what should i write a speech about

My Speech Class

Public Speaking Tips & Speech Topics

259 Interesting Speech Topics [Examples + Outlines]

Jim Peterson has over 20 years experience on speech writing. He wrote over 300 free speech topic ideas and how-to guides for any kind of public speaking and speech writing assignments at My Speech Class.

The most asked question I get almost every day from students is this:

What makes a topic interesting?

Well, the answer is simple. You have to like it yourself, the subject has to be appropriate to the rules of the assignment, to the audience and the setting of the meeting:

In this article:

How To Find An Interesting Topic

Best interesting speech topics, interesting persuasive speech topics, interesting informative speech topics, topics with outline.

1 – Look in magazines, journals, and newspapers for events.

Can We Write Your Speech?

Get your audience blown away with help from a professional speechwriter. Free proofreading and copy-editing included.

Current or historical, that does not matter at this point, both are okay – and recent engaging and exciting facts, and perhaps valuable information that attracts the attention.

Articles about subjects that interests you and that are comfortable for you to talk about are good indications.

2 – Jot down any possible idea that comes up for interesting speech topics. I always draft a short list for myself of candidate issues if I am contracted for a public speaking engagement.

And then I skip the ones that are too difficult and too complex to prepare and master in 8 to 10 minutes time.

3 – Review some online books on the subject for more detailed current information about your topic. Or go to a library and ask for books and reference articles about your subject.

Without exception, all librarians I know will help you sorting out the speechwriter subject with their advice and recommendations. For example you choose for an alluring pleasure physical activity or farming and countryside topic.

Try to understand how the author has covered it. What’s his structure? What points, information or arguments are the strongest? What examples and illustrations has she or he used?

4 – Peerless reliable statistics and new discoveries can help writing and refining.

Look for controversies, rare and strange opinions. What do you think of it? What do you want your audience to think of it?

5 – Think about related engaging interpretive hints to talk about. When you view your rough list, try to find new points, different angles of view or just turn your thoughts upside down. Look at the special aspects that surprise the listeners.

>>>  For example try these 2 more detailed summary outlines with main points and subpoints. Use my sample structure to add or otherwise wipe steps and stages you do not need.

>>>  In addition to these patterns, you find more ideas for outlined main points in my Minute Section (in the navigation menu bar right on your left of this portal page). Or move straight to sixty plus lineups for speechwriters.

That can be very enlighting for enhancing public discernment. They also can  see , feel, or even  taste  and  smell  what you try to explain or demonstrate in a couple of minutes.

6 – Look for supporting and also for opposing opinions, plus interesting speech topics statements. Add visual aids where you want to emphasize or to give some prominence to an unimaginable point in your interesting topic idea.

7 – Watch news shows, history documentaries and debating programs – for example, the morning shows and the evening news. They are especially helpful for developing a rough list of wheedling brainstorms.

Interesting Speech Topic Examples

Don’t have time to read our full list of 200+ topic ideas? Here is our list of 10 interesting speech topics.

• Beauty is not only in the eye of the beholder
• Children don’t play enough
• Animal testing is necessary
• Girls are too mean to each other
• Men should get paternity leave
• Tattoos are an addiction
• If I had a year to do what I want
• Butterflies: deadly creatures
• How to ruin a date in the first minute
• The meaning of dreams

Here is our list of top interesting persuasive speech topics.

• Beauty is not only in the eye of the beholder.
• Hyper active kids don’t need medication.
• Books are always better than the movie.
• Pick up lines do work.
• Televise all court proceedings.
• Suspend referees that are found to show too much bias.
• There is no place for monarchs any more.
• It is false that no one is above the law.
• You tube needs to monitor comments.
• Online friends show more compassion.
• Cross cultural couples respect each other more.
• Graffiti must be recognised as art.
• You can loose weight without exercising.
• Children don’t play enough.
• Carpets are harmful and shouldn’t be in homes.
• Sex education doesn’t work.
• Ban smoking in all public places.
• Women cheat just as much as men.
• Prohibit destruction of rainforests.
• Global warming is a myth.
• Justice is never the same for all.
• Video games are not the blame of violence at school.
• Financial rewards is the only way employees stay loyal.
• The world isn’t only black and white.
• Give girls over 16 contraceptives without parents consent.
• Calories should be included in restaurant menus.
• Sugar tax won’t reduce obesity.
• Pregnancy as a result of rape should be terminated.
• All couples must live together before getting married.
• Animal testing is necessary.
• Children’s beauty pageants are wrong.
• There are not enough cameras in public spaces.
• Freedom of speech rights needs to be rewritten.
• Random DUI test should be done on parents picking up children after school.
• Atheists are more peaceful than religious people.
• Heterosexual men and women can be just friends.
• Adoptive parents need maternity leave too.
• Print advertisements don’t work.
• Click bate headlines are the cause of less followers.
• Don’t give children allowances.
• Stop checking in on social media.
• There would be more divorces if couples didn’t have children.
• Compensate organ donors.
• Celebrities are not role models.
• Do drug tests on welfare recipients.
• Stem cell research is murder.
• People should be considered adults at 21.
• Religion is the cause of war.
• Life was not easier a century ago.
• Men are better forgivers.
• Making substances illegal only makes people want them more.
• Parenting classes must be compulsory.
• Helicopter parents are damaging their children.
• Give working moms special privileges.
• Social media fame is a scam.
• Make paparazzi photographing children a criminal offence.
• Food should never be seen as a reward.
• 6 hours is not enough sleep for an adult.
• People can live without eating meat.
• Curfews do not keep teens out of trouble.
• Electronic textbooks don’t have the same impact as the printed version.
• This generation cannot fix anything.
• Boredom always leads to trouble.
• Girls are too mean to each other.
• Affirmative action isn’t right.
• School system is responsible for low test scores.
• Men should get paternity leave.
• Fast food needs to come with more warnings.
• Killing a murderer is immoral.
• Famous people must stay away from politics.
• Long distance relationships do work.
• Men are the stronger sex.
• Jobs shouldn’t be gender specific.
• Religion won’t die away.
• Women shouldn’t give birth after 40.
• Abortion is murder.
• Tattoos are an addiction.
• Drug addiction is a choice.
• Social media will run it’s course and die out.
• Caesarian sections are safer than normal births.
• There is a connection between science and religion.
• Never pay children for good grades.
• People in open marriages are not happy.
• The soul does exist.
• People’s salaries should reflect their performances.
• English will always be the business language of the world.
• Why you should always put yourself first.
• Earth has not been explored properly.
• Women are more intelligent than they give away.
• Alternatives to evolution exist.
• Prisons create criminals.
• Sick building syndromes exist.
• Strategic defense and ethics do not match.
• The War on Terror is based on a hidden agenda.
• Aging is a threat to pension funding.
• Airline safety restrictions won’t stop terrorists.
• Alcohol advertising stimulates underage alcohol use.
• All humans are spiritual in one way or another.
• Arts express the level of quality in different cultures.
• Atheists do care about Christmas.
• Australian aboriginal tattooing is art.
• Ban the filibuster from Congress.
• Body piercings can cause serious complications.
• Books are outdated.
• Censorship is a violation of freedom of speech.
• Charities must minimize the organizational and overhead costs.
• Child testimonies in abuse cases are not credible.
• Corporal punishment could be ethical, provided that it is proportional.
• Creative expression and creativity are not the same.
• Electronic baby timeshare does help to prevent teen pregnancy.
• English and Spanish should be the only languages in the world.
• Establishing democracy in Iraq is mission impossible.
• Fashion gurus have good reasons to promote skinny girls.
• Female genital mutilation is not unethical when done by cosmetic surgery doctors.
• Feminism will help improve the position of females in Africa.
• Fill in a country … should be condemned as human rights violator.
• Future generations have to keep their jobs until they drop.
• George Orwell was just right when he wrote his novel ‘1984’ … Big Brother is watching us all the time.
• Governments should not own news broadcasting corporations.
• Granting amnesty perpetuates immigration and makes border patrols fruitless.
• Harry Potter books are more popular among elderly persons.
• Hollywood movies have a bad influence on the world.
• Homelessness in rural areas is substantially undercounted compared to metropolitan and suburban areas.
• Hospitality is a valuable instrument to better foreign relationships.
• Houses affected by natural disasters should not be rebuilt.
• International satellite news broadcasting poses a threat to indigenous cultures.
• It is possible to be pro-life and pro-choice.
• It’s a myth that bottled water is better than tap water.
• Journalism codes are no longer respected by journalists.
• Limiting immigration is limiting opportunities.
• Link debt relief of developing countries to carbon emission reduction.
• Local aid to African communities is more effective than national aid.
• Mentally disabled people cannot be executed.
• Motivation courses only have one objective: to fund the instructor’s bank account.
• MP3 music belongs in the free public domain for educational institutions and the general public.
• News programs must be interesting rather than important.
• Open source software is better than Microsoft.
• Parental advisory labels hinder the freedom of speech of artists.
• People have the right to decide about their own life and death.
• Political correctness kills freedom of speech.
• Poverty can be cut by half in this century.
• Princess Diana’s death was not a tragic accident.
• Public insults should be considered as hate speech and should not be protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution.
• Right to work laws are useless.
• Robin Hood was a not a hero.
• Sex and sexuality are from different hemispheres.
• Telling lies is a justifiable instrument.
• The local council elections in Cuba are no elections at all.
• The right to privacy is not absolute.
• There is no secure protection of property rights in developing countries.
• There should be cultural content quotas in broadcasting.
• Tobacco and alcohol billboards litter the streets.
• United Nations will never truly exist in Europe.
• Vegetarians would not eat vegetables if they were born in rural Africa.
• We should have a king instead of a president.
• Weblogs are intellectual property and therefore must be legally protected.
• With the current economic situation, we will all be working until we are old and grey.
• Zero tolerance is a useful instrument to prevent violence.

