Forum series registration (opens in new tab)

Microsoft Research Podcast

Microsoft Research Blog

Microsoft Research AI & Society Fellows

Microsoft Research Africa, Nairobi

Microsoft Research AI for Science

Microsoft Research AI Frontiers

Microsoft Research Asia

Microsoft Research Cambridge

Microsoft Research India

Microsoft Research Redmond

• Follow on Twitter
• Like on Facebook
• Follow on LinkedIn
• Subscribe on Youtube
• Follow on Instagram
• Subscribe to our RSS feed

Share this page:

• Share on Twitter
• Share on Facebook
• Share on LinkedIn
• Share on Reddit

• Today's news
• Reviews and deals
• Climate change
• 2024 election
• Fall allergies
• Health news
• Mental health
• Sexual health
• Family health
• So mini ways
• Unapologetically
• Buying guides

Entertainment

• How to Watch
• My watchlist
• Stock market
• Biden economy
• Personal finance
• Stocks: most active
• Stocks: gainers
• Stocks: losers
• Trending tickers
• World indices
• US Treasury bonds
• Top mutual funds
• Highest open interest
• Highest implied volatility
• Currency converter
• Basic materials
• Communication services
• Consumer cyclical
• Consumer defensive
• Financial services
• Industrials
• Real estate
• Mutual funds
• Credit cards
• Balance transfer cards
• Cash back cards
• Rewards cards
• Travel cards
• Online checking
• High-yield savings
• Money market
• Home equity loan
• Personal loans
• Student loans
• Options pit
• Fantasy football
• Pro Pick 'Em
• College Pick 'Em
• Fantasy baseball
• Fantasy hockey
• Fantasy basketball
• Download the app
• Daily fantasy
• Scores and schedules
• GameChannel
• World Baseball Classic
• Premier League
• CONCACAF League
• Champions League
• Motorsports
• Horse racing
• Newsletters

New on Yahoo

• Privacy Dashboard

On second day in Hunter Biden gun trial, testimony addresses laptop, texts, drug addiction

• Oops! Something went wrong. Please try again later. More content below

June 4 (UPI) -- The second day of Hunter Biden's federal gun trial wrapped up Tuesday afternoon after an FBI agent was cross-examined about Biden's well-publicized laptop that was seized by federal authorities.

"It doesn't matter who you are or what your name is," prosecutor Derek Hines said Tuesday morning at the J. Caleb Boggs Federal Building in Delaware as he began his opening statement by inferring equal treatment for all is a key tenet under America's jurisprudence system -- even for the son of the nation's elected leader.

Hines outlined Biden's past drug use and how the son of the president allegedly lied on a federal form that asks about addiction in relation to gun ownership.

The prosecution later called FBI agent Erika Jensen as the first witness to discuss the laptop, which was subpoenaed in 2019. Jensen said under cross-examination that Biden might not have been using drugs continuously from 2015 to 2019, which covers when he bought the gun in 2018.

Biden, 54, the son of President Joe Biden, has pleaded not guilty to three felony counts of possession of a firearm in connection with a 2018 purchase in Delaware of a Colt revolver while he was admittedly using and possibly addicted to drugs.

The prosecution spent a considerable amount of time going over the timeline and "repetitive nature, low lows and high highs" of Biden's drug addiction, which included reading through a series of text messages in which the president's son talks about as much, including possible drug deals.

Biden had at some points in text messages supposedly called himself "a liar and a thief," as well as a drug user.

He "chose to lie," Hines said as he outlined how, he said, Biden allegedly bought the gun, with cash, while knowing he was addicted at the time to drugs.

The prosecution read excerpts from Biden's memoir Beautiful Things while his defense attorney Abbe Lowell tried to highlight discrepancies in the prosecutions arguments.

Lowell attempted to show how Hunter Biden was not at that time addicted to drugs, as alleged by the government, and, therefore, did not "knowingly" lie on a federal form during the supposed 2018 gun purchase. She also tried to show that Biden had little interest at the time in buying the gun and was lead to it by the salesman.

Text messages were shown from Hallie Biden, Hunter's then-partner and who had been married to his late brother Beau Biden , invoices from Hunter Biden's 2018 rehab stay in California, in addition to half-naked images of Biden and some of drugs on the laptop in question, which the FBI says had been seized via subpoena from a computer store.

"Did you take that from me?" a text from Hunter to Hallie Biden, who later will be a witness, read in reference to the gun that was later found in a dumpster.

"You're being totally irresponsible and unhinged," he wrote back in the text.

"I just want you to be safe. That was not safe," Hallie Biden replied back.

Hunter Biden, the prosecution said, "isn't charged with possessing drugs" and, "We would not be here today if he was just a drug addict."

The court will resume at 9 a.m. EDT Wednesday morning.

On Tuesday morning as she entered the courtroom, U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika, appointed by former President Donald Trump and backed by Democrats, said "We lost a juror overnight." Among the 12 jurors picked on Monday , six men and six women, there also were four alternates to fill juror slots for such occasions.

Noreika, who has a varied past with donating to both Republican and Democrat candidates, said the now-former juror, a woman, "begged" to be let go from her role, citing transportation issues and adding she did not realize that she had to be at the courthouse every day as a resident of Milford, Del., an hour south of Wilmington, where the courthouse is located.

First lady Jill Biden was seen sitting in the same seat she was in the day before this time with daughter Ashley Biden and Hunter Biden's wife, Melissa Cohen Biden.

In the morning while the court waited for other jurors to arrive and opening arguments to commence, the judge took the time to speak to several motions before her, including one from Biden's lawyer, who requested certain photos of Biden be excluded as evidence.

Noreika allowed the photos to be used because they contained "circumstantial evidence" of Biden's admitted past with drug use

This came on the heels of Trump's conviction on 34 counts related to falsifying records to facilitate hush-money payments in New York with both trials facing extra scrutiny in the shadow of an election year.

Special counsel David Weiss, an appointee of Trump, brought the charges against the president's son after he was named by Attorney General Merrick Garland, a Biden appointee, to investigate the alleged crime last year. Biden's attorneys contended that Weiss "buckled under political pressure" after a plea deal crumbled last year.

The cases mark the first time in American history that an ex-president has ever been criminally convicted in a court of law, and the first time the child of a sitting president was ever put on trial during their father's presidency and all in the middle of a presidential election.

If convicted on all counts, Hunter Biden could face up 25 years in prison and $750,000 in fines, according to court filings. However, because Biden does not have a violent past and is an alleged first-time offender, it is possible he could get a lighter sentence.

Recommended Stories

Hunter biden trial: key takeaways from opening statements as 1st witness is called in felony gun case.

President Biden’s 54-year-old son is accused of lying about his drug addiction on an application he used to purchase a firearm in 2018.

Jury selection begins in Hunter Biden's gun trial. Here's everything you need to know about the case.

The president's son pleaded not guilty to three charges related to a 2018 gun purchase.

1963 Indianapolis 500 winner Parnelli Jones dies at 90

Jones won the race once as a driver and twice as an owner when Al Unser Sr. won in 1970 and 1971.

UConn signs Geno Auriemma to 5-year, $18.7M contract extension

Auriemma will remain with UConn through an unprecedented period of growth for women's basketball amid a dramatically changing landscape across college sports.

New Biden order seeks to crack down on migration at the southern border. What does it mean, and how will it affect asylum seekers?

President Biden signed an executive order to limit illegal crossings at the southern border. Here's what that means.

French Open 2024: How to watch the Alexander Zverev vs. Alex De Minaur match

It's time for the clay court Grand Slam at Roland Garros. Here's how to tune into Alexander Zverev vs. Alex De Minaur.

Biden gets Trumpy on immigration

Biden is taking new action to limit migrant crossings while insisting his policies are more humane than Trump's.

Walmart's secret sale room is bursting with deals — save $1,000 on a laptop and more

We also spotted ridiculously low prices on a Samsung TV, Keurig coffee maker and zero-gravity outdoor chairs.

