| ... |
... |
@@ -1,12
+1,0 @@ |
| 1 |
|
-A. Interpretation: The affirmative must only eliminate restrictions on constitutionally protected speech – they cannot fiat or gain offense from removing a speech regulation that’s constitutional. Constitutionally protected speech is limited by exceptions created by the Supreme Court – its protected unless there’s a specific exemption in play. |
| 2 |
|
- |
| 3 |
|
-B. Violation: |
| 4 |
|
-SMU Law Library (http://library.law.smu.edu/Collections/Ellen-K~-~-Solender-Institute/Case-Summaries/Hosty-v~-~-Carter) |
| 5 |
|
-"Student journalists of ... in the case." |
| 6 |
|
- |
| 7 |
|
-C. Standards: |
| 8 |
|
- |
| 9 |
|
-1) Field Context |
| 10 |
|
-2) Limits |
| 11 |
|
- |
| 12 |
|
-paradigm issues |