Here is our list of top interesting informative speech topics.

• A comparison of the official definition of terrorism in different parts of the world.
• A week of monastery life.
• Abu Sayyaf links to global terror organizations.
• Architectural movements in the late nineteenth century.
• Armed conflicts in Africa.
• Artificial intelligence opportunities.
• Biochemical weapons explained.
• Bioethics versus human rights.
• Combatting modern slavery.
• Debunking weight loss myths.
• Development goals of the United Nations.
• Everything we can find in our Solar System.
• Five ways to give and donate to charity funds.
• Forms of public diplomacy.
• Fraud detection systems explained.
• How giant sea aquariums are constructed.
• How nepotisms started in the Middle Ages.
• How the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences is structured.
• How the American Civil War began.
• How the application for immigration and naturalization works.
• How the CIA can track terrorists.
• How to apply Feng Shui to your bedroom.
• How to outlaw reactionary conservative groups and individuals.
• Is it possible to clone humans?
• Major incidents and consequences in the first decade of this millennium.
• Middle East roadmap for peace.
• Migration trends.
• Offshore installation accidents over the years.
• Racism and cultural diversity in mass media.
• Refugees and forced displacement.
• Result on foreign aid funding in the long term.
• Scientific explanations for the mysteries of the Bermuda Triangle.
• State sponsored tyranny explained.
• The 9/11 Commission assignment and its main conclusions.
• The best consumer electronics innovations to date.
• The chain of cargo and freight services at international airports.
• The difference between soft and hard drugs.
• The effect of counter terrorism legislation on ordinary people.
• The European convention on human rights explained.
• The flying fortress called Air Force One.
• The four general goals of the Homeland Security Department.
• The functions of Samurai warriors in Ancient Japan.
• The future of fashion.
• The Geneva Convention on the treatment of prisoners of war.
• The governing system of rules during the Middle Ages.
• The history of Amtrak.
• The innovative and unique styling of Dodge trucks.
• The long term complications of sunburn.
• The philosophical doctrine of Nihilism.
• The pros and cons of pacifism.
• The relations between federal budget deficit, national debt and trade balance.
• The role of Emperor Akihito in Japan.
• The secrets of crop circles revealed.
• The short history of the second man on the Moon, Buzz Aldrin.
• The struggle to patent computer software.
• The war costs in Iraq and Afghanistan
• Two party system compared multiple party systems.
• What is acne and what are its causes.
• Why the NASA shuttle program was stopped.
• Why the Romans built huge aqueducts in France.
• Venezuela and the constitutional power crisis.
• A diamond exploration certification system will not prevent conflict-diamonds trade.
• Handwriting analysis and how it reveals aspects of your personality.
• Hindu Cinema: not just Bollywood movies.
• How many disasters always happen at Christmas time.
• How sleepwalkers perform the most unusual things while asleep.
• Different lifestyles of generations.
• Importance of sleeping
• What makes me happy
• My ideal trip to Asia
• What would it be like to live with a famous person?
• If I were a volcano
• If l could the queen
• Benefits of being a vegetarian
• How girls worldwide are treated differently
• History of Mainamati in Bangladesh
• Broccoli flavored Oreos
• The Importance of public speaking
• A world without boundaries
• Stars and shooting stars
• How I came to school for the first time
• Conspiracy theories
• The pros and cons of being dead
• Confusing grammar
• When my birthday was there
• Importance of languages
• How to study effectively
• If I walked backwards
• The power of a lie
• Power of words
• If I was invisible
• Why I smile
• Fear of the unknown
• Fashion trends I hate
• Why do we have toes?
• Why I want to be a lawyer (or whatever job u pick)
• How colours affect your mood

Need a topic for your speech about an interesting persuasion statement?

Here are some of the best speech ideas and two easy informative subjects you can alter into a firm convincing claim.

Need other attracting ideas?

Check the navbar on the left and you will find thousands of special hints and tips for your public presentation 🙂

1. Whistleblower Protection Is Not Effective

• Whistleblower laws don’t protect against reprisals, disciplinary measures and spin from superiors.
• Huge companies have enough money to buy legal advice for a long period, laws offer employees no financial shield.
• Legislation often doesn’t address the issue itself, the problem, the allegations often are not investigated.

Another topic for your speech on business could be on fair trade:

2. Is Fair Trade Really Fair?

• Protectionism and markets are often stronger than fair trade appointments.
• Buying products is subsidizing poor farmers and manufacturers in developing countries. It isn’t helping them to make them stronger.
• It is anti-competitive and it undermines the economy in Third World nations.

And what do you think of this explosive persuasive topic for your speech?

3. Nuclear Power Is Dangerous Stuff

• An accident could cause thousands of fatalities and for billions of dollars property damage.
• There is no proper technology to handle radioactive waste material.
• Health risks for people working in the plant and for those who are living nearby could not be foreseen in advance and certainly not at the long term.
• Costs of nuclear plant safety measurements are very high.

And now two informative suggestions for a topic for your speech. But you easily transform them into some of the best speech ideas for persuasion speeches:

4. Checklist Before Taking A New Job

• A bigger company means more interesting job and task opportunities.
• It makes it possible to extend your existing network of trusted contacts.
• Like to travel abroad? Is it a Yes or No?
• How about the probability that you will keep your job – in other words what about the job security? What are the hidden clues?
• Is there a chance you can make you professional dreams and personal goals come true?
• How about the pay? Get all salary information, and decide on how much you want to earn from the start.
• Are there other requirements? Some personal wishes you would like to fulfill?

5. The Advantages Of Working In The Night

• No disturbing by telephone.
• No traffic jam.
• Not being awakened by the alarm clock in early morning hours …

You can think about the disadvantages too … Approach this subject from different sides and you double your opportunities!

89 Medical Speech Topic Ideas [Persuasive, Informative, Nursing]

292 Sports Speech Topics [Persuasive, Informative]

10 thoughts on “259 Interesting Speech Topics [Examples + Outlines]”

Are you in the Now?

Renewable energy pros and cons.

I want to learn the most detailed writing. Am a New student and i need to improve my own My subject is an informative one : Ivorians women teaching in Abidjan universites.

I need more topics to choose from for my oral presentation

Hello, I’d appreciate it if you’d stop perpetuating falseties about global warming and climate change. They are very much real, and putting them on a list like this only further pushes the myth that they are false. These topics are not up for debate.

Some of these are really creative.

#184 made me laugh. As someone who grew up with Harry Potter, perhaps students these days will consider me an older person ha.

Regards, Chris

thaaaank you very much this is help me a lot

Thanks for the ideas!

A lot of these “creative” topics are not only offensive but help push distructive rhetoric.

this helped me out so much.was just sitting there lost about what to speak at the academic decathlon.thanks

Leave a Comment

I accept the Privacy Policy

Reach out to us for sponsorship opportunities

Vivamus integer non suscipit taciti mus etiam at primis tempor sagittis euismod libero facilisi.

© 2024 My Speech Class

Everything that you need to know to start your own business. From business ideas to researching the competition.

Practical and real-world advice on how to run your business — from managing employees to keeping the books.

Our best expert advice on how to grow your business — from attracting new customers to keeping existing customers happy and having the capital to do it.

Entrepreneurs and industry leaders share their best advice on how to take your company to the next level.

• Business Ideas
• Human Resources
• Business Financing
• Growth Studio
• Ask the Board

Looking for your local chamber?

Interested in partnering with us?

Grow » thrive, 7 steps to writing a great speech.

These seven steps will help you write a memorable and effective speech.

If you’re preparing for a presentation, the work really begins when you sit down to write your speech. A great speech will engage the audience and can lead to greater personal and professional success. Here are seven steps to writing an effective speech.

Know what your core message is

When preparing to write a speech, you want to start by thinking about the core message you want to share. Your core message should be a topic you’re knowledgeable and passionate about and one that’s relevant to your audience.

