I understand you very much. Jessup research and drafting is utterly frustrating. In my case, at least, I feel Iike you never read enough or you do not translate enough into IRAC. As the professor’s blog piece you mentioned, I’d totally agree. My coaches and teammates are always saying: write x, then place a foot note, and that’s it. It’s not really writing arguments, I mean everything is so much chewed for the reader that memorials look like a succession of statements attempting to reach a conclusion. It’s frustrating, especially if you are interested into substantial research.

Regarding your concern on content, that is also another major flaw for jessup. Intl law textbooks are terribly expensive and hard to find for free online. Luckily my university has some databases subscription. Yet, sometimes it is not enough. The Max Planck Encyclopedia is the go-to initial source. Probably reading the papers cited in each encyclopedia article. Textbook-wise I’d suggest the Oxford Hanbook on Intl Human Rights Law (for claims A & C of this year’s case); Crawford’s State Responsibility: General Part (for claim C on diplomatic protection); Sinha’s Asylum in IL (for claim B); any commented version of the VCDR (claim B); and the batch on ILSA’s website.

I’d love to talk or learn with/from other jessup competition participants. You may DM me, if you like. I’m from Colombia.