French Open: Novak Djokovic withdraws, Coco Gauff and Iga Swiatek set for rematch in semifinals

Djokovic will not win the 2024 French Open.

Cowboys WR CeeDee Lamb, 49ers' Brandon Aiyuk skip start of mandatory minicamps, officially signaling holdouts

Lamb and Aiyuk are seeking to join the party in the wake of multiple lucrative contracts that have reset the NFL's wide receiver market.

Dolphins QB Tua Tagovailoa 'not concerned' but still 'antsy' while awaiting new deal with Miami

The quarterback, entering his fifth year in Miami, told reporters at Dolphins minicamp on Tuesday that he was "not frustrated" by lengthy contract negotiations, but admitted that he was a bit impatient.

Malicious code has allegedly compromised TikTok accounts belonging to CNN and Paris Hilton

A new TikTok hack is taking over accounts from Paris Hilton to CNN. It’s spread via direct messages, so watch out.

Stock market today: Stocks eke out gains as labor market cools, rate-cut bets rise

Investors are weighing signs the surprising resilience in the US economy might be starting to show cracks.

15 savings accounts that offer 5% APY and up

Looking for a high-yield savings account that offers at leat 5.00% APY? Here are 15 options.

AI apocalypse? ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity all went down at the same time

After a multi-hour outage that took place in the early hours of the morning, OpenAI's ChatGPT chatbot went down again — but this time, it wasn't the only AI provider affected. On Tuesday morning, both Anthropic's Claude and Perplexity began seeing issues, too, but these were more quickly resolved. It's unusual for three major AI providers to all be down at the same time, which could signal a broader infrastructure issue or internet-scale problem, such as those that affect multiple social media sites simultaneously, for example.

The Justin Jefferson impact: Will wide receivers become too expensive?

With the escalating cost of wide receivers, how many teams will look at the salaries and think they can get a replacement cheap via the draft?

Trump combines small donors and billionaires for a record fundraising haul in May

Donald Trump's campaign announced a crush of new money in May, combining a new surge of support from small-dollar donors with continuing strength among billionaires.

How to watch Summer Games Done Quick 2024

Summer Games Done Quick is back for more charity speed runs of classic and contemporary games. The 2024 edition of the marathon will stream from Minneapolis from June 30 to July 6 as turbo-gamers take on Alan Wake 2, Halo 3 and the Super Mario RPG Remake.

#DontStreamOnMax is trending on social media. Why the streaming service Max is facing a boycott.

Fans of the show "Our Flag Means Death" have rallied around a hashtag to call for change at the platform previously known as HBO Max.

Warner Bros.' Max streaming service raises prices for ad-free plans

Streaming companies raised prices consistently in 2023. These increases have continued in 2024.

Historic Trump trial comes to a dramatic close, jury deliberations begin Wednesday: recap

Both sides completed their final arguments Tuesday in the historic first criminal case against a former president capping a dramatic six-week trial in which a parade of often high-profile witnesses laid out the evidence that Donald Trump allegedly covered up hush money payments to a porn star to hide another crime.

Jury deliberations will begin Wednesday after instructions from Judge Juan Merchan . The forthcoming verdict – a conviction on all or some of 34 counts of falsifying business records, an acquittal, or a deadlocked jury – could have a major impact on Trump’s campaign against President Joe Biden.

The six-week trial featured 22 witnesses from Trump’s company, campaign, a national tabloid and a porn star. The testimony featured tense moments such as defense lawyer Todd Blanche accusing Trump’s former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen , of lying on the standand former Trump spokesperson Hope Hicks breaking into tears.

Meanwhile, Merchan threatened to jail Trump if he continued to violate a gag order against talking about witnesses participating in the case. A flock of Republican surrogates showed up to support Trump, and one conspiracy theorist set himself on fire outside the courthouse.

Prosecution cites 'jaw-dropping' evidence against Trump that defense says 'cannot be trusted'

The courtroom drama featured dramatic clashes between lawyers and witnesses, the judge and Trump.

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

Cohen was a key witness testifying that he submitted invoices for “legal expenses” that Trump knew were to reimburse him for paying $130,000 to silence porn actress Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election. But Trump lawyer Todd Blanche accused Cohen of lying on the stand when he testified he notified Trump about the payment to Daniels. In closing arguments, Blanche called Cohen the “MVP of liars” and “the embodiment of reasonable doubt.”

Merchan scolded Blanche for an “outrageous” statement in closing arguments that the jury shouldn’t “send someone to prison” based on Cohen’s testimony.

Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, described the alleged sexual encounter in enough detail that Merchan questioned why defense lawyers didn’t object more to block her testimony. She testified that she noticed gold nail clippers in Trump’s hotel room and he didn’t wear a condom during the encounter. Trump has repeatedly denied he had sex with Daniels and Blanche argued the payment “started out as an extortion” whether the allegation was true or not.

David Pecker, the former CEO of American Media Inc., which owned the National Enquirer, said he agreed in a meeting with Trump and Cohen in August 2015 to be the “eyes and ears” of Trump’s presidential campaign to buy negative stories about the candidate and never publish them.

Pecker acknowledged paying former Playboy model Karen McDougal $150,000 for her story and then refusing to pay for Daniels because Trump hadn’t reimbursed him. Cohen provided a recording , which prosecutor Joshua Steinglass called “jaw-dropping,” of Trump mentioning the $150,000 figure.

But Blanche raised questions about the credibility of the recording because it cuts off suddenly – Cohen said he got another call – and argued that a meeting to influence the campaign “made no sense.”

Trump paid Cohen for a retainer through invoices marked "legal expenses," so he committed no crime of falsifying business records, according to Blanche. "This is not a referendum on your views of President Trump," Blanche told jurors.

The jury will return Wednesday to receive instructions from Merchan and begin deliberations.

− Bart Jansen

Tuesday proceedings end

Judge Juan Merchan declared an end to the day's proceedings at about 8 p.m. EDT.

– Aysha Bagchi

Judge to give jury instructions in morning, proceedings to start slightly later

Judge Juan Merchan said he will give jurors their instructions on the law to apply in the case tomorrow morning. In light of today's proceedings running late, tomorrow's proceedings will start at 10 a.m. EDT, not the normal 9:30 a.m. EDT start time, Merchan said.

'In the name of justice': Prosecutor finishes closing argument

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass has ended his closing argument. He thanked the jurors for their service and for consistently arriving to trial on time.

"I apologize for trading brevity for thoroughness," he said, in reference to his lengthy time summing up the case.

Steinglass argued former President Donald Trump shouldn't get special treatment in this case. "He's had his day in court," Steinglass said. "The law is the law, and it applies to everyone equally. There is no special standard for this defendant."

Steinglass added that Donald Trump can't shoot somebody "during rush hour and get away with it." The defense objected to that comment, and Judge Merchan sustained their objection. The prosecutor appeared to be referring to a boast Trump made early in the 2016 presidential campaign: "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters, OK?"

"In the name of justice," Steinglass urged jurors, "I ask you to find the defendant guilty."

'Beating a dead horse' draws laughs as prosecutor's long closing continues

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass used the phrase "beating a dead horse here" to describe his team's argument that Trump conspired to unlawfully interfere in the 2016 presidential election.

That drew some giggling from the courtroom. I saw at least one juror smiling.

'The false business records benefited one person and one person only'

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass encouraged jurors to consider who stood to benefit from falsifying business records to cover up a hush money payment to Stormy Daniels .

The answer, Steinglass said, is Donald Trump .

"He was the one who stood to gain the most," Steinglass said. "He's the only one who'd care about creating the false business records to conceal the Daniels payoff."

"The false business records benefited one person and one person only – and that's the defendant," Steinglass added.

A fixer like Cohen would want credit for hush money deal: Steinglass

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass said another reason to credit Michael Cohen's testimony of Trump's involvement comes down to the common-sense question of how a fixer acts.