The topic should be delivered in a way that’s easy to understand and concise. Ideally, your audience should be able to explain what the speech was about in just one or two sentences.

Think about your audience

Next, you want to learn as much as possible about your audience because this will inform how you deliver the speech. The language you use and the examples you share will depend on the audience you’re speaking to.

As you learn more about your audience, you want to consider the circumstances that brought them together. Are they gathering for a business conference, or is it for a charity event? How big will the audience be, and how knowledgeable are they about the subject you’re speaking on?

[Read more: How to Give a Great Presentation ]

Do your research

The amount of research you complete will depend on how familiar you are with your topic. But even if it’s a topic you know inside and out, it’s a good idea to do at least some research. This will help you gather new information and come up with unique and fresh ideas.

The amount of research you complete will depend on how familiar you are with your topic. But even if it’s a topic you know inside and out, it’s a good idea to do at least some research.

Come up with an outline

Now it’s time to organize your information and ideas into a detailed outline. Organizing your information will make it easier once it’s time to sit down and write the speech. Your outline should include three main parts:

• Introduction : The introduction sets the stage for the information you’ll be sharing. It’s a good idea to start with a story that will catch your audience’s attention. From there, you can outline what you’ll be sharing and the conclusion you’ll reach.
• Body : The body of your speech is where you’ll highlight the overarching points you’re trying to make. But be careful not to throw too much information at your audience — two to three main points are enough.
• Conclusion : During the conclusion, you’ll summarize your core message and what the audience should take away from the speech. Look for ways to end your speech on a strong note, so the audience understands why this topic matters and how they can take action.

Write a draft

Once you have an outline, you can begin drafting your speech. Don’t try to make your speech perfect during the drafting stage — just try to get your ideas on paper. You can come back to revise and improve your speech later.

Choose a presentation tool

If you’re speaking in a professional setting, you’ll likely want to compliment your speech with a presentation tool like PowerPoint. Using a slide deck is a great way to add a visual element to your speech that will further engage the audience. Using a template can make it easier to develop a well-designed slide deck.

[Read more: 6 Business Presentation Tools for Small Businesses ]

Practice and revise

Great speeches take time to write, so you should plan to practice and revise your speech as needed. You can practice your speech in front of a friend or family member, ask for their feedback, and then adjust your speech accordingly.

As you’re revising, focus on using conversational language and short sentences. Look for any areas that are too general or vague, and try to come up with specific examples that will back up your core message.

CO— aims to bring you inspiration from leading respected experts. However, before making any business decision, you should consult a professional who can advise you based on your individual situation.

CO—is committed to helping you start, run and grow your small business. Learn more about the benefits of small business membership in the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, here .

Subscribe to our newsletter, Midnight Oil

Expert business advice, news, and trends, delivered weekly

By signing up you agree to the CO— Privacy Policy. You can opt out anytime.

For more personal success tips

5 simple steps to finding a mentor, 9 tips for becoming a great mentor, how to “spring clean” your business.

By continuing on our website, you agree to our use of cookies for statistical and personalisation purposes. Know More

Welcome to CO—

Designed for business owners, CO— is a site that connects like minds and delivers actionable insights for next-level growth.

U.S. Chamber of Commerce 1615 H Street, NW Washington, DC 20062

Social links

Looking for local chamber, stay in touch.

• PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
• EDIT Edit this Article
• EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
• Browse Articles
• Learn Something New
• Quizzes Hot
• This Or That Game New
• Train Your Brain
• Explore More
• Support wikiHow
• About wikiHow
• Log in / Sign up
• Education and Communications
• Communication Skills
• Public Speaking
• Speechwriting

How to Write a Speech

Last Updated: March 11, 2024 Fact Checked

This article was co-authored by Patrick Muñoz . Patrick is an internationally recognized Voice & Speech Coach, focusing on public speaking, vocal power, accent and dialects, accent reduction, voiceover, acting and speech therapy. He has worked with clients such as Penelope Cruz, Eva Longoria, and Roselyn Sanchez. He was voted LA's Favorite Voice and Dialect Coach by BACKSTAGE, is the voice and speech coach for Disney and Turner Classic Movies, and is a member of Voice and Speech Trainers Association. There are 7 references cited in this article, which can be found at the bottom of the page. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 2,972,431 times.

Giving an original speech for a class, event, or work presentation can be nerve-wracking. However, writing an effective speech can help to bolster your confidence. With careful planning and an eye for detail, you can write a speech that will inform, persuade, motivate, or entertain! Give yourself plenty of time to craft your speech and practice it several times for best results.

Sample Speeches

Drafting an Effective Speech

• If you are writing a speech for a class, make sure to check with your teacher to get details about the number and acceptable types of sources.

• If you are writing an informative or persuasive speech, then plan to arrange your speech with a problem and solution structure. Start the speech by talking about what is wrong, then explain how to fix the problem in the second half of your speech. [4] X Research source

Tip : Keep in mind that you can always refine your outline later or as you draft your speech. Include all of the information that seems relevant now with the expectation that you will likely need to pare it down later.

• For example, if you are writing a motivational speech about weight loss, then you might say something like, “Five years ago, I could not walk up a flight of stairs without needing to take a break halfway up.”
• If you hope to persuade audience members to reduce their use of fossil fuels, then you might start off by saying, “Gas-powered vehicles are the reason why global warming is threatening to destroy our planet.”

• For example, if you are giving a speech on increasing funding for Alzheimer’s research, it would be helpful to provide information on how common Alzheimer’s disease is and how it affects families. You could accomplish this with a combination of a statistic and an anecdote.

Tip: Keep your introduction less than 1 paragraph or 1 double-spaced page long. This will help to ensure that you do not spend too much time on the context and background before getting to the meat of your topic. [7] X Research source

• For example, in a speech about ending animal testing for cosmetics, you might start with a point about how animal testing is cruel, then explain that it is unnecessary, and then talk about the alternatives to animal testing that make it obsolete.

• For example, if you are about to cover the concept of delayed onset muscle soreness (also known as DOMS), then explain what it is in a nutshell first, then go into more detail about it and how it relates to your point, then end that section of your speech with a brief summary of the main point you are trying to make.

• In that moment
• The following week

• For example, if you have just described the effects of global warming on the polar bear population, conclude your speech by telling your audience about non-profit organizations that are working to protect the environment and the polar bear population.
• If you have just shared your weight loss story to motivate your audience, tell them what they can do to start their own weight loss journey and share resources that you found helpful.

Making Your Speech More Engaging

• For example, instead of saying, “Achieving and maintaining a healthy body weight is the pinnacle of human existence because it enables you to accomplish physical feats that boost your confidence and give you a sense of accomplishment,” say, “A healthy body weight allows you to do more physically, and this may make you happier overall.”
• Keep in mind that it is also important to vary your sentence structure. You can include a longer sentence once or twice per page to add variety to your speech. Just avoid using lots of long sentences in your speech. [15] X Research source

• For example, if you are giving a speech for a group of sales associates who are trying to increase sales of a new product called “Synergy,” then you might repeat a simple phrase to that effect, such as “Tell your customers about Synergy,” or you could simply say, “Synergy” a few times during your speech to remind your audience of this product.
• If you are writing a motivational speech about how running can help people to overcome emotional hurdles, then you might repeat a phrase in your speech to emphasize this idea, such as, “Run through the pain.”

• For example, if you are giving a speech about moose mating patterns, 2 numbers that show the decline in the moose population over a 50 year period may be a striking addition to your speech. However, sharing a complex set of moose population statistics would be less compelling and possibly even confusing to your audience.
• Choose quotes that are easy to follow and make sure that you explain how each quote you use supports to your argument. Try to stick with quotes that use simple language and take up no more than 2 lines on your page.

• For example, when describing your love of food in a motivational speech about becoming a chef, you might decide to include a joke and say something like, “I always wanted to become a chef, ever since I was a little kid and I discovered that people actually make donuts and they don’t just randomly fall from the sky.”

• Avoid relying on the slides to make the speech for you. You will still need to deliver your speech in an engaging manner. Only use the slides as a complement to your words.

• Make sure to read your speech out loud when you review it! This will help you to determine if it sounds natural and if there are any awkward sections that you can cut, smooth out, or explain more clearly. [22] X Research source

Expert Q&A

Reader Videos

Share a quick video tip and help bring articles to life with your friendly advice. Your insights could make a real difference and help millions of people!

