opposing argument and rebuttal

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

A Guide to Rebuttals in Argumentative Essays

4-minute read

• 27th May 2023

Rebuttals are an essential part of a strong argument. But what are they, exactly, and how can you use them effectively? Read on to find out.

What Is a Rebuttal?

When writing an argumentative essay , there’s always an opposing point of view. You can’t present an argument without the possibility of someone disagreeing.

Sure, you could just focus on your argument and ignore the other perspective, but that weakens your essay. Coming up with possible alternative points of view, or counterarguments, and being prepared to address them, gives you an edge. A rebuttal is your response to these opposing viewpoints.

How Do Rebuttals Work?

With a rebuttal, you can take the fighting power away from any opposition to your idea before they have a chance to attack. For a rebuttal to work, it needs to follow the same formula as the other key points in your essay: it should be researched, developed, and presented with evidence.

Rebuttals in Action

Suppose you’re writing an essay arguing that strawberries are the best fruit. A potential counterargument could be that strawberries don’t work as well in baked goods as other berries do, as they can get soggy and lose some of their flavor. Your rebuttal would state this point and then explain why it’s not valid:

Read on for a few simple steps to formulating an effective rebuttal.

Step 1. Come up with a Counterargument

A strong rebuttal is only possible when there’s a strong counterargument. You may be convinced of your idea but try to place yourself on the other side. Rather than addressing weak opposing views that are easy to fend off, try to come up with the strongest claims that could be made.

In your essay, explain the counterargument and agree with it. That’s right, agree with it – to an extent. State why there’s some truth to it and validate the concerns it presents.

Step 2. Point Out Its Flaws

Now that you’ve presented a counterargument, poke holes in it . To do so, analyze the argument carefully and notice if there are any biases or caveats that weaken it. Looking at the claim that strawberries don’t work well in baked goods, a weakness could be that this argument only applies when strawberries are baked in a pie.

Find this useful?

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

Step 3. Present New Points

Once you reveal the counterargument’s weakness, present a new perspective, and provide supporting evidence to show that your argument is still the correct one. This means providing new points that the opposer may not have considered when presenting their claim.

Offering new ideas that weaken a counterargument makes you come off as authoritative and informed, which will make your readers more likely to agree with you.

Summary: Rebuttals

Rebuttals are essential when presenting an argument. Even if a counterargument is stronger than your point, you can construct an effective rebuttal that stands a chance against it.

We hope this guide helps you to structure and format your argumentative essay . And once you’ve finished writing, send a copy to our expert editors. We’ll ensure perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, referencing, and more. Try it out for free today!

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a rebuttal in an essay.

A rebuttal is a response to a counterargument. It presents the potential counterclaim, discusses why it could be valid, and then explains why the original argument is still correct.

How do you form an effective rebuttal?

To use rebuttals effectively, come up with a strong counterclaim and respectfully point out its weaknesses. Then present new ideas that fill those gaps and strengthen your point.

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

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

The benefits of using an online proofreading service.

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

2-minute read

6 Online AI Presentation Maker Tools

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

What Is Market Research?

No matter your industry, conducting market research helps you keep up to date with shifting...

8 Press Release Distribution Services for Your Business

In a world where you need to stand out, press releases are key to being...

3-minute read

How to Get a Patent

In the United States, the US Patent and Trademarks Office issues patents. In the United...

The 5 Best Ecommerce Website Design Tools 

A visually appealing and user-friendly website is essential for success in today’s competitive ecommerce landscape....

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

Your version of Internet Explorer is either running in "Compatibility View" or is too outdated to display this site. If you believe your version of Internet Explorer is up to date, please remove this site from Compatibility View by opening Tools > Compatibility View settings (IE11) or clicking the broken page icon in your address bar (IE9, IE10)

Missouri S&T Missouri S&T

• Future Students
• Current Students
• Faculty and Staff
• writingcenter.mst.edu
• Online Resources
• Writing Guides
• Counter Arguments

Writing and Communication Center

• 314 Curtis Laws Wilson Library, 400 W 14th St Rolla, MO 65409 United States
• (573) 341-4436
• [email protected]

Counter Argument

One way to strengthen your argument and demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of the issue you are discussing is to anticipate and address counter arguments, or objections. By considering opposing views, 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. Ask yourself what someone who disagrees with you might say in response to each of the points you’ve made or about 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 taking, but someone probably has. Look around to see what stances people have and do take on the subject or argument you plan to make, so that you know what environment you are addressing.
• Talk with a friend or with your instructor. Another person may be able to play devil’s advocate and suggest counter arguments that haven’t occurred to you.
• Consider each of your supporting points individually. Even if you find it difficult to see why anyone would disagree with your central argument, you may be able to imagine more easily how someone could disagree with the individual parts of your argument. Then you can see which of these counter arguments are most worth considering. 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 demanding.”

Once you have considered potential counter arguments, decide how you might respond to them: Will you concede that your opponent has a point but explain why your audience should nonetheless accept your argument? Or 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.

Two strategies are available to incorporate counter arguments into your essay:

Refutation:

Refutation seeks to disprove opposing arguments by pointing out their weaknesses. This approach is generally most effective if it is not hostile or sarcastic; with methodical, matter-of-fact language, identify the logical, theoretical, or factual flaws of the opposition.

For example, in an essay supporting the reintroduction of wolves into western farmlands, a writer might refute opponents by challenging the logic of their assumptions:

Although some farmers have expressed concern that wolves might pose a threat to the safety of sheep, cattle, or even small children, their fears are unfounded. Wolves fear humans even more than humans fear wolves and will trespass onto developed farmland only if desperate for food. The uninhabited wilderness that will become the wolves’ new home has such an abundance of food that there is virtually no chance that these shy animals will stray anywhere near humans.

Here, the writer acknowledges the opposing view (wolves will endanger livestock and children) and refutes it (the wolves will never be hungry enough to do so).

Accommodation:

Accommodation acknowledges the validity of the opposing view, but argues that other considerations outweigh it. In other words, this strategy turns the tables by agreeing (to some extent) with the opposition.

For example, the writer arguing for the reintroduction of wolves might accommodate the opposing view by writing:

Critics of the program have argued that reintroducing wolves is far too expensive a project to be considered seriously at this time. Although the reintroduction program is costly, it will only become more costly the longer it is put on hold. Furthermore, wolves will help control the population of pest animals in the area, saving farmers money on extermination costs. Finally, the preservation of an endangered species is worth far more to the environment and the ecological movement than the money that taxpayers would save if this wolf relocation initiative were to be abandoned.

This writer acknowledges the opposing position (the program is too expensive), agrees (yes, it is expensive), and then argues that despite the expense the program is worthwhile.

Some Final Hints

Don’t play dirty. When you summarize opposing arguments, be charitable. Present each argument fairly and objectively, rather than trying to make it look foolish. You want to convince your readers that you have carefully considered all sides of the issues and that you are not simply attacking or caricaturing your opponents.

Sometimes less is more. It is usually better to consider one or two serious counter arguments in some depth, rather than to address every counterargument.

Keep an open mind. Be sure that your reply is consistent with your original argument. Careful consideration of counter arguments can complicate or change your perspective on an issue. There’s nothing wrong with adopting a different perspective or changing your mind, but if you do, be sure to revise your thesis accordingly.

• How It Works
• Prices & Discounts

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

Table of contents

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

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

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

Understanding the Concept of a Rebuttal

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Components of a Persuasive Rebuttal: Breaking It Down

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

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

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

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

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

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

Building Your Rebuttal: A Step-by-Step Guide

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

Step 1: Identify the Counter-Arguments

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

Step 2: Choose the Strongest Counter-Argument

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

Step 3: Research and Collect Evidence 

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

Step 4: Write the Rebuttal

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

Step 5: Review and Refine

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

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

Practical Example: Constructing a Rebuttal

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Case Study: Effective vs. Ineffective Rebuttal

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

Example 1: "Homework is unnecessary."

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Final Thoughts

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

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

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

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

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

Additional Resources

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

Posts from Writers Per Hour Blog :

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

External Resources :

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

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

Share this article

Achieve Academic Success with Expert Assistance!

Crafted from Scratch for You.

Ensuring Your Work’s Originality.

Transform Your Draft into Excellence.

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

Calculate the cost of your paper

Get ideas for your essay

English Current

ESL Lesson Plans, Tests, & Ideas

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

Argumentative Essays: The Counter-Argument & Refutation

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

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

Introduction Paragraph

(Background information....)

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

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

• Background information

Body Paragraph 1

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

Body Paragraph 2

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

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

You Need to Also Respond to the Counter-Arguments!

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

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

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

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

The Refutation/Response Paragraph

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

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

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

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

Where Do We Put the Counter-Argument and Refutation?

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

Counter-argument Paragraph

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

Refutation/Response Paragraph

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

Body Paragraph 3

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

Body Paragraph 4

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

Working from home may increase productivity.

Extra Advice on Argumentative Essays

It's not a compare and contrast essay.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Choose the Side with the Strongest Support

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

Do Not Include Too Many Counter-arguments

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

If you have any questions, leave a comment below.

- Matthew Barton / Creator of Englishcurrent.com

Additional Resources :

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

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

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

Thank you professor. It is really helpful.

Can you also put the counter argument in the third paragraph

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

Thank you for the information Professor

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

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

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

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

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

Thank you, professor Mylene 102-04

it was very useful for writing essay

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

Really very helpful. Thanks Regards Mayank

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

It is really helpful thank you

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

Thanks Professor

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

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

This was really helpful proof, thankyou!

Thanks this was really helpful to me

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

thank you so much for this useful information.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

Find what you need to study

9.1 Strategically conceding, rebutting, or refuting information

6 min read • january 21, 2023

ChristineLing

Introduction

This is Topic 1 of Unit 9. Here, we’ll be looking at how to qualify your claim by acknowledging existing (opposing) claims and actively responding to them. This comes in three main forms, as described in the AP Lang CED . First is conceding to another claim. The second is rebutting that claim. Lastly, you can refute the claim.

You may not know what exactly the difference is between each of those three techniques yet, but that’s fine! You’ll learn in the coming sections. You’ll also learn when to use each, since that’s the skill you need. It’s not enough just to know what each entail.

Why Acknowledge Opposing Claims?

If you want to join the ongoing discussion on a subject with your own argument, you'll need to take into account what's already been said. Generally, evidence will either be in support of your thesis or against it. Thus, you can use it to back up your own views, or to challenge the ideas that other people have presented. It's a good idea to acknowledge the evidence and arguments that go against your own opinion. It shows deeper thinking about the topic at stake and enhances your trustworthiness as a scholar.

Concede vs. Rebut vs. Refute

Now, let’s define and distinguish conceding , rebutting , and refuting an argument. The first one you may know already. However, the difference between the last two is a bit more nuanced.

I’ll be using definitions from the AP Lang CED , since that is a primary source that AP Lang teachers refer to and details exactly what College Board expects from you.

Here’s the argument we’ll base our examples off of, so you can see how to use each technique :

Public libraries will become irrelevant in the future, and should be restructured to prioritize digital resources more.

1. Concession

College Board definition: “When writers concede, they accept all or a portion of a competing position or claim as correct, agree that the competing position or claim is correct under a different set of circumstances, or acknowledge the limitations of their own argument.”

At first, conceding your argument might feel like it goes against the point of an argument essay. Isn’t the whole point to make my argument seem stronger than the opposing ones? In actuality, conceding can benefit your argument by acknowledging the validity of and critically evaluating the opposing claim. By doing this, you demonstrate that you have a thorough understanding of the issue and have thoughtfully considered the other side of the argument. It tells the reader you can be objective while considering all sides of an issue. Additionally, conceding your argument to an opposing claim can help to make your essay more persuasive, as it shows that you are open-minded and willing to consider different points of view. 

