Summary

• Objects (2 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[6]
  • Caselist.RoundClass[7]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[4]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[6]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2016-12-10 15:12:20.872
	1	+2016-12-10 15:12:20.0

Caselist.RoundClass[7]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2016-12-10 15:14:41.291
	1	+2016-12-10 15:14:41.0

Caselist.CitesClass[4]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,85 @@
	1	+==1AC==
	2	+
	3	+
	4	+===Framework===
	5	+
	6	+
	7	+====Presume aff and err aff because: a) time skew b) adaptability. Prefer theoretical presumption.====
	8	+
	9	+
	10	+====I value morality because ought implies a moral obligation. ====
	11	+
	12	+
	13	+====The inescapable starting point of morality is that individuals are rational agents by submitting to a normative principle. Two warrants. ====
	14	+**Ferrero, University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee, 2009**
	15	+**Luca, "Constitutivism and the Inescapability of Agency", Oxford Studies in Metaethics, vol. IV, January 19th, Online: **https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/ferrero/www/pubs/ferrero-constitutivism.pdf**, Accessed November 14 – MG **
	16	+3.1 The initial appeal of the shmagency objection rests on the impression that
	17	+AND
	18	+it's a question of how we evaluate ethical claims in the first place.
	19	+Outweighs:
	20	+A.
	21	+B.
	22	+C.
	23	+D.
	24	+E.
	25	+Impacts:
	26	+A.
	27	+B.
	28	+
	29	+====Reason is universal. A - A reason for you must also be a reason for me.====
	30	+**Velleman, Professor of Philosophy, Bioethics; Director of Undergraduate Studies, Ph.D., Princeton, 1983, 2006**
	31	+**(J. David, "A BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO KANTIAN ETHICS," 2006, accessed Dec. 1, MG)**
	32	+In Kant's view, being a person consists in being a rational creature, both
	33	+AND
	34	+attractive vantage point of some kind.
	35	+B. Meta-constraints.
	36	+Impacts:
	37	+A.
	38	+B.
	39	+The standard is consistency with universal reason. Independently, prefer the framework:
	40	+
	41	+====Rational willing determines what is an action versus a series of fragmented events. Roedl. ====
	42	+Sebastian Roedl. Prof. Of Philosophy, University of Leipzig. "Two Forms of Practical Knowledge and Their Unity" in Ford and Hornsby, Eds. Essays on Anscombe's Intention (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2011) 239.
	43	+"We can give a more specific description of the consciousness of temporal unity that
	44	+AND
	45	+we would never be able to pursue personal projects; it's over demanding.
	46	+A.
	47	+B.
	48	+
	49	+====Impact calculus: ====
	50	+
	51	+
	52	+====State key. The framework entails an omnilateral will or a higher authority to deal with rights conflicts. ====
	53	+Ripstein, Arthur. "Kant on Law and Politics." University of Toronto Law School. http://www.law.utoronto.ca/documents/Ripstein/Kant_on_law.pdf.
	54	+Kant's point about disputes is not just a reiteration of Locke's familiar claim that people
	55	+AND
	56	+does, and so does not require an explicit act of instituting it.
	57	+
	58	+
	59	+====AFF first on risk of offense. ====
	60	+
	61	+
	62	+===Contention===
	63	+
	64	+
	65	+====First, public officials like police officers must act for public ends- they are contractually bound and that is where they derive their authority. Ripstein 16.====
	66	+Ripstein, Arthur. "Reclaiming Proportionality (Society for Applied Philosophy Annual Lecture 2016)." Journal of Applied Philosophy, 2016, doi:10.1111/japp.12238. professor of law and of philosophy at the University of Toronto JZ *brackets for gender*
	67	+Nonetheless, there is something troubling about vigilantes and vigilantism. There is a question
	68	+AND
	69	+of proportionality. It might be asked why this public standpoint is required.
	70	+
	71	+
	72	+====Immunity hinders essential tort litigation. ====
	73	+**Sheng, associate in Davis Polk's Litigation Department, practicing in the Menlo Park office, law clerk to the chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, 2012**
	74	+**Philip, "An "Objectively Reasonable" Criticism of the Doctrine of Qualified Immunity in Excessive Force Cases Brought Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983", Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law, March 1st, Accessed November 10th, Online: **http://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1459andcontext=jpl** – MG **
	75	+Apart from the concerns that (I) the Court is affording law enforcement officers
	76	+AND
	77	+to whether and when cases on point arc needed to overcome qualified immunity.
	78	+
	79	+
	80	+====Second, tort law captures the unique responsibility to other persons while maintaining freedom to pursue one's own conception of the good. Ripstein 4.====
	81	+**Ripstein, Professor of Law at the University of Toronto, 2004**
	82	+**Arthur, "Tort, The Division of Responsibility and the Law of Tort", Fordham Law Review, Online: http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3975andcontext=flr**
	83	+All of these effects that one person might have on another are consistent with each
	84	+AND
	85	+to your ability to set and pursue your own conception of the good.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2016-12-10 15:14:42.682

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Claire Kueffner

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Carrollton AJ

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+7

Round

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Law Magnet Gao Aff

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+NOVDEC - Kant AC

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Isidore Newman