A person playing that role for Trump might cover their tracks and avoid a paper trail, but that person also wants credit, Steinglass suggested. "They sure as heck want the principal to know."

Trump's alleged knowledge of prior hush money deals part of a pattern , Steinglass says

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass reminded jurors of testimony from former tabloid publisher David Pecker that he updated Trump on two hush money agreements that took place before the Stormy Daniels deal was sealed. Pecker's company paid out money to a Trump Tower doorman and to former Playboy model Karen McDougal in the two deals. Michael Cohen was in communication with Pecker, but Cohen himself paid Daniels.

If you credit Pecker's testimony, Trump knew about those two earlier deals, Steinglass told the jury.

"So why would the defendant be kept in the dark about the Daniels NDA?" Steinglass asked, using an abbreviation for "non-disclosure agreement." 

"That defies common sense," he added.

Hope Hicks cried over her damning testimony: Steinglass

Former Trump aide Hope Hicks made headlines earlier in the trial when she broke down crying on the witness stand. On Tuesday, Steinglass argued Hicks lost her composure after realizing the impact of the damning testimony she'd given against her former boss.

Hicks was testifying about Trump's reaction to a post-2016 election story on the hush money payment to Stormy Daniels. Hicks said Trump asked for her thoughts on how a story before the election would have compared.

"I think Mr. Trump's opinion was it was better to be dealing with it now, and that it would have been bad to have that story come out before the election," Hicks testified .

More: Donald Trump trial Friday recap: Former Trump spokesperson Hope Hicks emotional on stand

That was at the end the prosecution's questions for Hicks, and she broke down slightly later, as Trump defense lawyer Emil Bove began asking her questions.

"She realized how much this testimony puts the nail in" the case, Steinglass said.

The prosecution has argued that Trump authorized a hush money payment to Stormy Daniels in order to better his 2016 election chances. That forms part of the prosecution's argument for charging Trump with felonies.

Trump, a frugal and meticulous boss, would know what his checks were for: Steinglass

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass pointed to testimony that Trump is frugal and meticulous in his work and business life. For instance, former tabloid publisher and long-time Trump friend David Pecker testified that Trump was " very cautious" and "very frugal."

This, Steinglass suggested, is evidence Trump wouldn't have paid Cohen $420,000 – largely in checks he himself signed – without knowing the purpose.

Steinglass also pointed to Trump book excerpts in which the celebrity real estate developer characterized himself as careful about his finances. In one excerpt from "Trump: Think Like a Billionaire," he said: "I always sign my checks, so I know where my money's going."

Prosecutor challenges Trump team's claim that 2017 payments were for legal services

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass ridiculed the argument from defense lawyer Todd Blanche earlier today that Donald Trump's 2017 monthly payments to Michael Cohen were for legal services, not to reimburse hush money. Blanche said Trump Organization records accurately represented the payments.

Why wasn't Cohen "paid a dime in 2018?" Steinglass asked jurors. Because Cohen wasn't being paid for legal work in either 2017 or 2018, Steinglass said.

Steinglass added that Cohen had spent more time being cross-examined at Trump's hush money trial than doing legal work for Trump in 2017, and said Cohen would have been making an hourly rate of $42,000 if the payments were for legal services.

"That'd be a pretty good hourly rate," Steinglass said with sarcasm.

Steinglass also said Cohen was making more money than any government job would ever pay. 

"And don't I know that," the Manhattan line prosecutor added, drawing at least a few chuckles from the courtroom .

More: Would cameras in the courtroom change Donald Trump's New York hush money trial?

Jurors see handwritten notes that allegedly point to a planned tax crime

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass showed jurors a document dealing with Cohen's tranfer of $130,000 to Stormy Daniels' lawyer, Keith Davidson, in 2016.

The document has handwritten notes that ex-Trump Organization executive Jeffrey McConney testified belonged to Allen Weisselberg . Weisselberg was the long-time chief financial officer at the Trump Organization. He is currently in jail for committing perjury in Trump's New York civil fraud case.

The notes refer to "grossing" up $180,000 to $360,000. Prosecutors say two reimbursements to Cohen – one for the $130,000 hush money to Daniels and a second for $50,000 related to polling services – were doubled to account for taxes Cohen would have to pay. That, according to prosecutors, reflected a plan to commit tax fraud under New York law .

This seems aimed at showing Trump falsified business records in order to hide a plan to violate New York tax law. That's one of three crimes or potential crimes prosecutors say Trump was trying to cover up by falsifying records. To win a conviction, prosecutors have to show not just that Trump falsified records, but also that he was trying to conceal or commit another crime.

Here are the handwritten notes jurors just saw:

Trump executive's testimony used against former president

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass is pointing to the testimony of former Trump Organization financial controller Jeffrey McConney as evidence Trump was reimbursing Michael Cohen with a series of 2017 payments that are at the heart of this business records case. Prosecutors say Trump falsified records to conceal that the payments were reimbursements to Cohen for hush money he paid to Stormy Daniels .

McConney testified he was told by former Trump Organization chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg that the payments were reimbursing Cohen.

Steinglass told jurors to think about who McConney is as they consider that testimony.

"He has no axe to grind," Steinglass said of McConney. "He has every incentive to help his former boss."

McConney nonetheless said he was told this was a reimbursement, Steinglass noted.

Prosecutor's argument shifts from hush money to alleged cover-up

After a short break in proceedings, prosecutor Joshua Steinglass has resumed his closing argument. He explained to the jury that he'd gone over Trump's alleged conspiracy to influence the election. But after the election, he continued, Trump also needed to keep people from knowing about the conspiracy.

Plus, Michael Cohen wanted his money back .

Steinglass is now showing jurors a transcript of Cohen's testimony that Trump approved a scheme to reimburse Cohen over 12 months while misrepresenting the payments as ongoing legal expenses.

Jurors paying attention as long day continues

Judge Juan Merchan excused jurors for a short break at 4:54 p.m. EDT. He then commented that jurors continued to appear attentive, even as proceedings have extended beyond the normal 4:30 p.m. EDT end time.

What the judge said is true. I haven't seen any jurors dozing off or appearing distracted, even as they have heard several hours of arguments from just two lawyers today.

Merchan indicated the jurors have made arrangements to stay late today, and that proceedings could go past 7 p.m. EDT.

'What have we done?': Prosecutor points to election reaction as evidence of Trump's guilt

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass showed jurors a text exchange between Stormy Daniels' former lawyer, Keith Davidson, and former National Enquirer editor Dylan Howard . Davidson texted Howard after the 2016 presidential election results started to come in: "What have we done?"

Steinglass suggested Davidson's reaction to news of Trump's victory shows how players involved in the Trump-related hush money deals fully understood their importance to the election.

More: National Enquirer editor said Stormy Daniels' affair story was true: Texts shown to jury

'This is damning': Prosecutor says evidence shows Trump OK'd hush money

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass is displaying text messages and call records that he says support Michael Cohen's testimony that Trump authorized the $130,000 hush money payment to Stormy Daniels.

Keith Davidson , the former lawyer for Daniels, testified that he believed Cohen didn't have the authority to spend money on his own, Steinglass noted. Even after Cohen told Davidson "I'll just do it myself," Davidson testified, he understood the money would be coming from Donald Trump or a related corporation.

Steinglass also showed a call record indicating Cohen called Trump 10 minutes after hearing that Daniels might be about to share her story with the Daily Mail. Cohen didn't reach him, but Melania Trump texted the next morning asking Cohen to call Trump on his cell phone.

Steinglass also showed jurors a record of a call that he said was half an hour before Cohen filled out the paperwork for the hush money wire transfer.

"This is damning," Steinglass said.

'Pandemonium': Prosecutor says Access Hollywood tape is key context for hush money

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass is talking to jurors about the infamous Access Hollywood tape, in which Trump discussed kissing women without waiting and grabbing their genitals. The tape was published by The Washington Post on Oct. 7 of 2016 – about a month before the 2016 election.