Example concession: 

While I disagree that public libraries will become irrelevant in the future, I concede that they should be restructured to prioritize digital resources more. Libraries already offer access to technology, digital resources, and workshops to teach digital literacy skills, but they could benefit from more support and resources to help them further their mission. Libraries should also prioritize providing access to digital tools for those who may not have them, and create programs to help people learn how to use technology. By doing so, libraries can continue to be an important part of a technology-focused future.

2. Rebuttal

College Board definition: “When writers rebut, they offer a contrasting perspective on an argument and its evidence or provide alternative evidence to propose that all or a portion of a competing position or claim is invalid.”

In a rebuttal, you are offering a different perspective in order to try to prove that an opposing argument isn’t true. This doesn’t necessarily mean offering new or different evidence . Rather, you could be looking at the evidence that the opposing argument is using and extract a different conclusion from it.

Example rebuttal:

While it is true that public libraries need to keep up with the growing demand for digital resources, they should not be restructured to prioritize digital resources over traditional ones. Public libraries are still important for providing access to physical resources, such as books, magazines, and newspapers, as well as for preserving historical and cultural artifacts. Libraries are also important for providing access to reliable and trustworthy information, which can be difficult to find online. In addition, libraries continue to provide a safe and welcoming space for people to learn and explore, making them an invaluable resource in a technology-focused future.

3. Refutation

College Board definition: “When writers refute, they demonstrate, using evidence , that all

or a portion of a competing position or claim is invalid.”

This may sound very similar to the definition for rebuttal. However, the main distinction is that refuting an opposing claim involves explicitly presenting evidence to prove the opposing claim is factually untrue. So in summary: both involve attempting to prove an opposing argument is invalid. Refutation is the one where you actually prove it’s untrue.

Example refutation:

This argument is not supported by evidence . Public libraries remain important in the digital age, and they have adapted to the technological changes in a variety of ways. For example, many public libraries have created digital literacy programs and classes to help people learn how to use computers, tablets, and other devices. Additionally, libraries continue to offer physical resources such as books, magazines, and DVDs, and many libraries have started to offer digital versions of these resources. Additionally, libraries continue to provide a place for community members to gather and discuss technology, and they are often seen as a trusted source of information. Therefore, public libraries should be seen as an important part of our technology-focused future.

WhenHow to Use Each

Now that you know the differences between the three, let’s determine when to use each.

Concession:

FRQ 1 (the synthesis essay) of the AP exam would be a great place to concede, given that you are given multiple sources that offer varying perspectives. After using the sources that are in favor of your argument, take inventory of the remaining sources. Are there any that you acknowledge the strength of? Maybe you thought to yourself “Darn, that source entirely goes against my argument.” Do any of them offer points that are difficult/impossible to refute? If so, a concession could be fitting. 

Begin by restating the opposing argument and bring up the source that relates to it. You can then choose to express agreement or acceptance of their argument. You can even refer to your own argument and acknowledge that the opposing source refutes it.

Contrary to a concession, you could use a rebuttal when you do know how to attack the opposing argument. If you saw an opposing source and immediately thought “I can actually use this for my own argument,” a rebuttal is the move.

Again, bring up the opposing argument and source. Then, offer your own view of the source. Maybe there’s a particular detail about it that weakens it, or there’s a phrase within it that is actually supportive of your argument. Look carefully! You may be able to find a valuable quote.

Refutation:

Refutation is probably the most extreme writing technique of the three to employ in your essay. It requires you to be able to solidly state and justify why an opposing claim is false. This may require background knowledge of a topic or an amazing ability to nitpick and expose flaws.

You should first restate the opposing argument in your own words, then identify the flaw in their argument. After this, provide evidence that refutes their argument and explain why the evidence disproves their point (an explanation is crucial!). This will weaken the opposing argument and show the reader your critical analysis skills.

This topic of Unit 9 focuses on how to qualify your claim by acknowledging existing (opposing) claims and actively responding to them. There are three primary ways to do this: conceding , rebutting , and refuting . Conceding involves accepting all or a portion of a competing position or claim as correct. Rebutting entails offering a contrasting perspective on an argument and its evidence or providing alternative evidence to propose that all or a portion of a competing position or claim is invalid. Lastly, refuting involves demonstrating, using evidence , that all or a portion of a competing position or claim is invalid. When considering which technique to use, consider the quality of the opposing argument and its sources, and provide evidence to support your point.

Key Terms to Review ( 10 )

Counterargument

Logical Fallacy

Rhetorical Situation

Thesis Statement

Stay Connected

© 2024 Fiveable Inc. All rights reserved.

AP® and SAT® are trademarks registered by the College Board, which is not affiliated with, and does not endorse this website.

Table of Contents

Collaboration, information literacy, writing process, counterarguments – rebuttal – refutation.

• © 2023 by Roberto León - Georgia College & State University

Ignoring what your target audience thinks and feels about your argument isn't a recipe for success. Instead, engage in audience analysis : ask yourself, "How is your target audience likely to respond to your propositions? What counterarguments -- arguments about your argument -- will your target audience likely raise before considering your propositions?"

Counterargument Definition

C ounterargument refers to an argument given in response to another argument that takes an alternative approach to the issue at hand.

C ounterargument may also be known as rebuttal or refutation .

Related Concepts: Audience Awareness ; Authority (in Speech and Writing) ; Critical Literacy ; Ethos ; Openness ; Researching Your Audience

Guide to Counterarguments in Writing Studies

Counterarguments are a topic of study in Writing Studies as

• Rhetors engage in rhetorical reasoning : They analyze the rebuttals their target audiences may have to their claims , interpretations , propositions, and proposals
• Rhetors may develop counterarguments by questioning a rhetor’s backing , data , qualifiers, and/or warrants
• Rhetors begin arguments with sincere summaries of counterarguments
• a strategy of Organization .

Learning about the placement of counterarguments in Toulmin Argument , Arisotelian Argument , and Rogerian Argument will help you understand when you need to introduce counterarguments and how thoroughly you need to address them.

Why Do Counterarguments Matter?

If your goal is clarity and persuasion, you cannot ignore what your target audience thinks, feels, and does about the argument. To communicate successfully with audiences, rhetors need to engage in audience analysis : they need to understand the arguments against their argument that the audience may hold.

Imagine that you are scrolling through your social media feed when you see a post from an old friend. As you read, you immediately feel that your friend’s post doesn’t make sense. “They can’t possibly believe that!” you tell yourself. You quickly reply “I’m not sure I agree. Why do you believe that?” Your friend then posts a link to an article and tells you to see for yourself.

There are many ways to analyze your friend’s social media post or the professor’s article your friend shared. You might, for example, evaluate the professor’s article by using the CRAAP Test or by conducting a rhetorical analysis of their aims and ethos . After engaging in these prewriting heuristics to get a better sense of what your friend knows and feels about the topic at hand, you may feel more prepared to respond to their arguments and also sense how they might react to your post.

Toulmin Counterarguments

There’s more than one way to counter an argument.

In Toulmin Argument , a counterargument can be made against the writer’s claim by questioning their backing , data , qualifiers, and/or warrants . For example, let’s say we wrote the following argument:

“Social media is bad for you (claim) because it always (qualifier) promotes an unrealistic standard of beauty (backing). In this article, researchers found that most images were photoshopped (data). Standards should be realistic; if they are not, those standards are bad (warrant).” 

Besides noting we might have a series of logical fallacies here, counterarguments and dissociations can be made against each of these parts:

• Against the qualifier: Social media does not always promote unrealistic standards.
• Against the backing : Social media presents but does not promote unrealistic standards.
• Against the data : This article focuses on Instagram; these findings are not applicable to Twitter.
• Against the warrant : How we approach standards matters more than the standards themselves; standards do not need to be realistic, but rather we need to be realistic about how we approach standards.

In generating and considering counterarguments and conditions of rebuttal, it is important to consider how we approach alternative views. Alternative viewpoints are opportunities not only to strengthen and contrast our own arguments with those of others; alternative viewpoints are also opportunities to nuance and develop our own arguments. 

Let us continue to look at our social media argument and potential counterarguments. We might prepare responses to each of these potential counterarguments, anticipating the ways in which our audience might try to shift how we frame this situation. However, we might also concede that some of these counterarguments actually have good points.

For example, we might still believe that social media is bad, but perhaps we also need to consider more about 

• What factors make it worse (nuance the qualifier)?
• Whether or not social media is a neutral tool or whether algorithms take advantage of our baser instincts (nuance the backing )
• Whether this applies to all social media or whether we want to focus on just one social media platform (nuance the data ) 
• How should we approach social standards (nuance the warrant )?

Identifying counterarguments can help us strengthen our arguments by helping us recognize the complexity of the issue at hand.

Neoclassical Argument – Aristotelian Argument

Learn how to compose a counterargument passage or section.

While Toulmin Argument focuses on the nuts and bolts of argumentation, a counterargument can also act as an entire section of an Aristotelian Argument . This section typically comes after you have presented your own lines of argument and evidence .

This section typically consists of two rhetorical moves :

Examples of Counterarguments

By introducing counterarguments, we show we are aware of alternative viewpoints— other definitions, explanations, meanings, solutions, etc. We want to show that we are good listeners and aren’t committing the strawman fallacy . We also concede some of the alternative viewpoints that we find most persuasive. By making concessions, we can show that we are reasonable ( ethos ) and that we are listening . Rogerian Argument is an example of building listening more fully into our writing. 

Using our social media example, we might write: 

I recognize that in many ways social media is only as good as the content that people upload to it. As Professor X argues, social media amplifies both the good and the bad of human nature.

Once we’ve shown that we understand and recognize good arguments when we see them, we put forward our response to the counterclaim. In our response, we do not simply dismiss alternative viewpoints, but provide our own backing, data, and warrants to show that we, in fact, have the more compelling position. 

To counter Professor X’s argument, we might write:

At the same time, there are clear instances where social media amplifies the bad over the good by design. While content matters, the design of social media is only as good as the people who created it.

Through conceding and countering, we can show that we recognize others’ good points and clarify where we stand in relation to others’ arguments.

Counterarguments and Organization

Learn when and how to weave counterarguments into your texts.

As we write, it is also important to consider the extent to which we will respond to counterarguments. If we focus too much on counterarguments, we run the risk of downplaying our own contributions. If we focus too little on counterarguments, we run the risk of seeming aloof and unaware of reality. Ideally, we will be somewhere in between these two extremes.

There are many places to respond to counterarguments in our writing. Where you place your counterarguments will depend on the rhetorical situation (ex: audience , purpose, subject ), your rhetorical stance (how you want to present yourself), and your sense of kairos . Here are some common choices based on a combination of these rhetorical situation factors:

• If a counterargument is well-established for your audience, you may want to respond to that counterargument earlier in your essay, clearing the field and creating space for you to make your own arguments. An essay about gun rights, for example, would need to make it clear very quickly that it is adding something new to this old debate. Doing so shows your audience that you are very aware of their needs.
• If a counterargument is especially well-established for your audience and you simply want to prove that it is incorrect rather than discuss another solution, you might respond to it point by point, structuring your whole essay as an extended refutation. Fact-checking and commentary articles often make this move. Responding point by point shows that you take the other’s point of view seriously.
• If you are discussing something relatively unknown or new to your audience (such as a problem with black mold in your dormitory), you might save your response for after you have made your points. Including alternative viewpoints even here shows that you are aware of the situation and have nothing to hide.

Whichever you choose, remember that counterarguments are opportunities to ethically engage with alternative viewpoints and your audience. 

The following questions can guide you as you begin to think about counterarguments:

• What is your argument ? What alternative positions might exist as counterarguments to your argument?
• How can considering counterarguments strengthen your argument?
• Given possible counterarguments, what points might you reconsider or concede?
• To what extent might you respond to counterarguments in your essay so that they can create and respond to the rhetorical situation ?
• Where might you place your counterarguments in your essay?
• What might including counterarguments do for your ethos ?

