Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[23]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[36]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[23]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2016-11-21 18:59:28.29
	1	+2016-11-21 18:59:28.0

Caselist.CitesClass[36]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,143 @@
	1	+===Framework===
	2	+
	3	+
	4	+====Prefer reflective equilibrium. ====
	5	+
	6	+
	7	+====Reflective equilibrium is key to solve relativism. Reasonable disagreement exists in the political sphere, and it's philosophy's job to bridge those conflicts. Only RE is consistent with pluralism and the goal of political philosophy.====
	8	+**Lloyd 14**
	9	+SA Lloyd, moral/political/legal philosopher and Hobbesian expert, "Learning from the History of Political Philosophy" http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781118328460.ch30/summary
	10	+We can see Rawls's insistence on the importance of comparative study of moral philosophies in
	11	+AND
	12	+simpler (if imagined) time in which society enjoyed consensus in values.
	13	+
	14	+
	15	+====Next, reflective equilibrium yields a basic freedom principle – we ought to protect individuals' ability to pursue their own conception of the good.====
	16	+**Ripstein 04**
	17	+UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO Faculty of Law PUBLIC LAW AND LEGAL THEORY RESEARCH PAPER NO. 04-02 THE DIVISION OF RESPONSIBILITY AND THE LAW OF TORT ARTHUR RIPSTEIN ~~Professor of Law and Philosophy, University of Toronto~~
	18	+In treating the contract as an expository device, Rawls seeks to underscore the way
	19	+AND
	20	+point of view, each of these interests must be regarded as derivative.
	21	+
	22	+
	23	+====However, freedom cannot be absolute – the limit is responsibility for our own infringements on the freedoms of others.====
	24	+**Ripstein 04**
	25	+UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO Faculty of Law PUBLIC LAW AND LEGAL THEORY RESEARCH PAPER NO. 04-02 THE DIVISION OF RESPONSIBILITY AND THE LAW OF TORT ARTHUR RIPSTEIN ~~Professor of Law and Philosophy, University of Toronto~~
	26	+Rawls presents the idea of the division of responsibility by focusing only on the relation
	27	+AND
	28	+of tort law as governing transactions between private parties, albeit involuntary ones.
	29	+
	30	+
	31	+====And, denying moral responsibility creates a contradiction because we will our own limitless freedom while disavowing the freedom of others to do the same. ====
	32	+**Ripstein 04**
	33	+UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO Faculty of Law PUBLIC LAW AND LEGAL THEORY RESEARCH PAPER NO. 04-02 THE DIVISION OF RESPONSIBILITY AND THE LAW OF TORT ARTHUR RIPSTEIN ~~Professor of Law and Philosophy, University of Toronto~~
	34	+A better way of thinking about the special responsibility that each of us is said
	35	+AND
	36	+, or discharge all of my obligations to society through a single payment.
	37	+
	38	+
	39	+====Only this system can balance the two societal goals of private freedom and redistribution.====
	40	+**Ripstein 04**
	41	+UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO Faculty of Law PUBLIC LAW AND LEGAL THEORY RESEARCH PAPER NO. 04-02 THE DIVISION OF RESPONSIBILITY AND THE LAW OF TORT ARTHUR RIPSTEIN ~~Professor of Law and Philosophy, University of Toronto~~
	42	+The aggregative effects of contractual transactions may lead to distributive injustice that needs to be
	43	+AND
	44	+of redistributive ideas, Rawls offers a synoptic vision able to accommodate both.
	45	+
	46	+
	47	+====In legal contexts, this means enforcing tort law.====
	48	+**Ripstein 04**
	49	+UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO Faculty of Law PUBLIC LAW AND LEGAL THEORY RESEARCH PAPER NO. 04-02 THE DIVISION OF RESPONSIBILITY AND THE LAW OF TORT ARTHUR RIPSTEIN ~~Professor of Law and Philosophy, University of Toronto~~
	50	+All of these effects that one person might have on another are consistent with each
	51	+AND
	52	+to your ability to set and pursue your own conception of the good.
	53	+
	54	+
	55	+====Thus, the standard is maintaining an effective system of tort law.====
	56	+
	57	+
	58	+===Advocacy===
	59	+
	60	+
	61	+====I defend the resolution as a general principle. Specific details are irrelevant to aff offense, but if they want me to defend a plan, I'll defend:====
	62	+
	63	+
	64	+====Resolved: The Supreme Court of the United States ought to limit qualified immunity for police officers by removing the "clearly established" standard for qualified immunity.====
	65	+
	66	+
	67	+===Contention===
	68	+
	69	+
	70	+====~~A~~ QI is a substantial barrier to tort suits.====
	71	+**Chen 06**
	72	+Chen, Alan K. (Professor @ University of Denver Sturm College of Law)"The Facts about Qualified Immunity." Emory Law Journal 55.2 (2006): 229-278. ~~Premier~~
	73	+The law provides a damages action to people whose constitutional rights have been violated
	74	+AND
	75	+acts. 24 She may still, however, assert qualified immunity.
	76	+
	77	+