You Might Also Like

• ↑ http://teacher.scholastic.com/writewit/speech/tips.htm
• ↑ Patrick Muñoz. Voice & Speech Coach. Expert Interview. 12 November 2019.
• ↑ https://www.write-out-loud.com/howtowritespeech.html
• ↑ https://www.academicwritingsuccess.com/7-sensational-essay-hooks/
• ↑ https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/speeches/
• ↑ https://www.unr.edu/writing-speaking-center/student-resources/writing-speaking-resources/speech-introductions
• ↑ https://pac.org/content/speechwriting-101-writing-effective-speech

About This Article

To write a speech, start off with an attention-grabbing statement, like "Before I begin my speech, I have something important to say." Once you've gotten everyone's attention, move on to your strongest argument or point first since that's what audiences will remember the most. Use transitions throughout your speech, like "This brings us back to the bigger picture," so the audience doesn't get lost. To conclude your speech, restate the key points and leave your audience with a question or something to think about. To learn how to edit your first draft, scroll down! Did this summary help you? Yes No

• Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

May 8, 2018

Did this article help you?

Anna Machok

Aug 9, 2016

Apr 27, 2017

Stephanie Johnson

Apr 24, 2018

Sundus Ghayas

Apr 9, 2016

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell or Share My Info
• Not Selling Info

wikiHow Tech Help Pro:

Develop the tech skills you need for work and life

How to Write a Speech Your Audience Remembers

by Sue Weems | 0 comments

Free Book Planning Course!  Sign up for our 3-part book planning course and make your book writing easy . It expires soon, though, so don’t wait.  Sign up here before the deadline!

I’ve had some additional duties this year that have required me to add speech writing to my list of skills. I didn’t realize how much it would improve my writing in general. Even if you run in fear from public speaking (you’re in good company—95% of adults say it’s their number one fear), try these techniques for how to write a speech and see if speech writing helps your writing too!

I’ve received a couple big awards at work lately, and as a result, I’ve been called to speak at events. For an introvert like me, public speaking doesn’t come naturally. I’d much rather type out my words and publish them for an audience to read.

But writing a speech is great practice regardless of whether or not you’ll ever deliver it, because it forces you to think about audience, story, and message in a compressed format. Here’s what I’ve been practicing in my own speeches.

When I’m writing fiction, I tend to think about one ideal reader. In speechwriting, I’ve had to broaden how I think about audience.

Who will be there? What problems are they facing? What questions do they have? And most importantly, how can I speak effectively into those problems or questions with my message?

Knowing your audience is as important as knowing your readers. Your audience and readers have expectations. You make a promise by stepping to that podium that you will connect with them, even if it is only for a few minutes.

We’ve all sat through a boring or ineffective talk, lecture, or speech. What went wrong? It usually has to do with the connection of the message with the audience. If I don’t find it relevant, I’m going to have a hard time paying attention.

If you don’t know your audience, you’ll struggle to make that connection.

I attended a rally this week where we stood for several hours as people made speeches. There were probably ten speakers, and most were very good. They were clear and spoke into the concerns of the audience.

But two days later, I can only remember the specifics of two. You know what they had in common? Both told a story.

Our brains are hard-wired for story. A story is simply a person who wants something and has to overcome obstacles to get it; it’s transformation after struggle. A story uses clear imagery that stays with the audience long after the event.

Think about Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech, with the line, “America has given the Negro people a bad check which has come back marked ‘insufficient funds,'” or where he offers the image of children holding hands as the dream. His storytelling and imagery perfectly aligned with his message. It still resonates today.

If you’re writing a speech, find or write a story that illustrates your point and build your message from it. Get specific and use imagery that will stick in the audience's mind.

In fiction, the message is the theme. Sometimes it is explicitly stated, but often theme is implied. In a speech, the message has to be clear, succinct, and unambiguous, especially if it is to be memorable.

This can be the most challenging part of public speaking. It’s easy to say a lot of words. It’s hard to revise and limit yourself to speaking only what is needed.

I recently attended a training where we wrote out our message on paper. They gave us five or six minutes and I easily had a page.

Then, we had to work with a partner. Each of us read our message and then our partner condensed what we’d said into a sentence. Suddenly, I realized which parts of my message were off.

By the end of the exercise, we each had our message down to six words—enough for a quick elevator pitch that grabbed someone’s attention.

As I reflected on the training, I realized it was the writing process in action. First draft, feedback, revision, feedback, more cutting, feedback, and polishing until crystal clear.

Strengthen Your Communication

I can’t end without sharing Nancy Duarte’s fascinating talk on the shared structure of great speeches. She studied the structure of famous speeches like Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech and Steve Jobs’s speech when he introduced the iPhone and found they used similar structures. Well worth a listen.

Whether you have a speech to write for yourself or for a character in your book, I hope you’ll practice these strategies and find they strengthen your writing like they have mine.

What are your best tips for speech writing? Share in the comments .

Your character is given an award and asked to make a speech in front of a crowd. What's the award, and what does your character say? Keeping the tips above in mind, write your character's speech.

Take fifteen minutes to write. When you're done, share your writing in the comments , and be sure to leave feedback for your fellow writers!

Sue Weems is a writer, teacher, and traveler with an advanced degree in (mostly fictional) revenge. When she’s not rationalizing her love for parentheses (and dramatic asides), she follows a sailor around the globe with their four children, two dogs, and an impossibly tall stack of books to read. You can read more of her writing tips on her website .

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

Submit Comment

Join over 450,000 readers who are saying YES to practice. You’ll also get a free copy of our eBook 14 Prompts :

Popular Resources

Book Writing Tips & Guides Creativity & Inspiration Tips Writing Prompts Grammar & Vocab Resources Best Book Writing Software ProWritingAid Review Writing Teacher Resources Publisher Rocket Review Scrivener Review Gifts for Writers

Books By Our Writers

You've got it! Just us where to send your guide.

Enter your email to get our free 10-step guide to becoming a writer.

You've got it! Just us where to send your book.

Enter your first name and email to get our free book, 14 Prompts.

Want to Get Published?

Enter your email to get our free interactive checklist to writing and publishing a book.

How to Write and Structure a Persuasive Speech

• Homework Tips
• Learning Styles & Skills
• Study Methods
• Time Management
• Private School
• College Admissions
• College Life
• Graduate School
• Business School
• Distance Learning
• M.Ed., Education Administration, University of Georgia
• B.A., History, Armstrong State University

The purpose of a persuasive speech is to convince your audience to agree with an idea or opinion that you present. First, you'll need to choose a side on a controversial topic, then you will write a speech to explain your position, and convince the audience to agree with you.

You can produce an effective persuasive speech if you structure your argument as a solution to a problem. Your first job as a speaker is to convince your audience that a particular problem is important to them, and then you must convince them that you have the solution to make things better.

Note: You don't have to address a real problem. Any need can work as the problem. For example, you could consider the lack of a pet, the need to wash one's hands, or the need to pick a particular sport to play as the "problem."

As an example, let's imagine that you have chosen "Getting Up Early" as your persuasion topic. Your goal will be to persuade classmates to get themselves out of bed an hour earlier every morning. In this instance, the problem could be summed up as "morning chaos."

A standard speech format has an introduction with a great hook statement, three main points, and a summary. Your persuasive speech will be a tailored version of this format.

Before you write the text of your speech, you should sketch an outline that includes your hook statement and three main points.

Writing the Text

The introduction of your speech must be compelling because your audience will make up their minds within a few minutes whether or not they are interested in your topic.

Before you write the full body you should come up with a greeting. Your greeting can be as simple as "Good morning everyone. My name is Frank."

After your greeting, you will offer a hook to capture attention. A hook sentence for the "morning chaos" speech could be a question:

• How many times have you been late for school?
• Does your day begin with shouts and arguments?
• Have you ever missed the bus?

Or your hook could be a statistic or surprising statement:

• More than 50 percent of high school students skip breakfast because they just don't have time to eat.
• Tardy kids drop out of school more often than punctual kids.

Once you have the attention of your audience, follow through to define the topic/problem and introduce your solution. Here's an example of what you might have so far:

Good afternoon, class. Some of you know me, but some of you may not. My name is Frank Godfrey, and I have a question for you. Does your day begin with shouts and arguments? Do you go to school in a bad mood because you've been yelled at, or because you argued with your parent? The chaos you experience in the morning can bring you down and affect your performance at school.

Add the solution:

You can improve your mood and your school performance by adding more time to your morning schedule. You can accomplish this by setting your alarm clock to go off one hour earlier.

Your next task will be to write the body, which will contain the three main points you've come up with to argue your position. Each point will be followed by supporting evidence or anecdotes, and each body paragraph will need to end with a transition statement that leads to the next segment. Here is a sample of three main statements:

• Bad moods caused by morning chaos will affect your workday performance.
• If you skip breakfast to buy time, you're making a harmful health decision.
• (Ending on a cheerful note) You'll enjoy a boost to your self-esteem when you reduce the morning chaos.

After you write three body paragraphs with strong transition statements that make your speech flow, you are ready to work on your summary.

Your summary will re-emphasize your argument and restate your points in slightly different language. This can be a little tricky. You don't want to sound repetitive but will need to repeat what you have said. Find a way to reword the same main points.

