| ... |
... |
@@ -1,34
+1,0 @@ |
| 1 |
|
-Interpretation: the affirmative must defend the implementation of the United States limiting qualified immunity for police officers. |
| 2 |
|
- |
| 3 |
|
-“Resolved” means enactment of a law. |
| 4 |
|
-Words and Phrases 64 Words and Phrases Permanent Edition (Multi-volume set of judicial definitions). “Resolved”. 1964. |
| 5 |
|
-Definition of the word “resolve,” given by Webster is “to express an opinion or determination by resolution or vote; as ‘it was resolved by the legislature;” It is of similar force to the word “enact,” which is defined by Bouvier as meaning “to establish by law”. |
| 6 |
|
- |
| 7 |
|
-United States” is defined by the entirety of its territories. |
| 8 |
|
-Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms 05 US Department of Defense 2005 http://www.thefreedictionary.com/United+States |
| 9 |
|
-United States Includes the land area, internal waters, territorial sea, and airspace of the United States, including the following: a. US territories, possessions, and commonwealths; and b. Other areas over which the US Government has complete jurisdiction and control or has exclusive authority or defense responsibility. |
| 10 |
|
- |
| 11 |
|
-Qualified immunity is a legal concept. |
| 12 |
|
-Chen 15 Alan K. Chen is the William M. Beaney Memorial Research Chair and professor of law at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law, where he teaches courses in constitutional law, federal courts, and public interest law. An experienced civil rights litigator and former ACLU staff attorney, Professor Chen continues to do pro bono work in constitutional rights cases. “Qualified Immunity Liming Access to Justice and Impeding Development of the Law” Human Rights Magazine Home 2015 (Vol. 41) Vol. 41, No. 1 - Lurking in the Shadows: the Supreme Court's Quiet Attack on Civil Rights http://www.americanbar.org/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/2015~-~-vol~-~-41-/vol~-~-41~-~-no~-~-1~-~--lurking-in-the-shadows~-~-the-supreme-court-s-qui/qualified-immunity-limiting-access-to-justice-and-impeding-devel.html JW |
| 13 |
|
-Savana sued the school personnel who conducted the search under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violating her Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches. The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously concluded that the officials had violated Savana’s constitutional rights. But by a 5–4 vote, the Court held that the officials could not be held liable for their conduct because they were entitled to “qualified immunity.” Safford Unified School District No. 1 v. Redding, 557 U.S. 364, 379 (2009). Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense that protects federal, state, or local officials who are sued for damages when they have violated the Constitution (constitutional tort claims filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 or Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 392–97 (1971)). It bars suits from proceeding unless the plaintiff can demonstrate that the officials’ conduct violated “clearly established . . . constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982). In Savana’s case, the Supreme Court held that the prevailing legal standard, which required school officials to balance the need to conduct the search against the intrusion on students’ privacy, was not so clearly defined that the officials could be said to have committed an obvious Fourth Amendment violation. As the majority observed, “cases viewing school strip searches differently from the way we see them are numerous enough, with well-reasoned majority and dissenting opinions, to counsel doubt that we were sufficiently clear in the prior statement of law.” Safford, 557 U.S. at 378–79. |
| 14 |
|
- |
| 15 |
|
-Police officers are law enforcement agents for the government. |
| 16 |
|
-Black’s Law Dictionary “What is POLICE OFFICER?” http://thelawdictionary.org/police-officer/ JW |
| 17 |
|
-a person who is an officer of the law enforcement team employed by the county, town, municipality or state. |
| 18 |
|
- |
| 19 |
|
-1. Ground. |
| 20 |
|
-Violations of competitive equity prevent effective dialogue and participation which turns the aff. |
| 21 |
|
-Galloway 7 Ryan Galloway 7, Samford Comm prof, Contemporary Argumentation and Debate, Vol. 28, 2007 |
| 22 |
|
-Debate as a ... time and power (Farrell, 1985, p. 114). |
| 23 |
|
- |
| 24 |
|
-2. Institutional engagement. The state is inevitable—learning to speak the language of power creates the only possibility of social change debate can offer. This is best served by imagining the consequences of policy. |
| 25 |
|
-Coverstone 5 Alan Coverstone (masters in communication from Wake Forest, longtime debate coach) “Acting on Activism: Realizing the Vision of Debate with Pro-social Impact” Paper presented at the National Communication Association Annual Conference November 17th 2005 JW 11/18/15 |
| 26 |
|
-An important concern ... in America today. |
| 27 |
|
- |
| 28 |
|
-3. Topicality is a pre-requisite to engagement—otherwise nothing separates aff from neg. |
| 29 |
|
-Shively 2k – assistant professor of political science at Texas A and M University (Ruth Lessl, “Political Theory and Partisan Politics”, Chapter 8, “Political Theory and the Postmodern Politics of Ambiguity”, eds. Portis, Gundersen, and Shively, p. 176-182, ProQuest ebrary) |
| 30 |
|
-Like all attempts ... agreement or harmony. |
| 31 |
|
- |
| 32 |
|
-Relevance isn’t enough—only a precise and limited rez creates clash on a point of mutual difference |
| 33 |
|
-Steinberg and Freeley 8 *Austin J. Freeley is a Boston based attorney who focuses on criminal, personal injury and civil rights law, AND **David L. Steinberg , Lecturer of Communication Studies @ U Miami, Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making pp45- |
| 34 |
|
-Debate is a ... the following discussion. |