| ... |
... |
@@ -1,0
+1,18 @@ |
|
1 |
+====A Interpretation: The Aff has to defend colleges and universities ought not restrict constitutionally protected speech, not other actors.==== |
|
2 |
+USLegal: USLegal Site that defines legal terms “Public College Law and Legal Definition.” USLegal. RP |
|
3 |
+Public college means |
|
4 |
+AND |
|
5 |
+a governmental source.”(42 USCS § 2000c) |
|
6 |
+ |
|
7 |
+====B Violation==== |
|
8 |
+ |
|
9 |
+====C Net Benefits==== |
|
10 |
+ |
|
11 |
+====1 Limits – there a theoretically endless number of actors the Aff could pick – Congress, Courts, or executive orders. They could also different governments on state or regional levels. There are literally hundreds of thousands of Affs – that’s how many governments exist in the US==== |
|
12 |
+NLC: National League of Cities “Number of Municipal Governments and Population Distribution.” 2016. RP |
|
13 |
+ |
|
14 |
+The most recent |
|
15 |
+AND |
|
16 |
+District of Columbia. |
|
17 |
+ |
|
18 |
+====2 Effects T – the Aff only results in colleges taking an action but is not a direct action – their plan text proves the abuse. it says the Supreme Court should rule on an issue, but the mandate of the plan doesn’t directly affect colleges, but something else as a result.==== |