Recommended Resources

• Sweetland Center for Writing (n.d.). “ How Do I Incorporate a Counterargument? ” University of Michigan. 
• The Writing Center (n.d.) “ All About Counterarguments .” George Mason University. 
• Lachner, N. (n.d.). “ Counterarguments .” University of Nevada Reno, University Writing and Speaking Center. 
• Jeffrey, R. (n.d.). “ Questions for Thinking about Counterarguments .” In M. Gagich and E. Zickel, A Guide to Rhetoric, Genre, and Success in First-Year Writing. 
• Kause, S. (2011). “ On the Other Hand: The Role of Antithetical Writing in First Year Composition Courses .” Writing Spaces Vol. 2.
• Burton, G. “ Refutatio .” Silvae Rhetoricae.

Toulmin, S. (1958). The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press.

Perelman, C. and Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1971). “The Dissociation of Concepts”; “The Interaction of Arguments,” in The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation (pp. 411-459, 460-508), University of Notre Dame Press.

Mozafari, C. (2018). “Crafting Counterarguments,” in Fearless Writing: Rhetoric, Inquiry, Argument (pp. 333-337), MacMillian Learning

Brevity - Say More with Less

Clarity (in Speech and Writing)

Coherence - How to Achieve Coherence in Writing

Flow - How to Create Flow in Writing

Inclusivity - Inclusive Language

The Elements of Style - The DNA of Powerful Writing

Suggested Edits

• Please select the purpose of your message. * - Corrections, Typos, or Edits Technical Support/Problems using the site Advertising with Writing Commons Copyright Issues I am contacting you about something else
• Your full name
• Your email address *
• Page URL needing edits *
• Phone This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Other Topics:

Citation - Definition - Introduction to Citation in Academic & Professional Writing

• Joseph M. Moxley

Explore the different ways to cite sources in academic and professional writing, including in-text (Parenthetical), numerical, and note citations.

Collaboration - What is the Role of Collaboration in Academic & Professional Writing?

Collaboration refers to the act of working with others or AI to solve problems, coauthor texts, and develop products and services. Collaboration is a highly prized workplace competency in academic...

Genre may reference a type of writing, art, or musical composition; socially-agreed upon expectations about how writers and speakers should respond to particular rhetorical situations; the cultural values; the epistemological assumptions...

Grammar refers to the rules that inform how people and discourse communities use language (e.g., written or spoken English, body language, or visual language) to communicate. Learn about the rhetorical...

Information Literacy - Discerning Quality Information from Noise

Information Literacy refers to the competencies associated with locating, evaluating, using, and archiving information. In order to thrive, much less survive in a global information economy — an economy where information functions as a...

Mindset refers to a person or community’s way of feeling, thinking, and acting about a topic. The mindsets you hold, consciously or subconsciously, shape how you feel, think, and act–and...

Rhetoric: Exploring Its Definition and Impact on Modern Communication

Learn about rhetoric and rhetorical practices (e.g., rhetorical analysis, rhetorical reasoning,  rhetorical situation, and rhetorical stance) so that you can strategically manage how you compose and subsequently produce a text...

Style, most simply, refers to how you say something as opposed to what you say. The style of your writing matters because audiences are unlikely to read your work or...

The Writing Process - Research on Composing

The writing process refers to everything you do in order to complete a writing project. Over the last six decades, researchers have studied and theorized about how writers go about...

Writing Studies

Writing studies refers to an interdisciplinary community of scholars and researchers who study writing. Writing studies also refers to an academic, interdisciplinary discipline – a subject of study. Students in...

Featured Articles

Academic Writing – How to Write for the Academic Community

Professional Writing – How to Write for the Professional World

Authority – How to Establish Credibility in Speech & Writing

When you write an academic essay, you make an argument: you propose a thesis and offer some reasoning, using evidence, that suggests why the thesis is true. When you counter-argue, you consider a possible argument  against  your thesis or some aspect of your reasoning. This is a good way to test your ideas when drafting, while you still have time to revise them. And in the finished essay, it can be a persuasive and (in both senses of the word) disarming tactic. It allows you to anticipate doubts and pre-empt objections that a skeptical reader might have; it presents you as the kind of person who weighs alternatives before arguing for one, who confronts difficulties instead of sweeping them under the rug, who is more interested in discovering the truth than winning a point.

Not every objection is worth entertaining, of course, and you shouldn't include one just to include one. But some imagining of other views, or of resistance to one's own, occurs in most good essays. And instructors are glad to encounter counterargument in student papers, even if they haven't specifically asked for it.

The Turn Against

Counterargument in an essay has two stages: you turn against your argument to challenge it and then you turn back to re-affirm it. You first imagine a skeptical reader, or cite an actual source, who might resist your argument by pointing out

• a problem with your demonstration, e.g., that a different conclusion could be drawn from the same facts, a key assumption is unwarranted, a key term is used unfairly, certain evidence is ignored or played down;
• one or more disadvantages or practical drawbacks to what you propose;
• an alternative explanation or proposal that makes more sense.

You introduce this turn against with a phrase like  One might object here that...  or  It might seem that...  or  It's true that...  or  Admittedly,...  or  Of course,...  or with an anticipated challenging question:  But how...?  or  But why...?  or  But isn't this just...?  or  But if this is so, what about...?  Then you state the case against yourself as briefly but as clearly and forcefully as you can, pointing to evidence where possible. (An obviously feeble or perfunctory counterargument does more harm than good.)

The Turn Back

Your return to your own argument—which you announce with a  but, yet, however, nevertheless or still —must likewise involve careful reasoning, not a flippant (or nervous) dismissal. In reasoning about the proposed counterargument, you may

• refute it, showing why it is mistaken—an apparent but not real problem;
• acknowledge its validity or plausibility, but suggest why on balance it's relatively less important or less likely than what you propose, and thus doesn't overturn it;
• concede its force and complicate your idea accordingly—restate your thesis in a more exact, qualified, or nuanced way that takes account of the objection, or start a new section in which you consider your topic in light of it. This will work if the counterargument concerns only an aspect of your argument; if it undermines your whole case, you need a new thesis.

Where to Put a Counterargument

Counterargument can appear anywhere in the essay, but it most commonly appears

• as part of your introduction—before you propose your thesis—where the existence of a different view is the motive for your essay, the reason it needs writing;
• as a section or paragraph just after your introduction, in which you lay out the expected reaction or standard position before turning away to develop your own;
• as a quick move within a paragraph, where you imagine a counterargument not to your main idea but to the sub-idea that the paragraph is arguing or is about to argue;
• as a section or paragraph just before the conclusion of your essay, in which you imagine what someone might object to what you have argued.

But watch that you don't overdo it. A turn into counterargument here and there will sharpen and energize your essay, but too many such turns will have the reverse effect by obscuring your main idea or suggesting that you're ambivalent.

Counterargument in Pre-Writing and Revising

Good thinking constantly questions itself, as Socrates observed long ago. But at some point in the process of composing an essay, you need to switch off the questioning in your head and make a case. Having such an inner conversation during the drafting stage, however, can help you settle on a case worth making. As you consider possible theses and begin to work on your draft, ask yourself how an intelligent person might plausibly disagree with you or see matters differently. When you can imagine an intelligent disagreement, you have an arguable idea.

And, of course, the disagreeing reader doesn't need to be in your head: if, as you're starting work on an essay, you ask a few people around you what  they  think of topic X (or of your idea about X) and keep alert for uncongenial remarks in class discussion and in assigned readings, you'll encounter a useful disagreement somewhere. Awareness of this disagreement, however you use it in your essay, will force you to sharpen your own thinking as you compose. If you come to find the counterargument truer than your thesis, consider making  it  your thesis and turning your original thesis into a counterargument. If you manage to draft an essay  without  imagining a counterargument, make yourself imagine one before you revise and see if you can integrate it.

Gordon Harvey (adapted from The Academic Essay: A Brief Anatomy), for the Writing Center at Harvard University

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

21 Argument, Counterargument, & Refutation

In academic writing, we often use an Argument essay structure. Argument essays have these familiar components, just like other types of essays:

• Introduction
• Body Paragraphs

But Argument essays also contain these particular elements:

• Debatable thesis statement in the Introduction
• Argument – paragraphs which show support for the author’s thesis (for example: reasons, evidence, data, statistics)
• Counterargument – at least one paragraph which explains the opposite point of view
• Concession – a sentence or two acknowledging that there could be some truth to the Counterargument
• Refutation (also called Rebuttal) – sentences which explain why the Counterargument is not as strong as the original Argument

Consult  Introductions & Titles for more on writing debatable thesis statements and  Paragraphs ~ Developing Support for more about developing your Argument.

Imagine that you are writing about vaping. After reading several articles and talking with friends about vaping, you decide that you are strongly opposed to it.

Which working thesis statement would be better?

• Vaping should be illegal because it can lead to serious health problems.

Many students do not like vaping.

Because the first option provides a debatable position, it is a better starting point for an Argument essay.

Next, you would need to draft several paragraphs to explain your position. These paragraphs could include facts that you learned in your research, such as statistics about vapers’ health problems, the cost of vaping, its effects on youth, its harmful effects on people nearby, and so on, as an appeal to logos . If you have a personal story about the effects of vaping, you might include that as well, either in a Body Paragraph or in your Introduction, as an appeal to pathos .

A strong Argument essay would not be complete with only your reasons in support of your position. You should also include a Counterargument, which will show your readers that you have carefully researched and considered both sides of your topic. This shows that you are taking a measured, scholarly approach to the topic – not an overly-emotional approach, or an approach which considers only one side. This helps to establish your ethos as the author. It shows your readers that you are thinking clearly and deeply about the topic, and your Concession (“this may be true”) acknowledges that you understand other opinions are possible.

Here are some ways to introduce a Counterargument:

• Some people believe that vaping is not as harmful as smoking cigarettes.
• Critics argue that vaping is safer than conventional cigarettes.
• On the other hand, one study has shown that vaping can help people quit smoking cigarettes.

Your paragraph would then go on to explain more about this position; you would give evidence here from your research about the point of view that opposes your own opinion.

Here are some ways to begin a Concession and Refutation:

• While this may be true for some adults, the risks of vaping for adolescents outweigh its benefits.
• Although these critics may have been correct before, new evidence shows that vaping is, in some cases, even more harmful than smoking.
• This may have been accurate for adults wishing to quit smoking; however, there are other methods available to help people stop using cigarettes.

Your paragraph would then continue your Refutation by explaining more reasons why the Counterargument is weak. This also serves to explain why your original Argument is strong. This is a good opportunity to prove to your readers that your original Argument is the most worthy, and to persuade them to agree with you.

Activity ~ Practice with Counterarguments, Concessions, and Refutations

A. Examine the following thesis statements with a partner. Is each one debatable?

B. Write  your own Counterargument, Concession, and Refutation for each thesis statement.

Thesis Statements:

• Online classes are a better option than face-to-face classes for college students who have full-time jobs.
• Students who engage in cyberbullying should be expelled from school.
• Unvaccinated children pose risks to those around them.
• Governments should be allowed to regulate internet access within their countries.

Is this chapter:

…too easy, or you would like more detail? Read “ Further Your Understanding: Refutation and Rebuttal ” from Lumen’s Writing Skills Lab.

Note: links open in new tabs.

reasoning, logic

emotion, feeling, beliefs

moral character, credibility, trust, authority

goes against; believes the opposite of something

ENGLISH 087: Academic Advanced Writing Copyright © 2020 by Nancy Hutchison is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Usage and Examples of a Rebuttal

Weakening an Opponent's Claim With Facts

David Hume Kennerly/Wikimedia Commons/Public Domain

• An Introduction to Punctuation
• Ph.D., Rhetoric and English, University of Georgia
• M.A., Modern English and American Literature, University of Leicester
• B.A., English, State University of New York

A rebuttal takes on a couple of different forms. As it pertains to an argument or debate, the definition of a rebuttal is the presentation of evidence and reasoning meant to weaken or undermine an opponent's claim. However, in persuasive speaking, a rebuttal is typically part of a discourse with colleagues and rarely a stand-alone speech.