Steinglass played a response video Trump posted in which he characterized his words on the tape as simply that – words. Steinglass also referred to Trump characterizing his words as "locker-room talk," reminding jurors that Cohen testified that phrase was a suggestion from Melania Trump .

"You gotta remember this race could not have been closer," Steinglass said. The tape and events that followed were capable of costing Trump the whole election, and he knew it, Steinglass said.

Steinglass then played jurors a video recording of Trump at a campaign event on Oct. 14, 2016. Trump talked about lies at the rally, saying if 5% or 10% of people think they're true, "we don't win."

"It caused pandemonium in the Trump campaign," Steinglass said of the tape.

At the same time that Trump was desperately trying to sell the distinction between words and actions, he was trying to muzzle a porn star who had a story to tell about a sexual encounter while Trump was married, Steinglass said.

"Stormy Daniels was a walking, talking reminder that the defendant was not only words," Steinglass said. "She would have totally undermined his strategy for spinning away the Access Hollywood tape."

The trial goes on, but Tuesday’s protesters are mostly done

Nearly all the demonstrators outside of the courthouse − both pro-Trump and anti-Trump − packed up shortly after 4 p.m. EDT.

They did not stick around for the end of final arguments.

“We’re going to Trump Tower − you coming?” yelled one member of the ex-president’s contingent.Throughout the day, maybe 150 demonstrators of all stripes drifted into and out of the one-block park across the street from the courthouse.

Things occasionally got tense, as adherents of Trump and Biden dropped F bombs on each other; there was also, reportedly, at least one punch thrown.

With each confrontation, however, two or more New York police officers quickly moved in to stop things from getting out of hand.

−David Jackson

Steinglass pushes back on evidence manipulation argument

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass is pushing back on a suggestion from Trump lawyer Todd Blanche that evidence has been manipulated. Blanche targeted, in particular, an audio recording that Michael Cohen said he secretly made of a conversation he had with Trump where the two discussed hush money payments to former Playboy model Karen McDougal.

Blanche said there is "a lot of dispute" when it comes to the recording, and that the government hasn't shown it's reliable. The recording cuts off abruptly after Trump and Cohen discuss financing.

"Don't accept this invitation to muddy the waters," Steinglass said to jurors of Blanche's comments. Cohen would have no incentive to manipulate evidence because he had already pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations, Steinglass said.

Steinglass also said the recording "is nothing short of jaw-dropping," adding Trump talks about not paying with cash.

Here's a transcript of the recording prepared by the prosecution and shown earlier in the trial:

Trump slams Rep. Bob Good, a gag-order-get-around trial attendee, and endorses opponent

House Freedom Caucus chair Rep. Bob Good , R-Va., attended the hush money trial on May 16 and, along with several other Republican lawmakers, defended Trump against the judge's gag order .

But on Tuesday morning, Trump endorsed Good's opponent, State Sen.  John McGuire , who also made a quiet appearance at the Manhattan courthouse the same day.

"Bob Good is BAD FOR VIRGINIA, AND BAD FOR THE USA," Trump posted on Truth Social.

Good had initially endorsed Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis in the 2024 primary, but eventually backed Trump when DeSantis dropped out of the race in January.

– Kinsey Crowley

Prosecutor defends public's right to know Stormy Daniels' story

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass told jurors they might wonder why they should care if Trump had a sexual encounter with porn star Stormy Daniels in 2006.

Steinglass said that thought is understandable, but it's harder to say that the American people "don't have the right to decide for themselves whether they care or not."

Trump's alleged scheme to prevent negative stories from getting out ahead of the 2016 election "could very well be what got President Trump elected," Steinglass said.

This may be more of a moral argument from Steinglass than a legal one. Ultimately, Judge Juan Merchan will instruct jurors on the law around campaign finance violations. Then jurors will be tasked with deciding if Trump falsified records and, if so, whether he was trying to cover up unlawfully interfering in the 2016 election through the hush money to Daniels.

'We didn't pick him up at the witness store': Prosecutor on Michael Cohen

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass blamed former President Donald Trump for the prosecution's use of Michael Cohen in the criminal hush money case.

"We didn't pick him up at the witness store," Steinglass said of Cohen. "The defendant chose Michael Cohen to be his fixer because he was willing to lie and cheat on Mr. Trump's behalf."

Trump chose Cohen "for the same qualities" that Trump's lawyers now say should cause the jurors to reject Cohen's testimony, Steinglass added.

Steinglass then showed jurors an excerpt from one of Trump's books in which Trump said: "I value loyalty above everything else."

When will the Trump trial end?

The Trump trial could end this week , depending on how long the jury takes to deliberate.

Closing arguments are scheduled to wrap up Tuesday. Judge Juan Merchan has asked the jury to come in Wednesday, even though the court is typically off that day, so he can hand the case over to them.

While there is technically no limit on how long the jury deliberations can take, experts say three days would be considered a long time.

– Kinsey Crowley 

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass defends Michael Cohen's testimony

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass is spending a lot of time defending the same witness Trump lawyer Todd Blanche spent a lot of time attacking today: Michael Cohen .

Steinglass spoke of an Oct. 24, 2016 phone call Blanche has said Cohen got caught lying about on the stand. Cohen said the call to Trump's bodyguard was to get Trump on the phone about the Stormy Daniels hush money deal. After Blanche showed text messages to the bodyguard indicated Cohen wanted to talk about harassing phone calls he was getting from a 14-year-old, Cohen said he believes he also spoke to Trump about the deal.

"Even if you're not convinced" that both things happened in that call, Steinglass told jurors, "a far less sinister explanation" is Cohen got the time of the call wrong.

"This was not the final go-ahead. That would come two days later on October 26th," Steinglass added.

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass begins prosecution's closing argument

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass has begun his closing argument. Steinglass indicated earlier today that this is likely to be lengthy: he estimated he needs 4-4.5 hours.

Judge instructs jurors to disregard Trump lawyer's 'prison' comment

Following the lunch break, Judge Juan Merchan instructed jurors to disregard the comment from Trump lawyer Todd Blanche about sending Trump "to prison" if they convict him. Merchan told the jurors they may not consider sentencing at all when they are deliberating in the case.

'Outrageous': Judge rebukes Trump defense lawyer for prison comment

After Trump lawyer Todd Blanche finished his closing and jurors were excused for lunch, prosecutor Joshua Steinglass asked Judge Merchan to give jurors a special instruction about the "ridiculous comment" Blanche made about sending Trump to prison. Merchan already sustained an objection from Steinglass when Blanche told jurors they "cannot send someone to prison" based on Michael Cohen's testimony.

Steinglass noted the charges in the case carry no minimum sentence, so jail or prison time might not happen even if Trump is convicted. It was a "blatant and wholly inappropriate effort" to create sympathy for Trump, Steinglass said.

Blanche said the judge is already slated to give a regular instruction on this point to jurors after the closing arguments are over.

"I'm gonna give a curative instruction," Merchan said. "Saying that was outrageous, Mr. Blanche," Merchan added.

"You know that making a comment like that is highly inappropriate," Merchan told Blanche. "It's hard for me to imagine how that was accidental in any way."

'Not a referendum on your views of President Trump': defense finishes closing

"This is not a referendum on your views of President Trump," defense lawyer Todd Blanche told jurors at the end of his closing argument.

Blanche said the trial is not about whom jurors voted for or plan to vote for. Instead, it's only about the evidence they heard in the courtroom, he said.

If jurors stick to that evidence, they will return an "easy" and "quick" not guilty verdict, he said.

'He's the human embodiment of reasonable doubt, literally': Trump lawyer on Cohen

In his tenth and final argument for reasonable doubt in the case, Trump lawyer Todd Blanche again attacked Michael Cohen as a liar.

"He's the human embodiment of reasonable doubt, literally," Blanche said. Cohen's financial wellbeing will depend on this case, Blanche added. "He is biased and motivated to tell you a story that's not true."

Cohen is the G.O.A.T. of liars, Blanche said, referencing an abbreviation for "greatest of all time."