Finally, you must make sure to write a clear final sentence or passage to keep yourself from stammering at the end or fading off in an awkward moment. A few examples of graceful exits:

• We all like to sleep. It's hard to get up some mornings, but rest assured that the reward is well worth the effort.
• If you follow these guidelines and make the effort to get up a little bit earlier every day, you'll reap rewards in your home life and on your report card.

Tips for Writing Your Speech

• Don't be confrontational in your argument. You don't need to put down the other side; just convince your audience that your position is correct by using positive assertions.
• Use simple statistics. Don't overwhelm your audience with confusing numbers.
• Don't complicate your speech by going outside the standard "three points" format. While it might seem simplistic, it is a tried and true method for presenting to an audience who is listening as opposed to reading.
• How to Write a Persuasive Essay
• 5 Tips on How to Write a Speech Essay
• Tips on How to Write an Argumentative Essay
• Writing an Opinion Essay
• How To Write an Essay
• 5 Steps to Writing a Position Paper
• How to Structure an Essay
• Ethos, Logos, Pathos for Persuasion
• What Is Expository Writing?
• Audience Analysis in Speech and Composition
• Definition and Examples of Analysis in Composition
• 100 Persuasive Speech Topics for Students
• What an Essay Is and How to Write One
• How to Write a Good Thesis Statement
• 100 Persuasive Essay Topics
• How to Write a Graduation Speech as Valedictorian

Places on our 2024 summer school are filling fast. Don’t miss out. Enrol now to avoid disappointment

• 11 Tips for Giving a Great Speech

You might also enjoy…

• How to Survive Your First Academic Conference: 10 Vital Tips
• 6 Ways to Overcome Writer’s Block

Chances are you’ll be asked to give speeches or presentations in classes at school. If you get involved in volunteer groups, brief speeches to open events or thank participants are a must. Then there are the speeches at events such as weddings, as well as speeches that you might have to give in the workplace. That amounts to the average person being required to give quite a lot of speeches, even if they don’t get involved in an area such as politics where the ability to give a good speech becomes even more important. You might also have suffered through quite a number of bad speeches from other people – whether that’s at family events where the microphone squeaks the whole way through or a school presentation where the headteacher can’t quite make the jokes work. If you don’t want to inflict the same sort of experience on others, here are our top tips for giving a great speech.

1. Practise your microphone technique

2. Keep it short

Particularly at something like a party or a wedding, no one will be unhappy if your speech runs a little short; it’ll just give them more time to investigate the canapés. If you are giving a speech for a class in school, and it’ll be assessed, you need to prioritise keeping it within the required time limits. But even under these circumstances, if you’ve been tasked – say – with giving a 10-15 minute speech, it’s usually better to come in nearer the 10 than the 15 minute mark. Put simply, even if your speech is terrible, your audience can probably tolerate it for 10 minutes. Much longer, and they’ll be struggling. This shouldn’t limit what you can cover; in the film Up , the whole of Carl and Ellie’s heartbreaking love story is told in under 12 minutes. Do you really need longer to make your points? Achieve brevity by writing out the speech you would give if you had all the time in the world, and then cut anything that seems extraneous or boring.

3. Consider what your audience wants to hear

If you are giving a speech in class because it’s your assignment, what your audience wants to hear is likely to be “the bell ringing for lunch”; you can’t help them there. But under other circumstances, consider what your audience wants to hear and what you want to say, and strive for there to be as much overlap as possible. In the context of a political speech, for instance, what you want to say might be why your party should receive votes; what your audience wants to hear is what your party would do for them, if they won power. Hopefully it should be possible to write a speech that meets both sets of needs, rather than focusing solely on whatever it is that you want to say and leaving your audience disappointed.

4. Pick a theme and stick to it

Here’s a goal for giving a speech: someone sitting near the back, who’s messing around on their phone for at least two-thirds of it and focusing mainly on how long it will be until lunch, should nonetheless be able to give a reasonably accurate answer to the question, “what was it about?” If you’re supposed to be giving a speech in defence of the nuclear deterrent, for example, both the topic and your position on it should be clearly identifiable. This means – to stick with the nuclear deterrent example – not talking for a while about jobs, and then the wider economy, and then the North-South divide, and then Scottish independence, and then Ukraine with a brief digression into South Ossetia before rounding off by squeaking out “and that’s why we should renew Trident!” seconds before you run out of time – no matter how relevant that cornucopia of topics may feel (and they are all relevant, albeit tenuously). It means that even if you do have to take a while to explain a more complex idea, you need to be concise, and bring it back to your theme as quickly as you can.

5. Speak slowly

Most people speak more quickly than they realise when they’re on stage, especially if they’re nervous. But no one will be able to follow your speech if you’re jabbering it out. Thankfully, this one is easy to fix with a little effort and practise. First of all, figure out how quickly you’re actually speaking: do a word count for your speech and then time yourself saying it. A fast speaker will speak at maybe 160 words per minute, a slow speaker at 100 wpm and an average speaker at 130 wpm. For a formal speech, you want to be speaking on the slow side. While this will vary by culture and environment, 120 wpm is a reasonable target to aim for; slow enough that everyone should be able to understand you, and fast enough that you hopefully won’t be sending them to sleep.

6. Tell a couple of jokes

This is a tricky tip because there are lots of pitfalls in the world of telling jokes. For instance, there’s the temptation to include an in-joke that three of your friends will understand and find hilarious, that is utterly baffling to everyone else in the room. Avoid this – if you include any jokes, witty references or anything along those lines, make sure they are accessible to everyone present. All the same, if you can manage a joke or two, it can be a useful way to break up a speech and retain the audience’s interest. A little self-deprecation (not too much!) or the use of classic joke formats such as “the scene was chaotic; it looked as if a bomb had hit and we didn’t know where to start on repairs – but that’s enough about the hen party…” work nicely even if you’re not very confident. Don’t turn it into a stand-up comedy sketch if you’re not a comedian, don’t wait for ages for laughter that’s not showing up, and don’t make jokes at the expense of anyone who you don’t know for sure can take it.

7. Don’t be afraid to repeat yourself if you need to

If you follow US or UK politics at all, you’ve probably heard some of these phrases recently: take back control, make America great again, long-term economic plan, son of a bus driver. Three of these have already led the party or people they’re associated with to electoral victory; the fourth remains to be seen. To take the ‘son of a bus driver’ as an example, this refers to Sadiq Khan, now Mayor of London. There can be hardly anyone in London who doesn’t know what their Mayor’s dad did for a living. Meanwhile, many of them probably can’t remember his rival Zac Goldsmith’s name, let alone anything he said during the campaign. The point is that repetition works. In pursuit of point 4, if you want people to remember your key theme, you’re going to have to say it more than once. Don’t assume that everyone will have paid attention to everything you’ve said, unless you’re in a classroom setting where they’ll get told off if they don’t.

8. Only use the visual aids you need

This tip applies to two things: PowerPoints and notes. If you can do without either (and your assignment allows it), then do. Every time you’re glancing over your notes or up at the screen, fiddling with the laptop to get the slide to move on, fighting with a video that isn’t working or struggling to read your own handwriting, is time that you’re not spending engaging with your audience. A well-written, clear speech delivered without notes is always going to be better than someone awkwardly reading aloud the bullet points on their PowerPoint slides. If you must do a presentation – for instance, because there are photos that need to be included – have as little text on it as possible, preferably none. That way, if there are people at the back who can’t really see the screen through the sea of heads in front of them, they’ll still be able to follow what you’re saying.

9. Get a friend to check for awkward mannerisms

Mannerisms that are entirely fine in normal life become awkward and strange when you’re speaking in public. Perhaps you’re inclined to fiddle with your hair or your cuffs, you rock back and forth on the balls of your feet, or you have a habit of reaching your hand to your cheek when you’re talking. No one would notice in everyday conversation, but when you’re on a stage, it’ll become all they’ll see. Some of this is easily avoidable – for instance, if you have long hair that you’re inclined to twirl or otherwise fiddle with, tie it up. For other mannerisms, get the critical friend who helped you sort out your microphone technique to tell you what they are, and do your best to suppress the more annoying ones.

10. Look around the room

Talking about eye contact usually has the effect of making normal eye contact a lot harder, and so does giving a speech. All of a sudden, you’re up on stage, and you have no idea what a normal way to look at a group of people is. Some speakers deal with this by picking a point in the middle distance and speaking to it; others by picking a particular person near to the back and addressing their entire speech at them. This is obviously no fun for that person, who probably spends the whole thing feeling extremely uncomfortable, but it’s not too weird for everyone else. Better still, though, if you can manage it, is to look slowly and steadily around the room, trying to make eye contact with a decent range of people, before returning to the middle distance for a while, rinse and repeat. This needs to be slow and steady, or you give the impression that you’ve just smelled smoke and are casting about for a fire exit before the stampede beings.