Rebuttals are used in law, public affairs, and politics, and they're in the thick of effective public speaking. They also can be found in academic publishing, editorials, letters to the editor, formal responses to personnel matters, or customer service complaints/reviews. A rebuttal is also called a counterargument.

Types and Occurrences of Rebuttals

Rebuttals can come into play during any kind of argument or occurrence where someone has to defend a position contradictory to another opinion presented. Evidence backing up the rebuttal position is key.

Formally, students use rebuttal in debate competitions. In this arena, rebuttals don't make new arguments , just battle the positions already presented in a specific, timed format. For example, a rebuttal may get four minutes after an argument is presented in eight.

In academic publishing, an author presents an argument in a paper, such as on a work of literature, stating why it should be seen in a particular light. A rebuttal letter about the paper can find the flaws in the argument and evidence cited, and present contradictory evidence. If a writer of a paper has the paper rejected for publishing by the journal, a well-crafted rebuttal letter can give further evidence of the quality of the work and the due diligence taken to come up with the thesis or hypothesis.

In law, an attorney can present a rebuttal witness to show that a witness on the other side is in error. For example, after the defense has presented its case, the prosecution can present rebuttal witnesses. This is new evidence only and witnesses that contradict defense witness testimony. An effective rebuttal to a closing argument in a trial can leave enough doubt in the jury's minds to have a defendant found not guilty.

In public affairs and politics, people can argue points in front of the local city council or even speak in front of their state government. Our representatives in Washington present diverging points of view on bills up for debate . Citizens can argue policy and present rebuttals in the opinion pages of the newspaper.

On the job, if a person has a complaint brought against him to the human resources department, that employee has a right to respond and tell his or her side of the story in a formal procedure, such as a rebuttal letter.

In business, if a customer leaves a poor review of service or products on a website, the company's owner or a manager will, at minimum, need to diffuse the situation by apologizing and offering a concession for goodwill. But in some cases, a business needs to be defended. Maybe the irate customer left out of the complaint the fact that she was inebriated and screaming at the top of her lungs when she was asked to leave the shop. Rebuttals in these types of instances need to be delicately and objectively phrased.

Characteristics of an Effective Rebuttal

"If you disagree with a comment, explain the reason," says Tim Gillespie in "Doing Literary Criticism." He notes that "mocking, scoffing, hooting, or put-downs reflect poorly on your character and on your point of view. The most effective rebuttal to an opinion with which you strongly disagree is an articulate counterargument."

Rebuttals that rely on facts are also more ethical than those that rely solely on emotion or diversion from the topic through personal attacks on the opponent. That is the arena where politics, for example, can stray from trying to communicate a message into becoming a reality show.

With evidence as the central focal point, a good rebuttal relies on several elements to win an argument, including a clear presentation of the counterclaim, recognizing the inherent barrier standing in the way of the listener accepting the statement as truth, and presenting evidence clearly and concisely while remaining courteous and highly rational.

The evidence, as a result, must do the bulk work of proving the argument while the speaker should also preemptively defend certain erroneous attacks the opponent might make against it.

That is not to say that a rebuttal can't have an emotional element, as long as it works with evidence. A statistic about the number of people filing for bankruptcy per year due to medical debt can pair with a story of one such family as an example to support the topic of health care reform. It's both illustrative — a more personal way to talk about dry statistics — and an appeal to emotions.

To prepare an effective rebuttal, you need to know your opponent's position thoroughly to be able to formulate the proper attacks and to find evidence that dismantles the validity of that viewpoint. The first speaker will also anticipate your position and will try to make it look erroneous.

You will need to show:

• Contradictions in the first argument
• Terminology that's used in a way in order to sway opinion ( bias ) or used incorrectly. For example, when polls were taken about "Obamacare," people who didn't view the president favorably were more likely to want the policy defeated than when the actual name of it was presented as the Affordable Care Act.
• Errors in cause and effect
• Poor sources or misplaced authority
• Examples in the argument that are flawed or not comprehensive enough
• Flaws in the assumptions that the argument is based on
• Claims in the argument that are without proof or are widely accepted without actual proof. For example, alcoholism is defined by society as a disease. However, there isn't irrefutable medical proof that it is a disease like diabetes, for instance. Alcoholism manifests itself more like behavioral disorders, which are psychological.

The more points in the argument that you can dismantle, the more effective your rebuttal. Keep track of them as they're presented in the argument, and go after as many of them as you can.

Refutation Definition

The word rebuttal can be used interchangeably with refutation , which includes any contradictory statement in an argument. Strictly speaking, the distinction between the two is that a rebuttal must provide evidence, whereas a refutation merely relies on a contrary opinion. They differ in legal and argumentation contexts, wherein refutation involves any counterargument, while rebuttals rely on contradictory evidence to provide a means for a counterargument.

A successful refutation may disprove evidence with reasoning, but rebuttals must present evidence.

• AP English Exam: 101 Key Terms
• Tips on Winning the Debate on Evolution
• Ethos, Logos, Pathos for Persuasion
• Use Social Media to Teach Ethos, Pathos and Logos
• Reductio Ad Absurdum in Argument
• Stage a Debate in Class
• Definition and Examples of Evidence in Argument
• What Does It Mean to Make a Claim During an Argument?
• Proof in Rhetoric
• Definitions and Examples of Debates
• Tips on How to Write an Argumentative Essay
• Benefits of Participating in High School Debate
• How to Write a Solid Thesis Statement
• How to Write a Good Thesis Statement
• Violence in the Media Needs To Be Regulated

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons
• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

2.7: Finding the Responses to the Counterarguments

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 27178

• City College of San Francisco via ASCCC Open Educational Resources Initiative

Media Alternative

Listen to an audio version of this page (4 min, 16 sec):

After a writer summarizes another perspective, they will signal that they are switching back to their own perspective. If they have not already given a hint about their attitude to the other side, they will have to make their response clear now. Do they see the counterargument as completely wrong-headed, or as having some merit?

If the writer completely disagrees with the counterargument, they will follow up their description of it by pointing out its flaws. This direct rebuttal will bring the readers back to the writer's side. If they have just conceded a point, they will now emphasize the reason why their own argument still holds. T he more the writer has credited the counterargument, the more they will need to explain why readers shouldn't accept it, at least not completely. Below are some phrases which can point toward the problem or limitation of the counterargument.

In the border argument example, the writer concedes that the counterargument does have merit: "I admit that completely open borders would put our security at risk." Immediately, the writer responds, " But surely there are ways to regulate the border without criminalizing people who are driven by need and good intentions. " The word “but” signals the transition from concession back to the writer's own side. In the map, we can put the rebuttal below the counterargument and use the arrow to show it supporting the main claim.

Practice Exercise \(\PageIndex{1}\)

• Choose an argument you are reading for class or one of our suggested readings. You may want to focus on a short excerpt of one or more paragraphs.
• Read your text closely and identify any counterarguments it mentions. What is the writer's attitude to each counterargument?
• Decide what your attitude to this counterargument is.  Choose a phrase from the above table to introduce the counterargument.  

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Organizing Your Argument

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

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

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

This page summarizes three historical methods for argumentation, providing structural templates for each.

How can I effectively present my argument?

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

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

Toulmin Method

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

The basic format for the Toulmin Method  is as follows:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Example of the Toulmin Method:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rogerian Method

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

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

The basic format of the Rogerian Method  is as follows:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Example of the Rogerian Method:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Classical Method

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

The basic format of the Classical Method  is as follows:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Example of the Classical Method:  

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

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

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

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

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

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

What Is a Rebuttal? Definition, Usage, and Literary Examples

Rebuttal definition.

A  rebuttal  (ree-BUH-tuhl) is a literary device wherein a writer presents reasons or evidence that undermine or challenge an opposing argument. Though rebuttals are not uncommon in literature, they are most often associated with court cases, where they are a type of evidence that contradicts or invalidates the evidence presented by the opposite party.

A rebuttal tends to be a formal, well-reasoned argument, so a simple refutation, an ad hominem attack, or a “ clapback ” is not a rebuttal. The word itself comes from the Old French word  reboter / rebuter , which means “to thrust back.”

The Elements of a Rebuttal

An effective rebuttal has several components, each contributing something critical to the central argument.

• The writer/speaker presents the other side’s argument clearly and accurately, without any distortions or factual omissions that would serve their own argument.
• The writer/speaker utilizes exact quotations when necessary, whether they come from the opposing side or some other source. This serves to underscore the accuracy and integrity of the writer/speaker’s claim.
• The writer/speaker’s evidence is rational and logical and doesn’t rely on baseless theories or easily disproved information.
• The writer/speaker presents their argument professionally, tactfully, and respectfully, without resorting to personal attacks, ridicule, or condescension.
• The writer/speaker’s evidence offers constructive criticism of the opposing viewpoint. While the argument doesn’t need to be  Pollyannaish  or overly solicitous, neither should it be explicitly negative or harsh. In other words, it should have some genuine merit that enlightens the opposite side while illuminating the fallacy of their argument.

The Function of a Rebuttal

The main function of any rebuttal is to prove an argument’s error or fallacy. A rebuttal lays out, often in detail, the erroneousness of the opposing position through specific facts that contradict the other side’s claims. The intent, however, is not just to refute. A rebuttal should also correct and inform.

In nonfiction works, rebuttals allow writers to expound upon their personal  perspectives . They might challenge ideas put forth by other writers, groups or governments, religions, or any other source that posits arguments antithetical to the writer’s position. In fiction and dramatic works, rebuttals compare characters’ perspectives, giving readers a deeper understanding of the characters’ internal belief systems and thought processes while propelling the story forward with the natural tension that arises from challenging an idea head on.

Rebuttals and Other Types of Arguments

Rebuttals vs. Counterarguments

A counterargument is an argument opposed to one’s own position. Essentially, it presents reasoning and evidence your opponent would make when trying to discredit you or challenge your ideas. A writer mainly uses counterarguments not to negate their own points—which would only deter from their larger purpose—but to preemptively show how the other side feels or would react. This way, the writer can launch a sort of preventative rebuttal that emphasizes their own argument.

Counterarguments, however, are not rebuttals in the strictest sense. Rebuttals are direct responses that highlight individual errors and fallacies in the other side’s way of thinking. Counterarguments are, by nature, more generalized.

Persuasive essays, theses, academic papers, and opinion pieces such as op-eds and personal essays frequently employ counterarguments.

Rebuttals vs. Refutations

A refutation is a conclusive disproval, which is different from a rebuttal. A rebuttal is trying to disprove an argument, while a refutation successfully does it. That’s not to say that a rebuttal cannot be a successful argument. However, from the information rebuttals present, one cannot absolutely, unequivocally conclude that the argument is unassailable. The difference here is subtle but distinct.

For example, the issue of rebut versus refute achieved some notoriety during the Senate Judiciary Committee questioning of Brett Kavanaugh after President Donald Trump nominated him to the US Supreme Court. Dr. Christine Blasey Ford testified that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her at a party in 1982. When Kavanaugh responded to her testimony, he said, “Dr. Ford’s allegation is not merely uncorroborated, it is refuted by the very people she says were there, including by a long-time friend of hers. Refuted.” His use of  refute  is incorrect in this instance. He uses the word as a synonym for  disprove  or  deny . The truth is that “the very people she says were there” testified that they didn’t remember the incident, which is not a refutation or a denial. The word  rebut , then, is more appropriate because it challenges the previously presented argument based on the facts provided without being able to completely disprove its position.

Rebuttals vs. Objections

An objection has a broader meaning than a rebuttal in that it is any expression of opposition or disagreement. Objections can include a direct questioning of the argument that was originally put forth. However, an objection doesn’t need to present a reasoned argument or a rational approach; for instance, just saying “I disagree” is an objection. Rebuttals, counterarguments, and refutations are all types of objections.