"He has lied to every single branch of Congress. Both houses. The House and the Senate," Blanche said of Cohen. Cohen has lied to the Department of Justice, to federal judges, to state judges, and to his family, he added. "His words cannot be trusted."

After all those lies, Cohen came to the trial, "raised his right hand, and he lied to each of you," Blanche said.

"You cannot send someone to prison" based on Cohen's testimony, Blanche added. Judge Juan Merchan sustained an objection to that comment.

10 reasons why there is reasonable doubt: Trump lawyer

Trump lawyer Todd Blanche ended his closing argument by offering ten reasons for reasonable doubt in the case.

Blanche argued the evidence didn't show Trump was aware or responsible for invoices, vouchers, and checks that make up the 34 allegedly falsified records in the case.

Blanche also targeted allegations he expects the prosecution to make in its closing about Trump's intent. He said Trump had no intention to defraud, and no intention to commit or conceal another crime. Prosecutors have to prove both those elements of Trump's intent.

Blanche also said there was no illegal agreement to influence the 2016 election through a "catch-and-kill" scheme .

Blanche argued that Stormy Daniels' allegation of an affair with Trump was already public by 2016. Testimony at trial discussed the publication of a rumor about it as far back as 2011.

Blanche also said evidence in the case had been manipulated. He noted, for example, testimony of an Oct. 15, 2016 factory reset of Cohen's phone.

The tenth and final reason for reasonable doubt, Blanche said, is that Cohen – who testified to various aspects of the prosecution's case – is a liar.

'He's literally like an MVP of liars': Trump lawyer on Michael Cohen

Trump lawyer Todd Blanche accused the prosecution of being "perfectly willing" to have a witness commit perjury and lie to the jurors. Judge Juan Merchan sustained an objection to that accusation.

"He's literally like an MVP of liars," Blanche said as he continued to target Cohen.

"He lies to reporters, he lies to federal judges. In fact, he's also a thief. He literally stole," Blanche said, referencing Cohen's own admission to stealing from the Trump Organization by claiming a larger reimbursement than he was owed for a payment unrelated to the Daniels hush money deal.

Blanche then played an audio recording for jurors showing Cohen's animus toward Trump. Cohen described picturing Trump getting booked and finger printed on criminal charges, and having a mug shot taken. It "fills me with delight," Cohen said. Cohen also thanked the Manhattan District Attorney's Office, including its "fearless leader," Alvin Bragg.

'That was a lie, and he got caught red-handed': Trump lawyer on Cohen

Near the end of his closing argument, Trump lawyer Todd Blanche focused on the prosecution's star witness: Michael Cohen . Blanche told jurors they "only know from one source" what Trump knew in 2016 – Cohen. Prosecutors have alleged Trump knew about and authorized a October 2016 hush money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels.

Blanche elevated his voice as he attacked the former Trump lawyer and fixer, noting text messages indicating that a call from Cohen to Trump's bodyguard on Oct. 24, 2016 was to discuss harassing phone calls Cohen was getting. Cohen had earlier testified the call was to get Trump on the phone to provide an update on the Stormy Daniels hush money deal. After Blanche showed Cohen the text messages on cross-examination, Cohen said he believed the call was also about the deal.

"It was a lie!" Blanche exclaimed to jurors on Tuesday. "This was a lie about the charged conduct involving Ms. Daniels," he said.

"That was a lie, and he got caught red-handed," Blanche continued.

"That is per-jur-y," Blanche said, putting emphasis on each syllable in the last word.

Blanche distances Trump from Daniels hush money and election concerns

Trump lawyer Todd Blanche questioned prosecutors' suggestion that Trump would have paid hush money to Stormy Daniels because of the 2016 election, as well as their claim that Trump actually authorized the payment.

Blanche said no one wants their family to hear these sort of allegations.

Blanche also said the release of the Access Hollywood tape – in which Trump crudely described groping women's genitals – wasn't the "doomsday event" the prosecution made it out to be. "He never thought it was gonna cause him to lose the campaign. And indeed, it didn't," Blanche said. 

"Michael Cohen, however, had a different view," Blanche argued to jurors. He noted Cohen said the tape "was catastrophic."

These arguments from Blanche may have two aims:

• Encouraging jurors to believe Cohen acted alone, and
• Encouraging jurors to believe that, if they conclude Trump authorized the payment, it wasn't for the election, and therefore wasn't an unlawful campaign contribution.

Prosecutors have suggested the tape's release put pressure on the Trump campaign to not let any more stories get out that could hurt Trump's standing with women voters. That, according to prosecutors, was added incentive to quiet Stormy Daniels with a hush money payment.

'No evidence' but Cohen's words that Trump knew about 2016 hush money deal: defense lawyer

There is "no evidence," Trump lawyer Todd Blanche said, "except for Mr. Cohen's words that President Trump knew about that agreement in 2016."

Blanche was referencing the $130,000 hush money deal involving porn star Stormy Daniels.

Blanche pointed to a text exchange between Daniels' then-manager Gina Rodriguez and former National Enquirer editor Dylan Howard , in which Rodriguez asked if Howard was working "in favor" of Trump and Howard said he was not. Howard acknowledged in the text exchange that his CEO endorsed Trump.

'Nothing sinister': Blanche defends hush money practice

"There's nothing wrong with a non-disclosure agreement," Blanche told jurors. "There's nothing illegal, there's nothing sinister about it," he added.

Prosecutors in this case don't dispute that claim generally, but they say the hush money payment to Stormy Daniels is different because it allegedly violated federal campaign finance laws .

Judge rejects gag request in Trump’s classified documents case

The federal judge in former President Donald Trump's  classified documents case  rejected an urgent request from prosecutors to prohibit him from  commenting on FBI agents  who seized the records at Mar-a-Lago.

U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon found  Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith's request Friday lacked “professional courtesy" for not meeting with Trump’s team first to discuss the defense’s concerns.

Smith's team  had asked  Cannon  on Friday  to prohibit Trump from commenting  about law enforcement agents after Trump claimed the FBI “was authorized to shoot me” and agents were “locked &loaded ready to take me out” when they went to Mar-a-Lago.

Trump’s lawyers, who were preparing for final arguments in his New York hush money case, asked to meet Monday before prosecutors filed their motion. After being rejected, defense lawyers on Monday asked Cannon to hold prosecutors in contempt for the request. She rejected that request.

“This is bad-faith behavior, plain and simple,” Trump’s lawyers Todd Blanche, Emil Bove and Christopher Kise wrote.

– Bart Jansen

'This started out as an extortion': Blanche on Stormy Daniels

Blanche played for jurors a recording of a conversation between Michael Cohen and Keith Davidson , the lawyer who negotiated the hush money deal for Stormy Daniels. Davidson says during the recording that Daniels told him he "better settle this God damn story" because if Trump loses the election, "we lose all (expletive) leverage."

Daniels testified at trial that she never yelled at Davidson and, on the recording, it sounded to her like he is making a threat.

You can listen to the recording here:

Blanche suggested to jurors that Daniels has been cashing in on her allegations about Trump, noting she has a book.

"This started out as an extortion. There's no doubt about that. And it ended very well for Ms. Daniels, financially speaking," Blanche said.

'He was shocked': Defense's take on secret recording by Cohen of Trump

Trump lawyer Todd Blanche reminded jurors of a recording they heard during the trial, which Michael Cohen testified involved a discussion between him and Trump about a hush money deal with former Playboy model Karen McDougal .

Cohen testified that he secretly recorded Trump in order to reassure David Pecker, whose media company paid McDougal $150,000, that he would get his money back.

"There is a lot of dispute about that recording. A lot," Blanche told jurors Tuesday. He added that the government hasn't shown the recording is reliable.

Blanche played a portion of the recording that he said featured the voice of Rhona Graff , Trump's former executive assistant. He then told jurors the government didn't ask her a single question about the recording, even though she testified.