11. Don’t be scared of a good reaction

If your speech is genuinely engaging, funny, inspiring or any of the other things you might hope it would be, your audience will react to it. There might be laughter, or applause, or even a bit of cheering depending on the setting. This can be daunting because when you’re practising your speech in front of your bedroom mirror, there’s no way to prepare for it. And it’s where even the best speakers can go wrong, by launching straight into what they were going to say next without waiting for the laughter or applause to stop, or by looking painfully awkward while it’s going on. It’s a pitfall that’s mostly solved by being aware it might happen. If your audience is applauding you or otherwise reacting well, it’s OK to smile, look up, wait for them to stop and then keep going with your speech – it’s as simple as that. You could even throw in a “thank you” before you continue in the knowledge that it’s all going well. Image credits: microphones ; audience ; boy with microphone ; clock ; winding road ; enjoy a joke ; sticky notes ; 

Improve your practice.

Enhance your soft skills with a range of award-winning courses.

Persuasive Speech Outline, with Examples

March 17, 2021 - Gini Beqiri

A persuasive speech is a speech that is given with the intention of convincing the audience to believe or do something. This could be virtually anything – voting, organ donation, recycling, and so on.

A successful persuasive speech effectively convinces the audience to your point of view, providing you come across as trustworthy and knowledgeable about the topic you’re discussing.

So, how do you start convincing a group of strangers to share your opinion? And how do you connect with them enough to earn their trust?

Topics for your persuasive speech

We’ve made a list of persuasive speech topics you could use next time you’re asked to give one. The topics are thought-provoking and things which many people have an opinion on.

When using any of our persuasive speech ideas, make sure you have a solid knowledge about the topic you’re speaking about – and make sure you discuss counter arguments too.

Here are a few ideas to get you started:

• All school children should wear a uniform
• Facebook is making people more socially anxious
• It should be illegal to drive over the age of 80
• Lying isn’t always wrong
• The case for organ donation

Read our full list of  75 persuasive speech topics and ideas .

Preparation: Consider your audience

As with any speech, preparation is crucial. Before you put pen to paper, think about what you want to achieve with your speech. This will help organise your thoughts as you realistically can only cover 2-4 main points before your  audience get bored .

It’s also useful to think about who your audience are at this point. If they are unlikely to know much about your topic then you’ll need to factor in context of your topic when planning the structure and length of your speech. You should also consider their:

• Cultural or religious backgrounds
• Shared concerns, attitudes and problems
• Shared interests, beliefs and hopes
• Baseline attitude – are they hostile, neutral, or open to change?

The factors above will all determine the approach you take to writing your speech. For example, if your topic is about childhood obesity, you could begin with a story about your own children or a shared concern every parent has. This would suit an audience who are more likely to be parents than young professionals who have only just left college.

Remember the 3 main approaches to persuade others

There are three main approaches used to persuade others:

The ethos approach appeals to the audience’s ethics and morals, such as what is the ‘right thing’ to do for humanity, saving the environment, etc.

Pathos persuasion is when you appeal to the audience’s emotions, such as when you  tell a story  that makes them the main character in a difficult situation.

The logos approach to giving a persuasive speech is when you appeal to the audience’s logic – ie. your speech is essentially more driven by facts and logic. The benefit of this technique is that your point of view becomes virtually indisputable because you make the audience feel that only your view is the logical one.

• Ethos, Pathos, Logos: 3 Pillars of Public Speaking and Persuasion

Ideas for your persuasive speech outline

1. structure of your persuasive speech.

The opening and closing of speech are the most important. Consider these carefully when thinking about your persuasive speech outline. A  strong opening  ensures you have the audience’s attention from the start and gives them a positive first impression of you.

You’ll want to  start with a strong opening  such as an attention grabbing statement, statistic of fact. These are usually dramatic or shocking, such as:

Sadly, in the next 18 minutes when I do our chat, four Americans that are alive will be dead from the food that they eat – Jamie Oliver

Another good way of starting a persuasive speech is to include your audience in the picture you’re trying to paint. By making them part of the story, you’re embedding an emotional connection between them and your speech.

You could do this in a more toned-down way by talking about something you know that your audience has in common with you. It’s also helpful at this point to include your credentials in a persuasive speech to gain your audience’s trust.

Obama would spend hours with his team working on the opening and closing statements of his speech.

2. Stating your argument

You should  pick between 2 and 4 themes  to discuss during your speech so that you have enough time to explain your viewpoint and convince your audience to the same way of thinking.

It’s important that each of your points transitions seamlessly into the next one so that your speech has a logical flow. Work on your  connecting sentences  between each of your themes so that your speech is easy to listen to.

Your argument should be backed up by objective research and not purely your subjective opinion. Use examples, analogies, and stories so that the audience can relate more easily to your topic, and therefore are more likely to be persuaded to your point of view.

3. Addressing counter-arguments

Any balanced theory or thought  addresses and disputes counter-arguments  made against it. By addressing these, you’ll strengthen your persuasive speech by refuting your audience’s objections and you’ll show that you are knowledgeable to other thoughts on the topic.

When describing an opposing point of view, don’t explain it in a bias way – explain it in the same way someone who holds that view would describe it. That way, you won’t irritate members of your audience who disagree with you and you’ll show that you’ve reached your point of view through reasoned judgement. Simply identify any counter-argument and pose explanations against them.

• Complete Guide to Debating

4. Closing your speech

Your closing line of your speech is your last chance to convince your audience about what you’re saying. It’s also most likely to be the sentence they remember most about your entire speech so make sure it’s a good one!

The most effective persuasive speeches end  with a  call to action . For example, if you’ve been speaking about organ donation, your call to action might be asking the audience to register as donors.

Practice answering AI questions on your speech and get  feedback on your performance .

If audience members ask you questions, make sure you listen carefully and respectfully to the full question. Don’t interject in the middle of a question or become defensive.

You should show that you have carefully considered their viewpoint and refute it in an objective way (if you have opposing opinions). Ensure you remain patient, friendly and polite at all times.

Example 1: Persuasive speech outline

This example is from the Kentucky Community and Technical College.

Specific purpose

To persuade my audience to start walking in order to improve their health.

Central idea

Regular walking can improve both your mental and physical health.

Introduction

Let’s be honest, we lead an easy life: automatic dishwashers, riding lawnmowers, T.V. remote controls, automatic garage door openers, power screwdrivers, bread machines, electric pencil sharpeners, etc., etc. etc. We live in a time-saving, energy-saving, convenient society. It’s a wonderful life. Or is it?

Continue reading

Example 2: Persuasive speech

Tips for delivering your persuasive speech

• Practice, practice, and practice some more . Record yourself speaking and listen for any nervous habits you have such as a nervous laugh, excessive use of filler words, or speaking too quickly.
• Show confident body language . Stand with your legs hip width apart with your shoulders centrally aligned. Ground your feet to the floor and place your hands beside your body so that hand gestures come freely. Your audience won’t be convinced about your argument if you don’t sound confident in it. Find out more about  confident body language here .
• Don’t memorise your speech word-for-word  or read off a script. If you memorise your persuasive speech, you’ll sound less authentic and panic if you lose your place. Similarly, if you read off a script you won’t sound genuine and you won’t be able to connect with the audience by  making eye contact . In turn, you’ll come across as less trustworthy and knowledgeable. You could simply remember your key points instead, or learn your opening and closing sentences.
• Remember to use facial expressions when storytelling  – they make you more relatable. By sharing a personal story you’ll more likely be speaking your truth which will help you build a connection with the audience too. Facial expressions help bring your story to life and transport the audience into your situation.
• Keep your speech as concise as possible . When practicing the delivery, see if you can edit it to have the same meaning but in a more succinct way. This will keep the audience engaged.

The best persuasive speech ideas are those that spark a level of controversy. However, a public speech is not the time to express an opinion that is considered outside the norm. If in doubt, play it safe and stick to topics that divide opinions about 50-50.

Bear in mind who your audience are and plan your persuasive speech outline accordingly, with researched evidence to support your argument. It’s important to consider counter-arguments to show that you are knowledgeable about the topic as a whole and not bias towards your own line of thought.

Speech Writing

Introduction Speech

Introduction Speech - A Step-by-Step Guide & Examples

11 min read

People also read

The 10 Key Steps for Perfect Speech Writing

Understanding the Speech Format - Detailed Guide & Examples

How to Start A Speech - 13 Interesting Ideas & Examples

20+ Outstanding Speech Examples for Your Help

Common Types of Speeches that Every Speechwriter Should Know

Good Impromptu Speech Topics for Students

Entertaining Speech Topics for Your Next Debate

How to Write a Special Occasion Speech: Types, Tips, and Examples

How to Write the Best Acceptance Speech for Your Audience?