Rebuttals Outside of Literature

Rebuttals are common in the legal world. They’re a specific type of evidence submitted to the courts to disprove or invalidate evidence submitted by the opposing side. A defined set of rules dictate how the legal system handles rebuttals. For instance, the rebuttal must only address the exact points made in the opposing party’s original argument; new evidence on any other subject in the case is inadmissible at that time. A rebuttal can involve calling surprise witnesses or submitting surprise evidence as long as it pertains directly to the subject(s) of the other side’s original argument.

In politics, public affairs, and public discourse, rebuttals are a common part of communication. The US Congress engages in partisan rebuttals on a routine basis. After every Presidential State of the Union Address, a representative from the party not currently holding office gives a rebuttal speech that counters arguments the president made moments before. In media and public relations, high-profile individuals like politicians, actors, singers, and activists release statements rebutting arguments, perceptions, or accusations made against them.

Sales and marketing techniques employ rebuttals to increase sales figures and revenue. Most direct sales training entails advice on how to rebut a potential customer’s initial rejection of a proposed product or service. A salesperson will try to appeal to a customer’s reason, emotions, or ethics to make the sale; this appeal is a type of rebuttal.

Examples of Rebuttals in Literature

1. Harper Lee,  To Kill a Mockingbird

In Lee’s classic novel, Southern lawyer Atticus Finch attempts to defend Tom Robinson, an African American man, after a woman named Mayella Ewell falsely accuses him of rape. At trial, the prosecution presents evidence that they feel points definitively to Tom being the assaulter. In this passage, Atticus offers a rebuttal to the theory:

What did her father do? We don’t know, but there is circumstantial evidence to indicate that Mayella Ewell was beaten savagely by someone who led most exclusively with his left. We do know in part what Mr. Ewell did: he did what any God-fearing, preserving, respectable white man would do under circumstances—he swore a warrant, no doubt signing with his left hand, and Tom Robinson now sits before you, having taken the oath with the only good hand he possesses—his right hand.

For his rebuttal, Finch explains that Mayella’s attacker used his left hand while Tom is only able to use his right hand. Thus, he wants to disprove the prosecution’s argument by showing it as fallacious based on the defendant’s physical limitations.

2. Arthur Miller,  The Crucible

In Miller’s play set during the Salem, Massachusetts, witchcraft hysteria, a group of adolescent girls accuses several townspeople of being witches. Abigail Williams, one of the accusers, points to her former employer, Elizabeth Proctor, who fired Abigail after discovering the girl’s brief affair with Elizabeth’s husband John. Abigail’s actions are clearly a spurned lover’s revenge, so John offers the following rebuttal to make clear the reason for these false accusations:

JOHN PROCTOR. I have known her, sir. I have known her….

In the proper place—where my beasts are bedded. On the last night of my joy, some eight months past. She used to serve me in my house, sir. A man may think God sleeps, but God sees everything, I know it now. I beg you, sir, I beg you—see her what she is. My wife, my dear good wife, took this girl soon after, sir, and put her out on the highroad. And being what she is, a lump of vanity, sir…. She thinks to dance with me on my wife’s grave! And well she might, for I thought of her  softly . God help me, I lusted, and there is a promise in such sweat. But it is a whore’s vengeance, and you must see it; I set myself entirely in your hands, I know you must see it now.

In this example, rather than rebutting the accusation of witchcraft itself, John is rebutting Abigail’s motivations. The teenagers present themselves as credible witnesses to witchcraft, so John hopes to prove Abigail is using this opportunity to get rid of her lover’s wife.

3. Benjamin Franklin’s Op-Ed in the January 2, 1766, issue of the  Gazetteer and New Daily Advertiser

A writer identified as Vindex Patriae opposed the colonists’ right to representation in Parliament. He refused to acknowledge the importance of colonial-era American trade to the British economy. Patriae dismissed the colonies’ boycott of British tea because, in his opinion, the American diet—namely corn—was reprehensible and required tea to be palatable. Franklin replied with this op-ed:

Vindex Patriae, a writer in your paper, comforts himself, and the India Company, with the fancy that the Americans, should they resolve to drink no more tea, can by no means keep that resolution, their Indian corn not affording “an agreeable, or easy digestible breakfast.” Pray let me, an American, inform the gentleman, who seems quite ignorant of the matter, that Indian corn, take it for all in all, is one of the most aggregable and wholesome grains in the world; that its green ears roasted are a delicacy beyond expression; that samp, hominy, succotash, and nolehock, made of it, are so many pleasing varieties; and that a johny, or hoecake, hot from the fire, is better than a Yorkshire muffin. But if Indian corn were as disagreeable and indigestible as the Stamp Act, does he imagine we can get nothing else for breakfast?

By extolling the virtues of American-grown corn, Franklin was rebutting Patriae’s claim that the colonies’ diet was lacking in quality.

Further Resources on Rebuttals

Columbia Journalism Review  explores  the rebut-versus-refute controversy  in more detail.

LawShelf  has more information on  using rebuttals and surrebuttals (rebuttals of rebuttals)  in legal cases.

Pen and the Pad has advice on  how to write a rebuttal essay .

Purdue University’s Online Writing Lab offers guidance on  how to organize a rebuttal  for an essay or thesis.

SalesScripter breaks down some  common rebuttals used in sales .

Related Terms

• Perspective

Breaking News

VIEW FROM THE COURT

A fast-moving argument over medication abortion.

It’s a crisp morning here as Washington’s famous cherry blossoms are holding on to their leaves and color a good eight days after they reached an unexpectedly early peak bloom. The court has some of the trees right on its grounds, and they will be a backdrop to much expressive activity over today’s lone case — Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine , about the agency’s 2016 and 2021 actions easing access to the abortion drug mifepristone.

Without getting into specifics, security is tighter than normal both outside and inside the courtroom as the justices take up their first case on abortion access since they overturned the constitutional right in 2022.

Inside the nearly full courtroom (only the bar section has a few empty seats), I scan the public gallery looking for one particular former Supreme Court law clerk. Soon enough, I see Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., seated in the front row on the south side. He is married to Erin Hawley, who will argue for the challengers this morning. Both clerked for Chief Justice John Roberts during the court’s 2007-08 term.

I am a bit taken aback to see another familiar face a few seats away. New York Attorney General Letitia James is also in the same front row of the public section. While universes seem to be colliding, James did file a “friend of the court” brief for New York and 22 other states (plus the District of Columbia) in this case, supporting the FDA. And James will have something to say later to the crowd of abortion-rights supporters outside the court.

Protesters for and against abortion gathered outside the court. (Katie Barlow)

In the bar section, Kristen Waggoner, the president and general counsel of Alliance Defending Freedom, the organization representing the anti-abortion doctors and medical associations that challenged FDA’s actions on mifepristone. Waggoner, who has argued several cases here, will approach the lectern to move the admission of a new bar member, but will leave the arguments to Hawley.

Unlike Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization and the dual arguments in 2021 over who could challenge the restrictive Texas S.B. 8 abortion law, which included arguments by one and three men, today’s arguments will all be carried out by women. (This is unusual at the Supreme Court, where in recent years women argued less than a quarter of the cases before the justices.)

The arguments today centered mostly on whether any of the doctors who are plaintiffs have a legal right to sue, known as standing, based on their theory that they might face treating a woman who used mifepristone and ended up in an emergency room with complications that would require a doctor with a conscience objection to abortion to participate in such a procedure. U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar said this is too tenuous a connection, and they therefore did not have standing.

The challengers’ “theories rest on a long chain of remote contingencies,” the solicitor general says. “Only an exceptionally small number of women suffer the kind of serious complications that could trigger any need for emergency treatment. It’s speculative that any of those women would seek care from the two specific doctors who asserted conscience injuries. And even if that happened, federal conscience protections would guard against the injury the doctors face.”

Protesters carry signs from the Alliance Defending Freedom, the group representing the challengers. (Katie Barlow)

When it’s her turn, Hawley argues that the challengers have standing “because, one, the FDA relies on [obstetrician] hospitalists to care for women harmed by abortion drugs. Two, the FDA concedes between 2.9 and 4.6 percent of women will end up in the emergency room and, three, the FDA acknowledges that women are even more likely to need surgical intervention and other medical care without an in-person visit.”

There is frequent discussion of two individual challengers who Hawley contends have objections of conscience to participating in any abortion procedures. Those doctors, Christina Francis and Ingrid Skop, are in the courtroom today.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett pushes Hawley on those doctors’ official statements, saying, “I think the difficulty here is that at least to me, these affidavits do read more like the conscience objection is strictly to actually participating in the abortion to end the life of the embryo or fetus. And I don’t read either Skop or Francis to say that they ever participated in that.”

Some of the other justices were more than happy to move on to the merits. Justice Samuel Alito, the author of the Dobbs decision overruling Roe v. Wade , asks about an issue that was part of the plaintiffs’ lawsuit at the district court but set aside by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit and only sparsely addressed in the merits briefs before the high court. “Shouldn’t the FDA have at least considered the application of 18 U.S.C. 1461?” he asks Prelogar, somewhat coyly avoiding the better-known identifier for the 19th century federal law that bars using the mail to deliver any drug meant to be used for “producing abortion.”

Prelogar is quick to refer to that better-known name, the Comstock Act, which was later amended to also apply to delivery of abortion drugs by “common carrier” or “Interactive mail service.”

Justice Clarence Thomas returns to the Comstock Act in his questioning of Jessica Ellsworth, representing the drug manufacturer, Danco.

“My problem is that you’re private,” Thomas tells Ellsworth in reference to Danco. “The statute doesn’t have this sort of safe harbor that you’re suggesting. And it’s fairly broad, and it specifically covers drugs such as yours.”

Hawley jumps at Thomas’s request for her to comment on the application of the Comstock Act.

“We don’t think that there’s any case of this court that empowers FDA to ignore other federal law,” Hawley says. “As relevant here, the Comstock Act says that drugs should not be mailed … So we think that the plain text of that, Your Honor, is pretty clear.”

Meanwhile, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson is willing to counter Alito’s aggressive line of questioning of Ellsworth, regarding whether the FDA had ever approved a drug and later had to pull it because of serious adverse consequences. (“It has certainly done that,” she replied.)

“I just have one quick question,” Jackson says to Ellsworth. “So you were asked if the agency is infallible and I guess I’m wondering about the flip side, which is, do you think that courts have specialized scientific knowledge with respect to pharmaceuticals and as a company that has pharmaceuticals, do you have concerns about judges parsing medical and scientific studies?”

Yes, Ellsworth says, pointing to “friend of the court” briefs from the pharmaceutical industry and adding that “FDA has many hundreds of pages of analysis in the record of what the scientific data showed. And courts are just not in a position to parse through and second-guess that.”

As the fast-moving 93-minute argument draws to a close, Sen. Hawley slips out of the courtroom just as Prelogar is starting her short rebuttal.

Outside the court building, I bump into James and say hello. There are so many questions I could think of to ask her about various pending legal matters. But she is walking briskly to the front of the building to address abortion access supporters (where she will be introduced over a loudspeaker as a “legal badass.”)

Some of the doctors who are among the challengers don their medical coats to join Hawley, Waggoner, and others from Alliance Defending Freedom before a bank of press cameras and microphones. (Ellsworth and a colleague will also address the press scrum a few minutes later on behalf of Danco.)

But their words are mostly drowned out by the two opposing groups, numbering in the hundreds, who are carrying on loudly with their separate rallies on the sidewalk.

The midday sun has warmed up the air and made the nearby cherry blossoms appear even more brilliant.

The scene outside the court on Tuesday. (William Hennessy)

Posted in Featured , Merits Cases

Cases: Danco Laboratories, L.L.C. v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine , Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine

Recommended Citation: Mark Walsh, A fast-moving argument over medication abortion , SCOTUSblog (Mar. 26, 2024, 6:35 PM), https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/03/a-fast-moving-argument-over-medication-abortion/

Privacy Overview

Supreme Court hears mifepristone arguments as protests gather outside: Highlights

What to know about today's hearing.