"The recording cuts off, as you know," Blanche said. He said there is "no doubt" the recording features discussion of David Pecker and his media company, but said there is "a lot of doubt" about whether it discussed McDougal.

When Trump asks about financing in the recording, "he has no idea" what Cohen is talking about, Blanche said. Cohen and Trump are "literally talking past each other about what is going on," he said.

"He was shocked," Blanche added, speaking about his client.

Biden and Trump campaigns conduct dueling news conferences

Another political first for the Trump hush money trial: Dueling news conferences by the presidential campaigns.First, the Biden team produced surrogates who denounced Trump to reporters stationed across the street from the courthouse.

“He wants to sow total chaos,” said Oscar-winning actor Robert De Niro. The Biden campaign said their news conference wasn’t about the hush money trial per se, but about Trump himself, particularly his role in the insurrection of Jan. 6, 2021 .

Other speakers included two Capitol police officers who were injured in the Jan. 6 riot, Michael Fanone and Harry Dunn.

“Those supporters were fueled by Trump’s lies,” Fanone said.

After watching the Biden proceedings from a distance, a trio of Trump aides took to the microphones to accuse the Biden people of political desperation over the trial.

“Why is Joe Biden now making this a campaign event?” said Trump senior adviser Jason Miller .

This was the first time that top Trump and Biden officials faced off in the same place at the same time, but it won’t be the last; there’s a June 27 debate coming up in Atlanta.

– David Jackson

'Makes no sense': Blanche attacks election conspiracy claim

Trump lawyer Todd Blanche told jurors he doesn't think they need to address whether Trump participated in a conspiracy to unlawfully influence the 2016 presidential election. That allegation from prosecutors has to do with why Trump has been charged with felony counts of falsifying records – but it's irrelevant to the charges if jurors conclude Trump never falsified records to begin with.

Still, Blanche challenged the suggestion that Trump engaged in an election-related conspiracy. He said "sophisticated people" like Trump and David Pecker – the former head of the National Enquirer's parent company – couldn't have believed they were able to influence the election through the publication's limited circulation when "millions and millions of people voted in the 2016 election."

The idea that an August 2015 meeting was going to influence the election "makes no sense," Blanche added. Pecker and Cohen both testified to having a meeting with Trump at Trump Tower that month to discuss how they could snap up potentially damaging stories to Trump's campaign and also publish negative stories about Trump's political opponents.

Actor Robert DeNiro calls Trump a ‘clown’ and ‘buffoon’ outside courthouse

Actor Robert DeNiro , flanked by former Capitol Police officers who defended the building on Jan. 6, 2021, called former President Donald Trump a “clown,” a “buffoon” and a “joke” outside the courthouse where Trump is on trial.

“He wants to sow total chaos,” said DeNiro, a surrogate for President Joe Biden who grew up in New York City. “He’ll use violence against anyone who stands in the way of his megalomania and greed. But it’s a coward’s violence.”

DeNiro noted Trump was found liable for sexual abuse and for misstating the value of his real estate. But DeNiro said over the shouts of hecklers and the honking of a car on the street outside the courthouse that Trump must be defeated or he would never leave the White House again.

“When Trump ran in 2016, it was like a joke, this buffoon running for president,” DeNiro said. “With Trump, we have a second chance and no one is laughing now. This is the time to stop him by voting him out once and for all.”

DeNiro was joined by Harry Dunn and Michael Fanone , two of the Capitol police officers who were injured defending the building when a mob of Trump supporters rioted and interrupted Congress certifying Biden’s 2020 win against Trump.

“These guys are the true heroes,” DeNiro said. “They stood and put their lives on the line for these lowlifes, for Trump.”

Blanche says Trump didn't have an intent to defraud

Trump lawyer Todd Blanche said he expects Judge Merchan to instruct jurors that, to find Trump guilty, they must conclude he falsified records and that he had an intent to defraud when he did so.

Blanche pointed to a 2018 tweet by Trump, in which Trump mentioned a retainer agreement with Cohen. A legal retainer is a compensation agreement that reserves a lawyer or pays for future services. Cohen submitted several invoices in 2017 – which form part of the allegedly falsified records in the case – referencing a retainer. Cohen testified no retainer actually existed.

Blanche said Trump wouldn't have posted that tweet if he had any intent to defraud.

Blanche says almost no evidence of planned tax crime

To find Trump guilty of the 34 felony counts in the case, the jurors must find not only that Trump falsified the 34 records, but also that he did so in order to commit or conceal another crime.

One of the theories the prosecution advanced about that purpose before trial was that the falsified records were covering up a plan to violate New York tax laws . The prosecution has also said there was a plan to violate New York election laws, and that the allegedly falsified records were hiding the violation of federal campaign finance laws through the hush money to Stormy Daniels.

The only evidence of a tax purpose for how payments to Cohen were recorded, according to Blanche, was former Trump Organization executive Allen Weisselberg saying the payments were grossed up. "Is there any other proof of that? Any other evidence? No, there's none," Blanche asked and answered.

'Case Turns On Cohen': Trump lawyer attacks Michael Cohen's credibility

Trump lawyer Todd Blanche displayed a portion of the transcript of Michael Cohen's testimony with a header above it titled: "Case Turns On Cohen."

The transcript excerpt featured Cohen saying he was in a meeting with Trump and former Trump Organization executive Allen Weisselberg , when Weisselberg allegedly said they would pay Cohen for the Stormy Daniels hush money, as well as for another expense and a bonus, over 12 months.

Cohen didn't even pretend to be part of that conversation, Blanche said – seeming to attack the lack of testimony from Cohen about what he himself said in the meeting. Blanche characterized it as weak evidence from the government about Trump's role in the alleged repayment scheme.

Blanche says lack of testimony from Trump sons Eric and Don Jr. is reason to acquit

Blanche argued that the lack of testimony from Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump – who are seated in the audience today – is a reason to acquit Trump. The two Trump sons were running Trump business operations during their father's presidency, and allegedly signed two checks that make up two of the 34 records that their father is allegedly responsible for falsifying.

"That is reasonable doubt," Blanche said.

The Trump defense team, like the prosecution, didn't call the two Trump sons to the stand, although it did call two other witnesses.

"We have no burden to do anything," Blanche said, emphasizing the prosecution chose to call Michael Cohen but not the sons.

Supreme Court rejects appeal from Stormy Daniels' former lawyer Michael Avenatti

Outside of the Manhattan courtroom today, the Supreme Court rejected an appeal from Stormy Daniels ' former lawyer Michael Avenatti .

The disgraced California lawyer represented Daniels in her 2018 lawsuits against Trump .

The Supreme Court denied the appeal of his 2020 conviction for an extortion scheme in which he tried to get up to $25 million from shoemaker Nike .

Avenatti is also serving sentences on two other convictions tied to stealing profits from Daniels' book, cheating clients out of millions of dollars, and failing to pay taxes.

– Kinsey Crowley &  Maureen Groppe

'That's a red flag': Blanche argues lack of evidence on vouchers

Trump lawyer Todd Blanche told jurors there is "no evidence" Trump knew anything about the Trump Organization's voucher system. "No evidence - not a single word," Blanche added.

This is a reference to a portion of the 34 records that Trump is allegedly responsible for falsifying. The vouchers were the digital entries in general ledgers at the Trump Organization that labeled payments to Michael Cohen as legal expenses.

Blanche said he doesn't know how the government is going to address the alleged lack of evidence, but told jurors to be skeptical if prosecutor Joshua Steinglass reads quotes from a decades-old Trump book. During the trial, the prosecution brought in two book publishers who read excerpts from Trump's books.

"You should be suspicious. That's a red flag," Blanche said.

'The bookings were accurate': Trump lawyer defends records

Trump lawyer Todd Blanche noted his client was in the White House at the time of the alleged records falsifications, arguing there wasn't evidence that Trump "had anything to do" with how payments to Michael Cohen were recorded on a ledger.