	78	+====This severely restricts individuals' ability to recover, even for egregious rights violations.====
	79	+**Reinhardt 15**
	80	+Stephen R. Reinhardt, (Circuit Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.) The Demise of Habeas Corpus and the Rise of Qualified Immunity: The Court's Ever Increasing Limitations on the Development and Enforcement of Constitutional Rights and Some Particularly Unfortunate Consequences, 113 Mich. L. Rev. 1219 (2015). Available at: http://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol113/iss7/3 ~~Premier~~
	81	+Unfortunately, the Court's actions no longer match its rhetoric. In fact, they
	82	+AND
	83	+relieved of its duty to compensate the victim of a constitutional violation.
	84	+
	85	+
	86	+====~~B~~ QI disrupts the natural balance of plaintiff and defendant rights in tort law.====
	87	+**Kinports 16**
	88	+Kit Kinports, prof @ Penn State, Professor Kinports is a leading scholar of feminist jurisprudence, criminal law and federalism and an award-winning classroom teacher, The Supreme Court's Quiet Expansion of Qualified Immunity, 100 Minn. L. Rev. Headnotes 62 (2016). http://elibrary.law.psu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1269andcontext=fac_works p. 67-68 ~~Premier~~
	89	+The Court's tendency in recent cases to use a different tenor in describing the qualified
	90	+AND
	91	+an even greater majority of § 1983 suits on qualified immunity grounds.2
	92	+
	93	+
	94	+===Underview===
	95	+
	96	+
	97	+====Drones advantage:====
	98	+
	99	+
	100	+====National Security Spillover====
	101	+
	102	+
	103	+====Aff brings lawsuits against police – spills over to national security====
	104	+**Brooks 13**
	105	+Brooks, Rosa (2013), pf @ Georgetown Law, "The Trickle-Down War," Yale Law and Policy Review: Vol. 32: Iss. 2, Article 8. Available at: http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/ylpr/vol32/iss2/8 ~~Premier~~
	106	+In this brief Essay, I have focused on policing, the state secrets privilege
	107	+AND
	108	+giving rise to these cases and ordinary civil litigation will increasingly blur. 9
	109	+
	110	+
	111	+====QI limits are transsubstantive====
	112	+**Coenen 14**
	113	+Michael Coenen, pf @ LSU Law, "SPILLOVER ACROSS REMEDIES" 98 MINN. L. REV. (2014),digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1120andcontext=faculty_scholarship ~~Premier~~
	114	+A further complication with remedial exceptions involves their generally transsubstantive character. Just as substantive
	115	+AND
	116	+remedial exceptions renders them a problematic means of attacking cross-remedial spillover.
	117	+
	118	+
	119	+====Deterrence====
	120	+
	121	+
	122	+====Suits against government officers will deter drones====
	123	+**Vladeck 13 **Stephen I. Vladeck 13, Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Scholarship at American University Washington College of Law, senior editor of the peer-reviewed Journal of National Security Law and Policy, Supreme Court Fellow at the Constitution Project, and fellow at the Center on National Security at Fordham University School of Law, JD from Yale Law School, Feb 27 2013, "DRONES AND THE WAR ON TERROR: WHEN CAN THE U.S.TARGET ALLEGED AMERICAN TERRORISTS OVERSEAS?" Hearing Before the House Committee on the Judiciary, http://www.lawfareblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Vladeck-02272013.pdf
	124	+At first blush, it may seem like many of these issues would be equally
	125	+AND
	126	+the restrictions that fence in even the most disinterested assertion of authority." 29
	127	+
	128	+
	129	+====Drones are Bad====
	130	+
	131	+
	132	+====Drones in Yemen increases blowback from AQAP, strengthens terrorism====
	133	+**Johnsen 13 **Gregory Johnsen, Near East Studies Scholar, Princeton University "National Security: How We Lost Yemen" August 6 http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/08/06/how_we_lost_yemen_al_qaeda
	134	+For much of the past four years the United States has been firing missiles into
	135	+AND
	136	+in favor of a strategy that's more sustainable — and more sensible too.
	137	+
	138	+
	139	+====Extinction====
	140	+**Hellman 8** (Martin E. Hellman, emeritus prof of engineering @ Stanford, "Risk Analysis of Nuclear Deterrence" SPRING 2008 THE BENT OF TAU BETA PI, http://www.nuclearrisk.org/paper.pdf)
	141	+The threat of nuclear terrorism looms much larger in the public's mind than the threat
	142	+AND
	143	+assume that preventing World War III is a necessity—not an option.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2016-11-21 18:59:30.100

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+hunt, castillo, pyda

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+peninsula ig

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+23

Round

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Octas

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Cambridge Rindge Sussman Aff

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+nd - 1ac - tort law

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+gbx