• The Supreme Court heard a challenge to the Food and Drug Administration's decisions over the past several years to increase women's access to mifepristone, a drug used in medication abortions, including making it available by mail. Many of the justices appeared to be questioning whether abortion opponents would have standing to sue over the decisions.
• A Texas-based U.S. district judge invalidated the FDA's approval of the pill last year, but an appeals court narrowed the decision to include only actions the agency has taken since 2016. Because the Supreme Court is not reviewing the FDA's initial approval of the drug, the medication will remain available in some form.
• Fourteen states completely ban abortion , including medication abortion, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that supports abortion rights, while several others prohibit delivering the abortion pill by mail and require patients to see a doctor in person before they can get a prescription for it.
• About two-thirds of abortions in the United States were carried out by use of the pill in 2023, the research group says.

Abortion providers react to Supreme Court hearing

Aria Bendix

Abortion providers responded to today's oral arguments by emphasizing the safety and effectiveness of mifepristone, stressing that reduced access to the drug could threaten public health.

“The very existence of this case puts every other FDA-approved medication at risk of being taken off the market or restricted for political reasons,” Alexis McGill Johnson, CEO of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said in a statement. 

Amy Hagstrom Miller, CEO of Whole Woman’s Health, an abortion provider with in-person clinics in four states, said her virtual clinic will continue to offer abortion pills by mail while the court considers the case.

“This cruel and baseless lawsuit is designed to intimidate and confuse Americans," Miller said in a statement. "This case is not about health and safety; it’s about power and control. Here is the truth: medication abortions are safe and effective.”

Evan Masingill, CEO of GenBioPro, the generic manufacturer of mifepristone, said Tuesday that the company “will continue to use every legal and regulatory avenue to protect access” to the drug.

New York attorney general speaks at rally for abortion pill access outside Supreme Court

New York Attorney General Letitia James joined abortion rights supporters during a protest outside the Supreme Court today.

Erin Hawley spotted outside of the Supreme Court near protesters

Diana Paulsen

Summer Concepcion

After delivering oral arguments before the Supreme Court, Erin Hawley was seen outside of the court near protesters, flanked by two bodyguards.

Anti-abortion protesters gather outside Supreme Court

Several protesters outside the Supreme Court during arguments today were calling for an end to abortion altogether.

"I hope one day we can live in a United States that is abortion-free in all 50 states," said Melanie Salazar, an anti-abortion activist who traveled from San Francisco.

Constance Becker, from Ohio, echoed that she “would love to see pills go” away.

"There are all types of people who are against abortion," Becker said. "I’m progressive. I’m a Democrat. I’m not a Republican, and I am against abortion."

Felipe Avila, communications director for the National Association of Pro-Life Nurses, said he'd like to see a requirement for in-person doctors visits for medication abortions.

"If chemical abortions are available for women, they should be safe," he said. "So we want those safeguards in place."

Supreme Court skeptical of effort to make abortion pill harder to obtain

Lawrence Hurley Supreme Court reporter

WASHINGTON — The  Supreme Court  on Tuesday appeared likely to reject a challenge to the abortion pill mifepristone, with a number of justices indicating the lawsuit should be dismissed.

The court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, heard oral arguments on the Biden administration’s appeal of lower court rulings that restricted women’s access to the pill, including its availability by mail.

But during the arguments, there was little discussion of whether the Food and Drug Administration’s decisions to lift restrictions on the drug were unlawful.

Instead, the justices focused on whether the group of anti-abortion doctors who brought the lawsuit even had legal standing to bring the claim. The plaintiffs, represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative Christian legal group, argue that the FDA failed to adequately evaluate the drug’s safety risks.

But justices probed whether the doctors could show that they were directly injured merely because they object to abortion and could be required to give emergency room treatment to a woman suffering from serious side effects.

Several justices also noted that doctors who oppose abortion can already object based on their personal beliefs to assisting patients suffering from abortion-related side effects.

“Under federal law, no doctors can be forced against their consciences to perform or assist in an abortion, correct?” conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked at one point.

Read the full story here.

Sen. Josh Hawley was in court for his wife's arguments

Sen. Josh Hawley was in attendance during his wife’s arguments on behalf of the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, which is suing the FDA.

The Republican senator from Missouri and his wife, both of whom graduated from Yale Law School, met while they clerked for Chief Justice John Roberts.

Jackson repeatedly asked about the deference courts should pay the FDA

In her questioning today, Jackson repeatedly asked iterations of whether courts owe any deference to the opinion of the expert agency concerning the safety and efficacy of drugs. In her response, Hawley said the defendants are not asking the court to second-guess FDA determinations at all, but rather to look at what the FDA has said.

After Jackson said she doesn’t understand how that scope of review is not, in fact, second-guessing the FDA, Hawley pushed back, saying she didn't think that’s an accurate portrayal and that the FDA’s statements in 2016 and 2021 were “arbitrary.”

Danco lawyer pushes back against justices citing debunked scientific studies

After being questioned by Justice Alito about the potential adverse consequences of mifepristone, Ellsworth said she had “significant concerns” about justices parsing medical and scientific studies.

Ellsworth said the Texas district court’s ruling relied on an analysis of anonymous blog posts and another set of studies that have since been retracted. 

“Those sorts of errors can infect judicial analyses precisely because judges are not — they are not experts in statistics, they are not experts in the methodology used for scientific studies for clinical trials,” Ellsworth said.

The district court’s ruling cited statistics from an analysis of anonymous posts about negative abortion experiences on the website Abortion Changes You. The study’s co-author is a senior research associate at the Charlotte Lozier Institute, an anti-abortion group.

The ruling also cited two studies supported by the Charlotte Lozier Institute that claimed to find harms associated with abortion. The publisher, Sage Perspectives, retracted both studies after an independent review found the conclusions weren’t valid.

Oral arguments conclude

Today's oral arguments before the Supreme Court have ended.

Prelogar offers a rebuttal to Hawley

Rebecca Shabad is in Washington, D.C.

The solicitor general is offering a rebuttal to Hawley's argument, arguing that the doctors she represents don't have any clear harms and so the standing argument is speculative.

She also said the doctors group that Hawley represents doesn't have organizational standing and the remedy is overly broad.

Thomas, Alito bring back focus on Comstock Act

Thomas and Alito are questioning Hawley about the relevance of the Comstock Act.

Gorsuch questions a nationwide injunction

Gorsuch raised the possibility of this case turning what could be a small lawsuit into a nationwide injunction on an FDA rule or any other federal government action.

Hawley said she thinks it’s impractical to raise a conscientious objection, but that the district court remedy was appropriate under Section 705, which grants the authority for courts to issue necessary and appropriate relief.

Asked why the court can’t specify that this relief runs to the parties before the court as opposed to looking to the FDA in general, Hawley said the only availability for relief from nonregulated parties is if the court does something to the FDA order or regulation at issue.

Most of the justices, including Gorsuch and Chief Justice John Roberts, seem skeptical of her argument.

Kagan grills Hawley on conscience objections by anti-abortion doctors

Justice Elena Kagan drilled down again on the conscience objections of anti-abortion doctors Hawley represents.

Hawley said one of the doctors, for example, had to perform a surgical abortion (a D&C) because of a "life-threatening emergency."

"And did she have an opportunity to object?" Kagan asked.

"No, your honor," Hawley said. "Again, these are life-threatening situations in which the choice for a doctor is either to scrub out and try to find someone else or treat the woman."

Kagan says that most hospitals have mechanisms or routines in place "to ensure" doctors can make objections to performing certain procedures in advance.

"There's just nothing that you have there," Kagan says about Hawley's supporting arguments.

Jackson pushes Hawley on why doctors can't just refuse to treat patients

Jackson pushed Hawley on whether doctors couldn't just object to doing these procedures. Hawley argued that the emergency nature of these cases makes it impossible for doctors to lodge objections.

Jackson questioned whether the court has to "entertain your argument that no one in the world can have this drug ... in order to protect your clients."

Gorsuch followed up on Jackson's questioning, asking why this lawsuit was "turning what could be a small lawsuit into a nationwide legislative assembly on an FDA rule."

Danco lawyer presents argument

Attorney Jessica Ellsworth, who represents Danco, the manufacturer of mifepristone, argued that anti-abortion groups' view is "so inflexible it would upend not just Mifeprix, but virtually every drug approval" the FDA has made for decades.

The changes that the FDA made to the drug’s approved use in 2016 and 2021 — which made it easier to access — can't be linked to a possible harmful event in the future, Ellsworth argued.

Danco lawyer expresses concerns about judges making decisions on pharmaceuticals

Asked by Jackson whether she thinks courts have specialized scientific knowledge with respect to pharmaceuticals and if she has concerns about judges making decisions on them, Ellsworth said Danco has “significant concerns” on the matter, noting that those concerns are shared among pharmaceutical companies that depend on the FDA to approve their drugs.

As an example, Ellsworth mentioned that a district court relied on a study that was based on an analysis of anonymous blog posts and other studies that contain misleading presentations of data.

“Those sorts of errors can infect judicial analyses precisely because judges are not experts in statistics. They are not experts in the methodology used for scientific studies for clinical trials,” Ellsworth said. “That is why the FDA has many hundreds of pages of analysis in the record of what the scientific data showed, and courts are just not in a position to parse through and second-guess that.”

Hawley has begun her arguments

Erin Hawley has begun speaking. She is arguing on behalf of the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, a doctors group suing the FDA.

Thomas questions Danco lawyer about whether Comstock Act applies to company

Justice Thomas questioned Danco's lawyer, Jessica Ellsworth, about whether the Comstock Act applies to the company, as opposed to the federal government.

"How do you respond to an argument that mailing your product and advertising it would violate the Comstock Act?" Thomas asked.

Ellsworth said that FDA's charge under the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act is limited to looking at safety and efficacy considerations.

"FDA routinely approves drugs whose manufacture and distribution is restricted by other laws, like the Controlled Substances Act, environmental laws, customs laws and so on," she said.

Thomas said that the statute doesn't cover drugs like Mifeprex.

"We disagree that that's the correct interpretation of the statute, but we think that in order to address the correct interpretation, there would need to be a situation in which that issue was actually teed up," Ellsworth said. "This statute has not been enforced for nearly 100 years."

Sotomayor asks about the difficulty of determining risk versus need for access

Asked by Alito about some studies that suggested more frequent emergency room visits related to the use of mifepristone, Prelogar said the FDA acknowledged that as a fact but found that the visits didn’t equate to additional adverse events. She noted that many women might go to the ER because they’re experiencing heavy bleeding, which mimics a miscarriage, and want to know whether they’re having complications.

Sotomayor then asked Prelogar about the FDA’s determinations concerning safety and efficacy of mifepristone.

“Whatever the statistical increase was, FDA determined under the rim standard, that it wasn’t sufficient to create a risk that counterbalances the need for access, correct?” Sotomayor asked.

Prelogar replied that’s correct because the FDA is instructed to take into account burdens on the health care delivery system and that it reviews a variety of sources of data to make conclusions, with the burdens that were suggested were not necessary to keep restrictions in place.

Jackson focuses again on issue of standing

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson again raised the issue of standing and Prelogar repeated her argument about raising conscience objections as the remedy.

Health complications from medication abortions are rare

The standard two-pill regimen for a medication abortion — mifepristone followed by misoprostol — has a 0.4% risk of major complications . 

In very rare cases, abortion pills may cause blood clots in the uterus, heavy bleeding or infection — but, according to Planned Parenthood , the overall risks are lower than with other medications like penicillin, Tylenol or Viagra.

Misoprostol is also safe to take on its own , but it's slightly less effective than the two-drug combo and could cause more uncomfortable side effects, such as intense nausea, diarrhea, chills, vomiting or cramping.