Presentation Speech - An Ultimate Writing Guide

Commemorative Speech - Writing Guide, Outline & Examples

Farewell Speech - Writing Tips & Examples

How to Write an Extemporaneous Speech? A Step-by-Step Guide

Crafting the Perfect Graduation Speech: A Guide with Examples

Introduction speeches are all around us. Whenever we meet a new group of people in formal settings, we have to introduce ourselves. That’s what an introduction speech is all about.

When you're facing a formal audience, your ability to deliver a compelling introductory speech can make a lot of difference. With the correct approach, you can build credibility and connections.

In this blog, we'll take you through the steps to craft an impactful introduction speech. You’ll also get examples and valuable tips to ensure you leave a lasting impression.

So, let's dive in!

• 1. What is an Introduction Speech? 
• 2. How to Write an Introduction Speech?
• 3. Introduction Speech Outline
• 4. 7 Ways to Open an Introduction Speech
• 5. Introduction Speech Example
• 6. Introduction Speech Ideas
• 7. Tips for Delivering the Best Introduction Speech

What is an Introduction Speech? 

An introduction speech, or introductory address, is a brief presentation at the beginning of an event or public speaking engagement. Its primary purpose is to establish a connection with the audience and to introduce yourself or the main speaker.

This type of speech is commonly used in a variety of situations, including:

• Public Speaking: When you step onto a stage to address a large crowd, you start with an introduction to establish your presence and engage the audience.
• Networking Events: When meeting new people in professional or social settings, an effective introduction speech can help you make a memorable first impression.
• Formal Gatherings: From weddings to conferences, introductions set the tone for the event and create a warm and welcoming atmosphere.

In other words, an introduction speech is simply a way to introduce yourself to a crowd of people. 

How to Write an Introduction Speech?

Before you can just go and deliver your speech, you need to prepare for it. Writing a speech helps you organize your ideas and prepare your speech effectively. 

Here is how to introduce yourself in a speech.

• Know Your Audience

Understanding your audience is crucial. Consider their interests, backgrounds, and expectations to tailor your introduction accordingly.

For instance, the audience members could be your colleagues, new classmates, or various guests depending on the occasion. Understanding your audience will help you decide what they are expecting from you as a speaker.

• Start with a Hook

Begin with a captivating opening line that grabs your audience's attention. This could be a surprising fact, a relevant quote, or a thought-provoking question about yourself or the occasion.

• Introduce Yourself

Introduce yourself to the audience. State your name, occupation, or other details relevant to the occasion. You should mention the reason for your speech clearly. It will build your credibility and give the readers reasons to stay with you and read your speech.

• Keep It Concise

So how long is an introduction speech?

Introduction speeches should be brief and to the point. Aim for around 1-2 minutes in most cases. Avoid overloading the introduction with excessive details.

• Highlight Key Points

Mention the most important information that establishes the speaker's credibility or your own qualifications. Write down any relevant achievements, expertise, or credentials to include in your speech. Encourage the audience to connect with you using relatable anecdotes or common interests.

• Rehearse and Edit

Practice your introduction speech to ensure it flows smoothly and stays within the time frame. Edit out any unnecessary information, ensuring it's concise and impactful.

• Tailor for the Occasion

Adjust the tone and content of your introduction speech to match the formality and purpose of the event. What works for a business conference may not be suitable for a casual gathering.

Introduction Speech Outline

To assist you in creating a structured and effective introduction speech, here's a simple outline that you can follow:

Here is an example outline for a self-introduction speech.

Outline for Self-Introduction Speech

7 Ways to Open an Introduction Speech

You can start your introduction speech as most people do:

“Hello everyone, my name is _____. I will talk about _____. Thank you so much for having me. So first of all _______”

However, this is the fastest way to make your audience lose interest. Instead, you should start by captivating your audience’s interest. Here are 7 ways to do that:

• Quote  

Start with a thought-provoking quote that relates to your topic or the occasion. E.g. "Mahatma Gandhi once said, 'You must be the change you want to see in the world."

• Anecdote or Story

Begin with a brief, relevant anecdote or story that draws the audience in. It could be a story about yourself or any catchy anecdote to begin the flow of your speech.

Pose a rhetorical question to engage the audience's curiosity and involvement. For example, "Have you ever wondered what it would be like to travel back in time, to experience a moment in history?”

• Statistic or Fact

Share a surprising statistic or interesting fact that underscores the significance of your speech. E.g. “Did you know that as of today, over 60% of the world's population has access to the internet?”

• “What If” Scenario

Paint a vivid "What if" scenario that relates to your topic, sparking the audience's imagination and curiosity. For example, "What if I told you that a single decision today could change the course of your life forever?"

• Ignite Imagination  

Encourage the audience to envision a scenario related to your topic. For instance, "Imagine a world where clean energy powers everything around us, reducing our carbon footprint to almost zero."

Start your introduction speech with a moment of silence, allowing the audience to focus and anticipate your message. This can be especially powerful in creating a sense of suspense and intrigue.

Introduction Speech Example

To help you understand how to put these ideas into practice, here are the introduction speech examples for different scenarios.

Introduction Speech Writing Sample

Short Introduction Speech Sample

Self Introduction Speech for College Students

Introduction Speech about Yourself

Student Presentation Introduction Speech Script

Teacher Introduction Speech

New Employee Self Introduction Speech

Introduction Speech for Chief Guest

Moreover, here is a video example of a self introduction. Watch it to understand how you should deliver your speech:

Want to read examples for other kinds of speeches? Find the best speeches at our blog about speech examples !

Introduction Speech Ideas

So now that you’ve understood what an introduction speech is, you may want to write one of your own. So what should you talk about?

The following are some ideas to start an introduction speech for a presentation, meeting, or social gathering in an engaging way. 

• Personal Story: Share a brief personal story or an experience that has shaped you, introducing yourself on a deeper level.
• Professional Background: Introduce yourself by highlighting your professional background, including your career achievements and expertise.
• Hobby or Passion: Discuss a hobby or passion that you're enthusiastic about, offering insights into your interests and what drives you.
• Volunteer Work: Introduce yourself by discussing your involvement in volunteer work or community service, demonstrating your commitment to making a difference.
• Travel Adventures: Share anecdotes from your travel adventures, giving the audience a glimpse into your love for exploring new places and cultures.
• Books or Literature: Provide an introduction related to a favorite book, author, or literary work, revealing your literary interests.
• Achievements and Milestones: Highlight significant achievements and milestones in your life or career to introduce yourself with an impressive track record.
• Cultural Heritage: Explore your cultural heritage and its influence on your identity, fostering a sense of cultural understanding.
• Social or Environmental Cause: Discuss your dedication to a particular social or environmental cause, inviting the audience to join you in your mission.
• Future Aspirations: Share your future goals and aspirations, offering a glimpse into what you hope to achieve in your personal or professional life.

You can deliver engaging speeches on all kinds of topics. Here is a list of entertaining speech topics to get inspiration.

Tips for Delivering the Best Introduction Speech

Here are some tips for you to write a perfect introduction speech in no time. 

Now that you know how to write an effective introduction speech, let's focus on the delivery. The way you present your introduction is just as important as the content itself. 

Here are some valuable tips to ensure you deliver a better introduction speech:

• Maintain Eye Contact 

Make eye contact with the audience to establish a connection. This shows confidence and engages your listeners.

• Use Appropriate Body Language 

Your body language should convey confidence and warmth. Stand or sit up straight, use open gestures, and avoid fidgeting.

• Mind Your Pace

Speak at a moderate pace, avoiding rapid speech. A well-paced speech is easier to follow and more engaging.

• Avoid Filler Words

Minimize the use of filler words such as "um," "uh," and "like." They can be distracting and detract from your message.

• Be Enthusiastic

Convey enthusiasm about the topic or the speaker. Your energy can be contagious and inspire the audience's interest.

• Practice, Practice, Practice

Rehearse your speech multiple times. Practice in front of a mirror, record yourself, or seek feedback from others.

• Be Mindful of Time

Stay within the allocated time for your introduction. Going too long can make your speech too boring for the audience.

• Engage the Audience

Encourage the audience's participation. You could do that by asking rhetorical questions, involving them in a brief activity, or sharing relatable anecdotes.

Mistakes to Avoid in an Introduction Speech

While crafting and delivering an introduction speech, it's important to be aware of common pitfalls that can diminish its effectiveness. Avoiding these mistakes will help you create a more engaging and memorable introduction. 

Here are some key mistakes to steer clear of:

• Rambling On

One of the most common mistakes is making the introduction too long. Keep it concise and to the point. The purpose is to set the stage, not steal the spotlight.

• Lack of Preparation

Failing to prepare adequately can lead to stumbling, awkward pauses, or losing your train of thought. Rehearse your introduction to build confidence.

• Using Jargon or Complex Language

Avoid using technical jargon or complex language that may confuse the audience. Your introduction should be easily understood by everyone.

• Being Too Generic

A generic or uninspiring introduction can set a lackluster tone. Ensure your introduction is tailored to the event and speaker, making it more engaging.

