| ... |
... |
@@ -1,0
+1,70 @@ |
|
1 |
+===Part 1: Framework=== |
|
2 |
+====I value justice. |
|
3 |
+Racism builds walls of exclusion and controls how bodies can interact with other bodies==== |
|
4 |
+Mendieta (Eduardo, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Stony Brook University), Philosphy and Geography, Vol. 7, No 1, February 2004, http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/depts/sese/Mendieta.pdf |
|
5 |
+It may be easily argued, without too much contrivance, that racism is a |
|
6 |
+AND |
|
7 |
+Foucault’s work we can also¶ encounter a more condemning analysis of racism. |
|
8 |
+====Particularism is good—root cause claims and focus on overarching structures ignore application to material injustice.==== |
|
9 |
+Gregory Fernando Pappas 16 Texas AandM University “The Pragmatists’ Approach to Injustice”, The Pluralist Volume 11, Number 1, Spring 2016, BE |
|
10 |
+The pragmatists’ approach should be distinguished from nonideal theories whose starting point seems to be |
|
11 |
+AND |
|
12 |
+in making us see aspects of injustices we would not otherwise appreciate.15 |
|
13 |
+====Thus, the standard is reducing institutionalized racism.==== |
|
14 |
+===Part 2: The War Against Free Expression=== |
|
15 |
+====In 1988 the legendary group NWA created an anthem for change for many communities with their song “F THE POLICE”. Sadly, in 2016, almost 3 decades later, the wake of violence against marginalized populations is increasing. Police have even criminalized the form of nonviolent expression of free speech of “flipping the bird”, “shooting the middle finger”, “making police read between the lines”, instead of the legitimate expression of free speech that it is. Today, we take a stand against this obvious violation of expression. |
|
16 |
+That said, court is now in session. Judges Alston, Alderete and Gandra presiding. |
|
17 |
+You know how sometimes you’re doing 80 in a 40 zone and you get pulled over and you just give the cop the bird? Well, turns out if they beat you up for that, they can get qualified immunity! Because that is bad, I affirm. |
|
18 |
+Flipping the police off is vital expression of government criticism–police retaliation is unconstitutional==== |
|
19 |
+Samantha Orovitz 12, JD, Emory School of Law, “Free Bird: No Right to Qualified Immunity for Police Who Retaliate Against the Middle Finger Gesture,” Journal of Law and Social Deviance, Vol. 3, 2012. RFK |
|
20 |
+The evocativeness of the middle finger gesture is evident in the story of Robert Ekas |
|
21 |
+AND |
|
22 |
+against citizens exercising this right should not be entitled to qualified immunity. 20 |
|
23 |
+====BUT–police officers routinely get qualified immunity for retaliating against individuals who shoot them the bird by invoking the disorderly conduct and breach of peace ordinances–those are vague and disingenuous which creates a massive abuse on power==== |
|
24 |
+Samantha Orovitz 12, JD, Emory School of Law, “Free Bird: No Right to Qualified Immunity for Police Who Retaliate Against the Middle Finger Gesture,” Journal of Law and Social Deviance, Vol. 3, 2012. RFK |
|
25 |
+Application of Qualified Immunity Doctrine to the Middle Finger and Its Effect on Police Retaliation |
|
26 |
+AND |
|
27 |
+.237 In this context, qualified immunity induces abuse of power.23 |
|
28 |
+====The middle finger is worth fighting for–protecting First Amendment rights key to checking back a police state by reminding officers they are not above the law==== |
|
29 |
+Samantha Orovitz 12, JD, Emory School of Law, “Free Bird: No Right to Qualified Immunity for Police Who Retaliate Against the Middle Finger Gesture,” Journal of Law and Social Deviance, Vol. 3, 2012. RFK |
|
30 |
+Just because you can legally give a police officer the middle finger does not mean |
|
31 |
+AND |
|
32 |
+form, because it is a manifestation of the public's feelings and attitudes. |
|
33 |
+====Provocative speech forces government to remain responsive to the will of the people–the squo gives police unfettered power to punish people who irritate them but we should be able to flip the police off without consequence==== |