Barrett questions possible increase in complications due to telemedicine

Justice Amy Coney Barrett questioned Prelogar on whether a lack of ultrasound before prescribing mifepristone could increase complications. Prelogar responded that even before telemedicine consultations were allowed for prescribing mifepristone, most women received the pill without one and that there was not an associated rise in complications.

Kagan asks if this is the only time a court has overridden FDA judgment

Justice Elena Kagan asked if the Texas decision was the first time a court has overridden a judgment by the FDA.

Prelogar says she thinks so and argues courts have no business making those judgments.

What is the Comstock Act?

Justice Samuel Alito just questioned Prelogar about the Comstock Act, a 151-year-old law that prevents using the mail to send "obscene" materials.

This law has been used as part of the challenge to newer FDA regulations that allow mifepristone to be mailed to patients. Parts of the bill have been repealed, but the prohibition on abortion materials being mailed still stands.

Alito asks about three changes involving mifepristone making it more dangerous when taken together

Alito asked Prelogar if three changes the government made to the access of mifepristone make the drug's risks higher when taken together. Under the new guidance, patients only need one doctor visit versus three to obtain the drug. The guidance also allows patients up to 10 weeks gestation to take the drug and they're able to access the drug by mail.

"You say that the 5th Circuit didn't give any reason to think that the three changes made in 2016 would be more dangerous in combination than they were individually. But isn't that obvious?" Alito asked. "That three things that may be innocuous or not excessively dangerous, if engaged in by themselves may become very dangerous, when they're all done together?"

Prelogar said the only way that would be true "would be if the three changes are interconnected and mutually reinforcing, guarding against the same kind of safety risk."

"So I agree that if there were a reason to think that the reason why mifepristone is safe up to 10 weeks gestation is because it's being prescribed by doctors instead of nurse practitioners, for example, then those changes would be interconnected," she said.

She added, "But there was nothing like that in this record. The studies that FDA examined instead demonstrated that these changes — and it was an exhaustive examination — were safe, not because there were other different safeguards in place to guard against risks, but rather because if you go up to 10 weeks of gestation, there is no observable increase in serious adverse events, no matter who's prescribing."

Medication abortions spiked last year

Medication abortions accounted for nearly two-thirds of all abortions in the formal U.S. health care system in 2023, according to a recent report from the Guttmacher Institute, which advocates for abortion access. That's a 30% increase since 2020, when abortion pills made up 53% of the overall total.

The provision of medications for self-managed abortions outside the formal health care system also increased in the six months after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, according to a study published Monday. From July to December 2022, there were an additional 27,800 instances of medication being provided for self-managed abortions compared to what was expected before Roe was reversed, the researchers estimated.

Solicitor general argues conscience protections would continue to apply for individual doctors who don’t want to provide care

Prelogar said the petitioners don’t think the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) would override conscientious protections for an individual doctor. She also noted that hospitals have a series of contingency plans in place such as staffing plans.

Prelogar acknowledged that as a matter of best practices, doctors are often asked to articulate their conscientious objections in advance so that it can be taken into account.

A smaller group of anti-abortion protesters gather outside the court

The protesters outside the court are mainly supportive of abortion access, but there are smaller groups of anti-abortion protesters.

The issue of standing is first up in questioning

Questioning has begun and Justice Clarence Thomas has begun with questions about standing. Standing refers to whether or not the group challenging the law actually faces harm from it and thus can sue.

The government is arguing that the physician group suing the FDA does not have standing, saying that "their theories rely on a long chain of remote contingencies." The Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine has argued that physicians could potentially be harmed if they had to treat a patient who had adverse health effects from mifepristone.

Questions from the judges then focused on who would be able to sue if these groups could not. The government had a hard time coming up with a party that would have standing in this case.

Solicitor general warns of consequences of restricting mifepristone access

Prelogar argued in her opening remarks that if the Supreme Court rules in favor of plaintiffs and, as a result, restricts access to mifepristone, it would have profoundly negative effects on people.

She said it would "severely disrupt the federal system for developing and approving drugs," adding that it would harm the FDA and the pharmaceutical industry.

"It would also inflict grave harm on women across the nation," she said. "Rolling back FDA changes would unnecessarily restrict access to mifepristone with no safety justification. Some women could be forced to undergo more invasive surgical abortions. Others might not be able to access the drug at all."

She said the court "should reject that profoundly inequitable result."

Where is medication abortion legal right now?

Danica Jefferies

Access to the two drugs involved in a medication abortion is legal in some form in 36 states and Washington, D.C., according to data from the Guttmacher Institute, a research organization that advocates for abortion access.

But 15 states limit who can prescribe medication abortions, and two states — Arizona and North Carolina — ban the mailing of abortion pills. Arizona, Nebraska, North Carolina, South Carolina and Wisconsin also require an in-person visit with a physician before the pills can be prescribed.

Oral arguments have begun, with solicitor general going first on behalf of Biden administration

Oral arguments have begun. Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar is kicking them off, arguing on behalf of the Biden administration, and is allotted 20 minutes.

Jessica L. Ellsworth, a lawyer for Danco, which manufactures the brand name version of mifepristone, Mifeprex, will go next and is allotted 10 minutes for arguments.

Erin Hawley, wife of Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., will represent the Christian legal group challenging access to mifepristone, and will have 30 minutes to deliver arguments for the respondents.

Rare all-women lineup will deliver arguments before the Supreme Court today

Notably, all lawyers arguing today in support of and against the FDA's actions to increase access to mifepristone are women — an uncommon scenario in oral arguments before the Supreme Court.

Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar will represent the FDA in support of its moves to make mifepristone more accessible. Lawyer Jessica Ellsworth will also represent drug manufacturer Danco Laboratories.

Arguing against the petitioners is Erin Hawley, the wife of Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley, who is representing a group of doctors and other medical professionals opposed to the actions of the FDA on mifepristone access.

Crowds of protesters gather outside court, mainly in support of abortion rights

Laura Jarrett

Different pockets of rallies formed outside the Supreme Court building. Most appeared to be in favor of abortion rights, chanting over megaphones, but there are smaller groups of people with signs protesting against “chemical abortions” as well. The energy outside of the courthouse is vibrant. There has been a huge turnout with some people even sleeping on the sidewalks in line as early as yesterday morning.

Biden campaign blames Trump for potential abortion medication restrictions

Nnamdi Egwuonwu

Megan Lebowitz

In advance of today's Supreme Court arguments, the Biden campaign pointed the finger at former President Donald Trump for the potential restrictions.

"This case could strip away access to medication abortion everywhere in this country," said Biden campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez during a press call yesterday. "It would be the biggest step towards Donald Trump’s ultimate goal of a nationwide abortion ban since Roe was overturned."

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who's also a member of the Biden campaign national advisory board, said the case before the Supreme Court is about Trump and the GOP pushing closer to a national abortion ban, rather than about the safety or efficacy of medication abortion.

"Donald Trump and MAGA Republicans are prepared to use every tool in their toolbox to control women’s bodies, banning abortion nationwide, ending access to IVF and even attacking contraception access," Warren, D-Mass., said on the call.

Lawyer for doctors' group played key role in Dobbs decision

Erin Hawley, who is representing the group suing the FDA, is senior counsel at the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal group that represents petitioners in many case against abortion. Hawley wrote briefs for the state of Mississippi in the Dobbs case, which overturned Roe v. Wade.

Hawley met her husband, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., while they were both clerks for Chief Justice John Roberts, who concurred with the majority opinion of Dobbs but stopped short of also reaching the decision to overturn Roe.

Abortion pill case could spark challenges to IVF, birth control

Vaccines, birth control pills, hormone therapies and fertility drugs would be subject to new litigation if the Supreme Court endorses a challenge to the abortion pill mifepristone, pharmaceutical industry experts warn.

When the court today weighs whether to roll back FDA findings that made mifepristone more readily available, it is not just access to that particular drug, used for the majority of abortions nationwide, that is on the line.

The pharmaceutical industry has raised the alarm, telling both the justices in court filings and anyone else who will listen that giving individual federal judges the power to cast aside the agency’s scientific health and safety findings would cause chaos within the sector. It would likely lead to litigation over other drugs, both current and those yet to be approved, on which people have strong feelings.

Will justices seize on the Comstock Act?

In response to the 2021 decision to allow mifepristone to be sent by mail, anti-abortion advocates have seized on a hitherto obscure 19th-century law called the Comstock Act, which prohibits the mailing of any drug or medicine that can be used for abortion. They argue that the Comstock Act should be taken into account in assessing the FDA’s decision to dispense with in-person visits.

When the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on the issue, one of the judges wrote that the FDA decision violated the Comstock Act, but the decision by the three-judge panel did not rely on that finding.

The FDA in court papers described it as a “doubly flawed” argument, arguing that the law was only intended to prohibit drugs that would lead to an “unlawful abortion,” not abortions that are lawful. The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion in December 2022 that supports the Biden administration’s position.

Justices could decide the case without addressing FDA authority

The Supreme Court could rule for the government, leaving in place the current approvals for mifepristone, without deciding the knotty legal issues about the FDA approval process.

The government has argued strenuously that the doctors and others who filed the lawsuit do not have legal standing because they cannot show any injury that can be traced to the FDA’s decisions.

If the court were to adopt that argument, it could simply rule that the lawsuit should be dismissed.

The doctors themselves do not prescribe mifepristone, but they argue they are injured because they could be required to treat patients who have taken the pill and have serious side effects. As they oppose abortion, any actions they are forced to take to help a woman complete the process would make them complicit, the plaintiffs argued in court papers .

The FDA’s lawyers wrote in the government’s brief that the plaintiffs can at best point at a “hypothetical scenario,” which is not enough to establish standing.

The challengers, the brief stated, “cannot identify even a single case where any of their members has been forced to provide such care.”

Challengers say FDA decisions were 'arbitrary and capricious'

The challengers — doctors and other medical professionals who oppose abortion — argue that the FDA failed to sufficiently take into account safety concerns when the restrictions on mifepristone, including the requirement that the patient have an in-person visit with a doctor, were lifted.

Among other things, they note that the FDA conceded there would be an increase in emergency room visits by women suffering side effects as a result of the pill being made available by mail. As a result, the government acted in an “arbitrary and capricious” manner in violation of a law called the Administrative Procedure Act, the plaintiffs argue.

The FDA said in court papers that its actions were “supported by an exhausting review of a record including dozens of scientific studies and decades of safe use of mifepristone by millions of women.”

Doctors and patient advocates fear restricted access to abortion pill

Berkeley Lovelace Jr.

About two years after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the court today will revisit the issue of reproductive rights, this time contemplating whether to limit access to mifepristone, the first of two pills used in medication abortion.

Ahead of oral arguments and eventual ruling, doctors and patient advocates are expressing alarm about what might happen if the high court decides to tighten access to the drug.

Protests and rallies are being held for and against access to mifepristone

Ahead of the oral arguments, the pro-abortion group Women's March and the Center for Popular Democracy are protesting against the challenge to access with a march to the Supreme Court at 8 a.m.

Students for Life of America, an anti-abortion youth group, will also hold a rally at 8 a.m. in front of the Supreme Court.

At 9 a.m., more than two dozen reproductive and civil rights groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, will bus in abortion advocates and providers to hold a protest on the steps of the Supreme Court.

Elsewhere, Students for Life of America will join the Pro-Life Action League in a rally at Walgreens headquarters outside Chicago at 12:30 p.m. to protest against the drugstore chain's decision to sell the pill.

What is at stake in abortion pill case?

The Supreme Court is weighing decisions made by the FDA from 2016 onward that lifted restrictions on mifepristone, including one that made it available by mail.

The court is not reviewing the original 2000 decision to approve the drug, which the plaintiffs had challenged in lower courts. Whatever the justices rule, the drug will remain available in some form.

In addition to the decision to make mifepristone available by mail, the court will also consider decisions in 2016 to extend the window in which mifepristone could be used to terminate pregnancies from seven weeks’ gestation to 10 weeks and reduce the number of in-person visits for patients from three to one. In another 2016 move, the FDA altered the dosing regimen, finding that a lower dose of mifepristone was sufficient.