• Using Inappropriate Humor

Be cautious with humor, as it can easily backfire. Avoid inappropriate or potentially offensive jokes that could alienate the audience.

• Not Tailoring to the Occasion

An introduction should be tailored to the specific event's formality and purpose. A one-size-fits-all approach may not work in all situations.

To Conclude,

An introduction speech is more than just a formality. It's an opportunity to engage, inspire, and connect with your audience in a meaningful way. 

With the help of this blog, you're well-equipped to shine in various contexts. So, step onto that stage, speak confidently, and captivate your audience from the very first word.

Moreover, you’re not alone in your journey to becoming a confident introducer. If you ever need assistance in preparing your speech, let the experts help you out.

MyPerfectWords.com offers a custom essay service with experienced professionals who can craft tailored introductions, ensuring your speech makes a lasting impact.

Don't hesitate; hire our professional speech writing service to deliver top-quality speeches at your deadline!

Write Essay Within 60 Seconds!

Dr. Barbara is a highly experienced writer and author who holds a Ph.D. degree in public health from an Ivy League school. She has worked in the medical field for many years, conducting extensive research on various health topics. Her writing has been featured in several top-tier publications.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That’s our Job!

Keep reading

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Stop Scripting Your Speeches

• Joel Schwartzberg

Anyone can read a script. Leaders champion their ideas.

While a speaker’s primary goal is to engage and inspire, many communicators are inclined to write out their speeches because they mistakenly believe their goal is  to be perceived as a fantastic speaker or writer . This mindset has nothing to do with getting your point across or doing your job and sends you down a path of performance (“I want to impress you”), not presentation (“I want to convince you”). Writing a full speech is a process that excludes the audience, whereas delivering a speech with limited notes involves and incorporates the audience into the experience. This concept is critical, because humans are more apt to give attention to speakers who seem to, or actually do, demonstrate a sincere interest in them. Speaking spontaneously, with authentic conviction and awareness, signals that you have  something to say  — a point you feel so strongly about that you’re willing to express it personally and out loud. Anyone can read a script. Leaders champion their ideas.

“Don’t worry,” a coaching client once told me shortly after I saw her rehearse her presentation. “I’ll have it completely written and memorized by next week!”

• JS Joel Schwartzberg oversees executive communications for a major national nonprofit, is a professional presentation coach, and is the author of Get to the Point! Sharpen Your Message and Make Your Words Matter and The Language of Leadership: How to Engage and Inspire Your Team . You can find him on LinkedIn and X. TheJoelTruth

Partner Center

Your Ultimate Guide to Writing a Meaningful Wedding Speech

• Lauren is a contributor for The Knot covering topics such as music, cakes, venues and speeches.
• She has been published in a wide array of lifetsyle-oriented publications including SELF and Allure.
• Lauren is a proud graduate of Syracuse University's SI Newhouse School of Public Communication.

Getting asked to speak at a wedding is exciting, but it can also be nerve-wracking, especially since you're not a professional speaker or speechwriter! So, if you're unsure how to write a wedding speech , know you're not alone. Whether you're a member of a wedding party or a parent or sibling of the soon-to-be-married couple, you may be wondering what to say in a wedding speech. However, that's where we come into the picture: Keep reading for a full rundown of wedding speech tips , insight and, last but not least, a fully written example that you can use as a guide. Happy speechwriting!

In this article:

How to Write a Wedding Speech

Wedding speech example, wedding speech tips.

Writing your wedding speech is no easy feat. To help ensure things go as smoothly as possible, we tapped into Renée Dalo, owner of Moxie Bright Events in Los Angeles, California. Below, she shares a step-by-step guide.

Brainstorm a great opening.

To captivate other guests' attention, Daloe recommends taking some time to brainstorm a great opening. For example, she says, "Try to resist saying, 'For those of you who don't know me, I'm Erica's sister, Michelle.'" Instead, skip this entirely in favor of something more fun and creative.

Start with a story.

…but be sure to make it a short one, says Dalo. "Make sure it's relevant to your friendship and/or the couple." When selecting what story to share, the wedding pro recommends sterling clear of any that involve ex-partners—and for that matter, anything negative about the newly married couple. "Even if you think it's funny , she says, "it's not." Instead, think of a special moment or fun memory you shared with the couple. What did it involve? What was so great about it? All of these things are worth considering as you jot down your wedding speech.

Share your well wishes.

After all, what would a wedding speech be if it didn't include some well wishes for the newlyweds? "Make sure to include both people in the couple in your remarks," advises Dalo.

End with a toast.

Cap off your speech on a fun and sentimental note by ending with an actual toast . Dalo recommends this foolproof example: "Please join me in raising a glass to the happy couple. Cheers to X and Y, and best wishes for a lifetime of laughter!" Afterward, go in for a hug with the couple, making for the perfect photo op !

Rehearse away.

After you write your speech down, spend a significant amount of time rehearsing it so that you feel confident and comfortable while giving the actual speech. "Don't try to wing it," says Dalo. "You're going to want to rehearse this [so that] you can be as calm and present as possible."

Still trying to figure out where to start? Don't fret: If you could use some additional assistance writing your wedding speech, consider Provenance , which helps users create personalized, meaningful wedding speeches using AI-powered tools along with real responses to personal questions.

Take the Provenance Toast Builder , for example. Couples can invite those who will be giving wedding speeches—including the father of the bride , mother of the bride , father of the groom , mother of the groom , maid of honor and best man —to use the Toast Builder. Upon being invited to use the platform, these individuals will "get alerted to how long their speech can be," as well as any other important information to mention—or steer clear of. "From there," says Provenance CEO Steven Greitzer, "you can see the status of the speech and the estimated length."

To help get those creative juices flowing, check out the below wedding speech example.

Hi! As Lisa's younger sister—and now maid of honor—I've had the unique privilege of growing up alongside her. Since we're just two years apart, we've been each other's built-in best friends from the start. Like most sisters, we bickered constantly throughout our childhood, hurling insults over clothing, makeup and missing pieces of jewelry: I'll finally admit it, Lisa, I was the one who lost your charm bracelet at summer camp! All kidding aside, I hope I've made it up to you with this epic speech.

When Lisa first met Jay on the train coming home from work (romantic, I know!), we lived together in a tiny one-bedroom apartment in the city, an experience that only brought us closer together. After their first date to their now-favorite pizza place, she came home all giddy—bubbly, smiling, and laughing. She told me that the two of them already planned their next date. I had never seen her so happy. The look in her eyes since that night has not faded, and if I know Jay—which I do!—he will make sure it never will.

Like Lisa, Jay is kind, patient, and compassionate, and this was evident from the first time we met, which was right before his and Lisa's second date. I ran to the door to catch a glimpse of the guy who was slowly but surely stealing my sister's heart. Upon meeting, Jay and I instantly hit it off. He greeted me by name, hugged me, and took the time to sit down and truly get to know me. Less than 10 minutes later, we were already cracking jokes. It was clear to me then that Jay was, without a doubt, my sister's perfect match.

Lisa and Jay, you've set the bar (very) high for all of your friends and family when it comes to relationship goals. The love and commitment you share with each other is inspiring and everlasting. I know Jay will spend the rest of his life making Lisa happy and supporting her through every endeavor—and I know she'll do the same, too.

So, Lisa and Jay, I wish you nothing but a lifetime of love and happiness together. And I'm so excited to have a front-row seat to all that's in store. Everyone, please join me in raising a glass to the newlyweds!

Keep it short and sweet.

According to Dalo, your wedding speech should be "no more than three minutes." She continues, telling The Knot, "Three minutes is a long time, and when you figure in getting up to the mic and then hugging afterward, it's about five minutes total which is ideal." If you go any longer, you run the risk of losing guests' attention and potentially boring them (a no-no in our book!).

Acknowledge both partners.

"A big speech taboo that we see way too often is when the person giving the speech only talks about the partner they're closest with, unintentionally making the other partner feel left out and unimportant," says Greitzer. If you need a helping hand, Greitzer recommends using the Provenance Toast Builder , which offers "thoughtful prompts to encourage you to share why they're both 1) good people and 2) a great match for each other."

Justices Seem Ready to Limit the 2020 Election Case Against Trump

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

• Share full article

Charlie Savage and Alan Feuer

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

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

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

Here are some takeaways.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Not surprisingly, the two sides saw things very differently.

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

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

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

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

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

Both sides found advocates for their positions on the court.

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

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

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

What happens next?

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

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

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

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

Aishvarya Kavi

Reporting from Washington

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Eileen Sullivan contributed reporting.

Advertisement

Adam Liptak

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Abbie VanSickle

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

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

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

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

Charlie Savage

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Alan Feuer and Charlie Savage

Is there such a thing as executive immunity?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What counts as an official act as president?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Noah Weiland and Alan Feuer

Here are the lawyers arguing before the Supreme Court.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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