Cohen testified that Trump was in a meeting with him and former Trump Organization executive Allen Weisselberg about how to reimburse Cohen for the $130,000 hush money payment to Stormy Daniels. "He approved it," Cohen told jurors about Trump. According to prosecutors, the reimbursement payments were falsely recorded as 2017 legal expenses.

Blanche defended the accuracy of the records on Tuesday.

"The bookings were accurate and there was absolutely no intent to defraud," Blanche said.

'This case is about documents': Trump lawyer to jurors

Trump lawyer Todd Blanche noted to jurors that Trump doesn't face any charges for allegedly having a sexual encounter with porn star Stormy Daniels in 2006 – an allegation Trump denies.

"This case is about documents. It's a paper case," Blanche said. "This case is not about an encounter with Stormy Daniels 18 years ago," he added.

Still, Blanche took the time to dispute Daniels' story, saying Trump has "unequivocally and repeatedly" denied the alleged encounter happened.

Biden campaign to hold courthouse news conference

Another interested party is visiting the scene outside the Trump trial courthouse: The Joe Biden presidential campaign.

“The Biden-Harris campaign will hold a press conference with special guests outside of the Manhattan Criminal Courthouse,” said an e-mailed announcement.

Among the spectators awaiting the Biden campaign news conference: Officials with the Trump campaign, who said they will be responding afterward.

'President Trump is innocent': Trump lawyer attacks prosecution's case

"President Trump is innocent," defense lawyer Todd Blanche said early into his closing argument. "He did not commit any crimes," Blanche added. "The district attorney has not met their burden of proof – period."

Blanche told the jurors they "should want and expect more than the testimony of Michael Cohen," referring to Trump's former lawyer, who was the prosecution's star witness. Blanche also said the jurors should want more than the testimony of Deborah Tarasoff , a Trump Organization employee who testified about invoices and checks that are at the core of the 34 felony counts Trump faces.

Blanche also referenced Stormy Daniels without using her name – telling jurors they should want more than a woman saying something happened in 2006. Daniels said she and Trump had a sexual encounter that year, after meeting at a celebrity golf tournament.

Blanche also told jurors they should want more than the testimony of former Daniels lawyers Keith Davidson, who testified about her $130,000 hush money deal. Davidson was "just trying to extort money" from Trump ahead of the 2016 election, Blanche said.

The consequence of those defects in the prosecution's case, Blanche said, "is a not guilty verdict, period."

Trump proclaims innocence before attending closing arguments

Former President Donald Trump continued to profess his innocence before closing arguments in his New York hush money trial, arguing “there is no crime” and “hopefully it doesn’t work out for them.”

Trump is charged with falsifying business records to hide his reimbursement to former lawyer Michael Cohen for his $130,000 payment to silence porn actress Stormy Daniels, to prevent another salacious story before the 2016 election.

Trump, who didn’t testify in his own defense, argued to reporters outside the courtroom that there is nothing wrong with securing a nondisclosure agreement. Trump also argued any personal payment couldn’t have violated campaign finance law.

“It’s a very sad day,” Trump said. “This is a dark day for America.”

Low-key demonstrations outside the NYC courthouse

About 50-60 people shuttled into and out of the small park across from the courthouse as lawyers inside prepared their final arguments.

Most of the early witnesses were anti-Trump, but a contingent of more than 20 supporters showed up to support the former president as he traveled to the courthouse.

“We wanted to let him know that people in New York support him,” said a Trump flag-carrying man with a white beard and a red suit who identified himself as “Hungry Santa” (he produced a business card with that name).Other demonstrators made clear they did not support Trump.

Brad McCormick, 38, an educational consultant from Brigantine, N.J., hawked copies of a game book called “Trump Madness.” Readers are presented with outrageous quotes on a variety of topics, and asked if Trump really said those things (in many cases, the answer is yes).

McCormick also said he came to the courthouse out of a “sense of duty.”

“You’ve got to do something,” he said.

Tiffany Trump, Don Jr., Eric attend closing arguments

Three of former President Donald Trump’s children – Donald Jr., Eric and Tiffany – accompanied him to the closing arguments Tuesday in his New York hush money trial.

Trump’s daughter in law, Lara Trump, who is co-chair of the Republican National Committee, also attended.

A parade of SUVs delivered Trump’s entourage to the local courthouse on the sunny, 70-degree morning, a day after the Memorial Day holiday.

Trump lawyer begins by thanking jurors

Trump lawyer Todd Blanche began his closing argument by thanking the jurors, noting that they have consistently arrived on time for the trial.

Prosecution plans lengthy closing argument

Trump lawyer Todd Blanche estimated his side's closing argument will last about 2.5 hours. Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass said the length of his argument may change based on what comes up in the defense's argument, but gave an estimate of 4-4.5 hours.

Judge Merchan said those estimates mean arguments and instructions may not conclude by the normal end time of 4:30 p.m. EDT and he will check whether jurors are able to stay later.

Judge Merchan arrives in courtroom

Judge Juan Merchan entered the courtroom at 9:31 a.m. EDT. Merchan said he sent his proposed jury instructions to both trial teams on Thursday.

Trump arrives in courtroom

Former President Donald Trump arrived in the courtroom at 9:25 a.m. EDT. We are still waiting for the judge and jury.

Alvin Bragg in attendance for closing arguments

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg entered the courtroom at 9:24 a.m. EDT. Bragg has attended some previous days of trial. He is seated in the second row of benches behind the prosecution team.

Prosecution arrives for closing arguments

The prosecution team entered the courtroom at about 9:14 a.m. EDT. We are still waiting on Trump's trial team as well as the judge and the jury.

What time does the Trump trial start today?

Proceedings are scheduled to begin at 9:30 a.m. EDT.

What to expect in closing arguments

Closing arguments offer each side a chance to go over evidence from the trial and make arguments about the inferences and conclusions that may fairly be drawn from that evidence.

Prosecutors may point to checks with Trump's signatures, excerpts from Trump's books, and recordings introduced at trial in order to bolster the testimony of star witness Michael Cohen, who testified that Trump authorized him to pay Stormy Daniels hush money in 2016 and approved a plan to cover it up in 2017.

The defense is likely to attack the credibility of Cohen, including by highlighting that he previously pleaded guilty to lying to Congress. Trump's team may also point to the high burden of proof prosecutors face: prosecutors must prove each element of the charges beyond a reasonable doubt.

Who goes first in closing arguments?

Under New York law , the defense team gives its closing argument first, followed by the prosecution. After both sides have spoken to the jurors, Judge Juan Merchan will instruct them on the law to apply in the case.

Trump rails against trial, quotes scripture

Former President Donald Trump posted a series of messages Monday, on the eve of closing arguments in his New York hush money trial, railing against the case as election interference and quoting scripture.

Besides criticizing Judge Juan Merchan and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, Trump questioned why the prosecution gets the final word before jury deliberations. Typically in summing up the evidence in a case, prosecutors make their statements, defense lawyers speak and prosecutors get a final rebuttal because they have the burden of proving their case.

“Big advantage, very unfair,” Trump said in an all-caps post on Truth Social.

Trump also quoted a passage from the book of John in the Bible about personal sacrifice. Trump and his supporters have described his four criminal cases as political persecution.

“Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends,” the post said.

Could Trump go to prison?

Each count against Trump carries a maximum penalty of four years in prison and no minimum amount of jail or prison time. If Trump is convicted on all counts, Merchan will be tasked with deciding on a sentence for each count, and also deciding whether the sentences will coincide with each other or be run one after the other. However, New York law caps sentences for Class E felonies such as those Trump is charged with  at 20 years .

Legal experts told USA TODAY it's possible Trump could get just probation, even if he were convicted on every count. Most predicted any incarceration sentence on each count would run simultaneously with the others, so Trump wouldn't be ordered to serve more than four years behind bars. Experts also said Trump would likely be free while his expected appeal ran its course.

What is Trump on trial for?