Recap Day 7: James Crumbley decision now in hands of jury

Pontiac — The case against James Crumbley, the father of the Oxford High School shooter, is now in the hands of an Oakland County jury after attorneys delivered their closing arguments Wednsesday.

Prosecutors and Crumbley's attorney clashed in their closing arguments Wednesday, with one side saying he knew his son had access to the gun and failed to act, leading to the deaths of four students in 2021, while his attorney insisted he "didn't know."

Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald reiterated her argument that Crumbley, 47, had chance after chance to recognize red flags about his son and take actions that could have interrupted Ethan Crumbley's plans to shoot up his school. He shirked his legal obligation to prevent his child from harming others, she argued.

“He did nothing," said McDonald, who at one point demonstrated how quickly it is to put a trigger lock on a handgun. "He did nothing over and over and over again."

But Mariell Lehman, Crumbley's attorney, argued her client "didn't know" his son had access to his firearms or what the teen was planning. And he didn't know what was written in his son's journal. She said prosecutors would've presented evidence if he had known, but they didn't.

"James didn't know," said Lehman. “.... He did not know he had to protect others from his son. He had no idea what his son was planning to do."

Crumbley, 47, is being tried on four counts of involuntary manslaughter in connection with the deaths of four students his then 15-year-old son fatally shot in 2021 — Madisyn Baldwin, 16; Tate Myre, 16; Justin Shilling, 17; and Hana St. Juliana, 14. He faces up to 15 years in prison if convicted.

Nicole Beausoleil, Madisyn Baldwin's mother, leaned over and cried as McDonald described how her daughter crouched down to protect herself during the Nov. 30, 2021 shooting, a door just a few feet away.

Jury instructions

Oakland Circuit Judge Cheryl Matthew randomly selected three juror members who will now serve as alternates. The jurors excluded to be alternates include: a woman who works part-time in a dental office; a part-time music teacher; and a woman who works at the Oakland Community Health Network.

The jury is now evenly divided with six men and six women.

After delivering a lengthy set of instructions, Matthews encouraged the jury to take its time.

"We want you to be careful, keep an open mind and take your time," she said.

'He'd be charged with murder'

In her rebuttal, McDonald argued that she doesn't have to prove what James Crumbley knew. And she doesn't have to ensure jurors are 100% certain about his guilt. She said she has to prove her case beyond a reasonable doubt and that James Crumbley failed to act with ordinary care.

She said if Crumbley knew his son was planning a mass shooting at Oxford, "he'd be charged with murder," she said.

McDonald also rejected the notion that school officials weren't concerned about Ethan Crumbley when they met with his parents the morning of the shooting.

"That's not what you heard," she said.

She urged the jury to use common sense in making its decision. At one point, McDonald demonstrated putting a cable lock in the murder weapon. She said it took "less than 10 seconds."

"Ten seconds," she said. "You don’t have to go find it, you don’t have to go buy it, it was provided. You just watched me do it. … Locking was one way to prevent this and it took less than 10 seconds.”

Case isn't about parental responsibility

McDonald noted that the case wasn't about guns or parental responsibility. She said parenting is the hardest job and parents are not responsible for everything their kids do.

But the case against Crumbley is so "egregious" and has such a rare set of facts that it warranted him being charged.

She ended her rebuttal noting again that Crumbley hadn't just failed his son, but the victims. She read their names.

"I say their names because they matter,” McDonald said, turning to look at the parents of Madisyn, Justin and Hana, who were sitting in the courtroom. “They matter. And that is why we’re here.” 

Defense attorney's closing argument

Point by point, Lehman argued that prosecutors didn't show evidence or present testimony that showed James knew his son had access to his guns or that the teen was having mental health issues.

"James had no idea that his son was having a hard time," Lehman said.

She argued prosecutors have selectively presented evidence to make it appear Crumbley knew, and ignored, more than he did. She urged jurors to "follow the law."

“When it comes to reasonable doubt, you can have one, or you can have 10," she said.

And the shooter's journal writings and texts to his friend about asking for mental health treatment don't prove he did, Lehman argued. She said prosecutors didn't present any direct evidence he actually said anything to his father.

Reasonable doubt

Lehman said the burden of proof is on prosecutors and encouraged jurors to pay attention to what evidence and testimony wasn't presented.

She noted that counselor Shawn Hopkins or former dean of students Nick Ejak "weren't concerned" that Ethan Crumbley was a danger to anyone and didn't view him as a threat. They were more concerned about the teen's "sadness."

“(Hopkins) wanted him to see someone so the sadness didn’t get any worse,” Lehman said.

And James wasn't the only one surprised that his son was the shooter. Lehman pointed to testimony by Oxford Assistant Principal Kristy Gibson-Marshall who said she was surprised it was Ethan Crumbley.

"She didn't believe that was right. Even in those moments," she said.

'He didn't know'

Lehman repeatedly stated in her closing that her client "didn't know."

"He didn't know what was going on with his son," she said. "He didn't know what his son was planning."

She reiterated that when James Crumbley met with police immediately after the shooting, police never asked if the gun had been locked. He told them that the gun was hidden in an armoire and the ammunition was hidden under some jeans.

Neither officer told Crumbley his storage of the gun and ammunition was irresponsible, nor did they ask how his son got the gun, or if the gun was locked up, Lehman said.

Defense: Gun wasn't shooter's

Lehman pointed to the entry in the teen's journal in which he wrote that couldn't find the gun and it was "hidden."

She also challenged the suggestion the gun was the teen's.

“If it really was his son’s gun, why was it hidden in James’ bedroom?” Lehman said. “James Crumbley had no idea what his son was capable of, he had no idea what his son was planning and he had absolutely no idea his son had access to the firearm.”

Prosecutors' closing argument

McDonald said Crumbley had a "willful disregard" for a known danger and it caused the deaths of four students at Oxford High School. She argued that Crumbley was presented with the "easiest, most glaring opportunities" to prevent the deaths of the students who died but didn't take action.

"It was foreseeable and it was preventable," said McDonald.

She sought to counter the defense argument that Crumbley didn't know his son could access the gun he used to commit the shooting. When he realized what his son had done, Crumbley never questioned how he got the gun, McDonald said.

“You know why he didn’t say it? He didn’t say it because he already knew. He knew his son had access to the gun.”

McDonald also touched on what Oxford school officials testified to during the trial — that they didn't view Ethan Crumbley as a threat — noting that jurors may not agree with that.

But James Crumbley "doesn’t get a pass because you don’t think the teachers did enough. He doesn’t get a pass," she said.

'Beware argument this could be you'

McDonald rejected the argument that any parent could be held accountable for parents who buy their children a car or a gun and that "this could be you."

"Beware of the claim that this could be you. Beware," she said. "This couldn’t be everybody. This couldn’t be the person who takes their kid hunting. That doesn't create a criminal charge. It couldn’t happen simply because you purchased a firearm."

Shooter's own words

McDonald read multiple texts from the shooter during her closing, in which the teen said he needed help but his parents would be mad. The teen wrote about going to the ER or asking his parents to see a doctor.

The texts don't paint the shooter in a better light, McDonald said, but as a kid in crisis trying to get help.

“They just make him look desperate and sad and wanting help," she said.

And then on the day of the shooting, Crumbley saw the words on the disturbing math worksheet.

“How many times does this kid have to say it (help me)? He says it in his journal, he says it to his friend,” McDonald said. “That isn’t enough. He writes the words ‘help me’ on a piece of paper. … What does he say? He says ‘we’ve got to go to work.’”

He 'failed to act'

McDonald said Crumbley waited 14 minutes from the time he rushed home to check on the family's gun and found the 9mm missing.

He and Jennifer both knew by 1:23 p.m. that the gun and bullets were missing. But he didn’t call 911 until 1:34 p.m., McDonald said, after being on the phone with his wife for 10 minutes on the way home and from 1:30 p.m. to 1:33 p.m. 

McDonald said Crumbley failed multiple people on Nov. 30, 2021, including his own son.

"James Crumbley failed his son in a tragic way," McDonald said. "But he didn’t just fail his son. He failed Hana. He failed Madisyn. He failed Tate. And he failed Justin. He failed to perform his legal duty to prevent these kids from being killed and he failed their parents too.” 

The case against Crumbley

Prosecutors have sought to show Crumbley was the adult "in the best position" to take actions that would have interrupted his son’s plans to go through with the shooting, but did not: He did not secure the 9mm SIG Sauer handgun that he bought a few days earlier for his son to use and left the cable lock that came with it unopened.

But most glaring, he saw the violent drawings his son made on a math worksheet the morning Nov. 30, hours before the shooting, and did not immediately seek mental health treatment despite the advice of his son's school counselor.

“What happened inside that school was truly a nightmare come to life. But it didn’t have to be,” Oakland County Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Marc Keast said during opening arguments last week. “That nightmare was preventable and it was foreseeable.”

But Mariell Lehman, Crumbley's attorney, has that her client didn't know his son posed a threat to others, nor did he know his son knew where Crumbley had hidden the 9mm handgun.

“James Crumbley was not aware that his son had access to that firearm. You will hear testimony that access was not allowed,” Lehman said during opening arguments. “He did not purchase that gun with the knowledge that his son may use it against other people.”

She said even school professionals, who have training to detect when a child is in crisis or is a danger, did not believe during the Nov. 30 meeting the shooter posed a threat to others.

Relatives of three of the four students who died in the shooting have been in the courtroom throughout the trial. Crumbley's father and stepmother also were in the courthouse Wednesday but declined comment.

More: Who will decide James Crumbley's fate? A look at the jury

Defense begins

Lehman, James Crumbley's attorney, rested her case Wednesday morning after calling Crumbley's sister as the sole witness. Karen Crumbley saw the shooter a few times in 2021 and testified she didn't notice anything that concerned her.

Karen, who lives in Florida, said their mother died in early April 2021, and while James was already in Florida with his mother, Jennifer and the shooter drove down to be with the family once she died.

Karen said she didn’t recall seeing or hearing anything concerning with the shooter, nor did James ever express any concern about his son’s behavior or mental health.

She also saw the Crumbley family again in June 2021 and stayed with them in their Oxford home for several days. She did not see anything concerning then either, Karen said.

“If I saw anything (concerning), I would’ve addressed it," Karen said. "If I would’ve known anything, I would’ve talked to him. I would’ve took him home with me if there was any kind of inclination that anything was wrong.”

During cross examination, Karen said she would have found the statement "help me" and drawing of a gun, both of which were on the math worksheet the shooter was drawing on Nov. 30, 2021, to be concerning.

Karen told police in November 2021 that having guns in the house was not unusual, but getting a gun for a child would be. On Wednesday, she elaborated to say that giving a gun to use at a range was different. 

"If you're getting a gun specifically for him to use at his leisure, that would be different," she told James' defense attorney, Mariell Lehman. "But with adult supervision, I don't see anything wrong with it."

ATF agent returns to stand

Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms, Tobacco and Explosives Agent Brett Brandon briefly retook the stand Wednesday to testify that the Crumbleys did not leave the parking lot at the art studio in Detroit where they were ultimately found by police on Dec. 4, 2021 and arrested.

They left the building more than a half dozen times to smoke or move their vehicle within the lot, but they remained in the area of the lot.

More: Recap Day 6: Shooter's journal shared during James Crumbley trial: 'I have access to the gun and ammo'

More: Recap Day 5: School officials, ATF agent testify about shooter, gun storage in James Crumbley trial

More: Recap Day 4: James Crumbley to police after shooting: Son was 'perfect kid,' didn't get in trouble

More: Recap Day 3: Audio of 911 call James Crumbley made after Oxford shooting: 'I'm really freaking out'

More: Recap Day 2: Prosecutors, defense attorney finalize jury for James Crumbley trial

More: Recap Day 1: Jury selection begins in James Crumbley trial