|
34 |
+Samantha Orovitz 12, JD, Emory School of Law, “Free Bird: No Right to Qualified Immunity for Police Who Retaliate Against the Middle Finger Gesture,” Journal of Law and Social Deviance, Vol. 3, 2012. RFK |
|
35 |
+Transforming the Bird into a Dove: First Amendment Speech Expresses the Will of the |
|
36 |
+AND |
|
37 |
+being granted qualified immunity for unlawfully arresting an individual who exercises this right. |
|
38 |
+====And–giving the middle finger is a symbol of black masculinity that becomes criminalized by paranoid White America–photo coverage of Trayvon Martin proves – the aff checks back violent police aggression against racialized criminality==== |
|
39 |
+Lisa Lebduska 14 Wheaton College, “Racist Visual Rhetoric and Images of Trayvon Martin,” Present Tense, Vol 3, 2014. RFK |
|
40 |
+Other People photos, which were also circulated on the Internet, featured a smiling |
|
41 |
+AND |
|
42 |
+to associate images of blacks with violence and those of whites with peace. |
|
43 |
+===Part 3: Solvency=== |
|
44 |
+====Thus the plan: The United States federal government ought to limit qualified immunity for police officers who arrest an individual who directs the middle finger gesture at the officers.==== |
|
45 |
+Samantha Orovitz 12, JD, Emory School of Law, “Free Bird: No Right to Qualified Immunity for Police Who Retaliate Against the Middle Finger Gesture,” Journal of Law and Social Deviance, Vol. 3, 2012. RFK |
|
46 |
+To ensure police officers are not omnipotent in quashing free speech, courts should not |
|
47 |
+AND |
|
48 |
+the court will not tolerate an officer's infringement on individuals' free speech rights. |
|
49 |
+====The aff is more consistent with EXISTING SUPREME COURT RULINGS ON FLIPPING THE BIRD–it just prevents police from exploiting ordinances==== |
|
50 |
+Samantha Orovitz 12, JD, Emory School of Law, “Free Bird: No Right to Qualified Immunity for Police Who Retaliate Against the Middle Finger Gesture,” Journal of Law and Social Deviance, Vol. 3, 2012. RFK |
|
51 |
+FIRST AMENDMENT STATUS OF "THE BIRD": WHY THE MIDDLE FINGER GESTURE IS NOT |
|
52 |
+AND |
|
53 |
+qualified immunity in an effort to protect themselves from liability for acting unconstitutionally. |
|
54 |
+====And–aff spills over–resolves court clog by reducing appeal on First Amendment grounds and prevents chilling effect on free speech==== |
|
55 |
+Samantha Orovitz 12, JD, Emory School of Law, “Free Bird: No Right to Qualified Immunity for Police Who Retaliate Against the Middle Finger Gesture,” Journal of Law and Social Deviance, Vol. 3, 2012. RFK |
|
56 |
+This issue's resolution is crucial for three reasons. First, the underlying cases drain |
|
57 |
+AND |
|
58 |
+, even if the individuals know this speech is within their constitutional rights. |
|
59 |
+ |
|
60 |
+====Even if civilians don't win compensation- lawsuits create reform and police know their behavior will be watched==== |
|
61 |
+Schwartz ‘11 (Joanna, "What Police Learn from Lawsuits." Cardozo L. Rev. 33 (2011): 841. Joanna Schwartz is a Professor of Law at UCLA School of Law. She teaches Civil Procedure, the Civil Rights Litigation Clinic) |
|
62 |
+Lawsuits are widely recognized to compensate and deter; this Article shows suits can also |
|
63 |
+AND |
|
64 |
+to create multiple, new, and even redundant sources of information.”253 |
|
65 |
+ |
|
66 |
+====And- if officers know they’re now liable they’ll worry about relations—our aff also compensates plaintiffs who flipped off the police which is the BIGGEST f you to the law==== |
|
67 |
+Schwartz ‘14 Schwartz, Joanna C. “Police Indemnification” Assistant Professor of Law, University of California, Los Angeles, School of Law. New York University Law Review. 2014 |
|
68 |
+Others will argue that, despite indemnification, police officers are still in danger of |
|
69 |
+AND |
|
70 |
+pays settle- ments and judgments against officers out of a general fund. |