Trump faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in order to conceal or commit another crime. The records – including checks, vouchers, and invoices – all relate to payments to former Trump lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen in 2017. Prosecutors say the payments were reimbursing Cohen for $130,000 in hush money to porn star Stormy Daniels in 2016, but the records were falsified to make the payments look like 2017 legal expenses.

Prosecutors say Trump was covering up the violation of federal campaign finance laws through the hush money, which was handed over less than two weeks before the 2016 presidential election. They also say Trump was trying to hide a plan to violate New York tax and election laws.

Trump has pleaded not guilty, and Trump defense lawyer Todd Blanche has denied the payments were reimbursing the hush money.

Why does Trump's team say the case should be dismissed?

Judge Juan Merchan may issue a ruling today on Trump's request to toss out the entire case ahead of jury deliberations.

Trump lawyer Todd Blanche told Merchan that prosecutors haven't put on enough evidence for the case to go to the jury because the business records at issue weren't false. He said documents show Trump was paying Michael Cohen for ongoing legal services in 2017. Blanche also said the prosecution's case shouldn't be able to stand given Cohen's history of lying, including – according to the Trump defense lawyer – during this trial.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Electric Cars Are Suddenly Becoming Affordable

More efficient manufacturing, falling battery costs and intense competition are lowering sticker prices for battery-powered models to within striking distance of gasoline cars.

By Jack Ewing

Alex Lawrence, a dealer in Salt Lake City who specializes in used electric cars, has seen a change over the last year in the kinds of customers who are coming into his showroom. They used to be well-heeled professionals who could drop $70,000 on a Rivian luxury pickup truck.

Recently, Mr. Lawrence said, customers have been snapping up used Teslas for a little over $20,000, after applying a $4,000 federal tax credit.

“We’re seeing younger people,” Mr. Lawrence said. “We are seeing more blue-collar and entry-level white-collar people. The purchase price of the car has suddenly become in reach.”

Regarded by conservative politicians and other critics as playthings of the liberal elite, electric vehicles are fast becoming more accessible. Prices are falling because of increased competition, lower raw-material costs and more efficient manufacturing. Federal tax credits of up to $7,500 for new electric cars, often augmented by thousands of dollars in state incentives, push prices even lower.

At the same time, technology is improving quickly and making electric vehicles more practical. Cars that can travel more than 300 miles on a fully charged battery are becoming common, and charging times are dropping below 30 minutes. The number of fast chargers, which can top up a battery in less than half an hour, grew 36 percent from April 2023 to April 2024.

Carmakers including Tesla, Ford, General Motors and Stellantis, the owner of Jeep, have announced plans for electric vehicles that would sell new for as little as $25,000.

“The E.V. market has hit an inflection point,” said Randy Parker, chief executive of Hyundai Motor America, which will begin producing electric vehicles at a factory in Georgia by the end of the year. “The early adopters have come. They’ve got their cars. Now you’re starting to see us transition to a mass market.”

All this is good news for proponents of electric vehicles and the Biden administration, which is aiming for half of new cars sold to be electric by 2030 as part of the president’s plan to combat climate change. Even if Republicans gain control of the White House and Congress and follow through on promises to dismantle electric vehicle subsidies, they may not be able to undo the market forces pushing down prices.

“There may be some hiccups in the exact pace and scale of E.V. sales if there are major policy changes, but I wouldn’t expect the E.V. market to flatline,” said Peter Slowik, who leads research on passenger cars at the International Council on Clean Transportation, a research organization. “Most automakers are committed to an all-electric future, and many are planning on a timeline that goes far beyond the next administration.”

Electric cars, sales of which have slowed in recent months, are still more expensive than gasoline models, costing an average of $55,252 in the United States in April, according to estimates by Kelley Blue Book. That is a decline of 9 percent from April 2023, but still about $6,700 more than the average for all vehicles.

But Mr. Slowik’s group estimates that cars and sport-utility vehicles capable of traveling 400 miles on a full battery will cost less than cars with internal combustion engines in 2030, even before taking into account government subsidies. (Pickup trucks, which require bigger batteries, will take a little longer, not reaching parity for 400-mile models until 2033.)

Those calculations do not take into account lower fuel and maintenance costs that strengthen the financial argument for electric vehicles. Electricity is almost always cheaper per mile than gasoline, and battery-powered vehicles don’t need oil changes, engine air filters or spark plugs. For people who drive a lot, electric cars may already be a better deal. At the same time, some automakers are offering strong discounts on E.V. models as an enticement for buyers.

While prices are clearly trending downward, there are risks. China supplies more than half of the lithium-ion batteries used in cars sold in the United States, according to Interact Analysis, a research firm. Those batteries will become more expensive because the Biden administration announced in May that it would raise tariffs on them to 25 percent from 7.5 percent.

Many companies are building battery factories in the United States and Canada , but most of these won’t produce enough batteries to replace China for several years.

Raw materials are another risk. The price of lithium and other materials required for batteries has plunged in the last 12 months, making electric cars cheaper. But commodity prices could soar again.

The recent slowdown in the growth of electric car sales has prompted Tesla, Ford and others to delay plans to expand manufacturing. But many analysts expect sales to pick up as a glut of models pushes down prices, and as the charging network grows. High prices and the fear of not being able to find a place to recharge are the two biggest reasons people hesitate to buy an electric vehicle, surveys show.

For many people, the car’s price is not the only expense to consider. People who live in apartments often depend on public charging plugs. Public charging, besides being less convenient, tends to be more costly than charging at home.

Still, the forces pushing prices down are powerful. Manufacturing costs are dropping as traditional carmakers, who were slow to sell electric vehicles, start to apply their decades of experience with mass production to the new technology.

Later this year, for example, General Motors will begin selling an electric version of its Chevrolet Equinox sport-utility vehicle that will have a range of more than 300 miles and sell for less than $30,000 after the $7,500 federal tax credit. And the company plans to sell an even cheaper car, a new Chevrolet Bolt, next year.

The Equinox and Bolt will be built on G.M.’s Ultium platform, a collection of components that can be used for a variety of vehicles including pickups and luxury Cadillacs. G.M., which has cut costs by using the same batteries and parts for different models, has said its electric vehicles will become profitable in the second half of this year.

Electric cars still cost more to manufacture than cars with internal combustion engines, said Prateek Biswas, an analyst at Wood Mackenzie, a research firm. But costs will come down as companies learn how to produce the cars more efficiently, Mr. Biswas said — for example, by eliminating rare minerals from electric motors or replacing copper wiring with aluminum.

At the same time, the cost to make a gasoline car is rising because of stricter emissions regulations. “At some point it will be easier to just move toward E.V.s,” Mr. Biswas said.

Competition is also intensifying. Toyota and other Japanese carmakers with a reputation for delivering reliable and affordable vehicles are belatedly offering electric vehicles. Honda plans to begin producing them at an Ohio factory next year.

There will be more than 100 fully electric models for sale in the United States by next year, according to Cars.com, an online sales platform, double the number available last year. “We’re at the point now where anybody that wants an E.V. for a price point can actually get an E.V.,” said Rebecca Lindland, senior director of industry data at Cars Commerce, which operates Cars.com.

Used car prices are arguably more important than prices of new cars. Most people buy used cars. A vibrant used market vastly increases the number of people who can consider an electric vehicle.

Models from Tesla, Nissan or G.M. have been on the road for three years or more, generating inventory for dealers as the original owners buy new ones. More than half of the used electric vehicles on the market sell for less than $30,000, according to Recurrent, a research firm that focuses on the used E.V. market.

Jesse Lore, owner of Green Wave Electric Vehicles in North Hampton, N.H., recently sold a used Chevy Bolt for $15,000. After applying a federal tax credit for used electric vehicles, the price was $11,000. Besides the lure of affordable prices, he noted, his customers like that electric vehicles are quieter than gasoline models, better for the environment, and faster because an electric motor generates instant torque.

“The car is more fun than whatever they’re driving now,” Mr. Lore said.

Jack Ewing writes about the auto industry with an emphasis on electric vehicles. More about Jack Ewing