Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[43]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[34]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[43]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2017-02-23 20:08:57.906
	1	+2017-02-23 20:08:57.0

Caselist.CitesClass[34]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,51 @@
	1	+FW
	2	+Non-ideal theory is the most epistemologically sound starting point for moral decisions- other methods foreclose viewpoints.
	3	+Mills 05, Charles, 2005, Ideal Theory” as Ideology,
	4	+The crucial common … male-dominated philosophical literature.
	5	+
	6	+Thus the standard is minimizing oppression.
	7	+
	8	+Prefer
	9	+
	10	+Debate should deal with the real-world consequences of oppression.
	11	+Curry 14, Tommy, The Cost of a Thing: A Kingian Reformulation of a Living Wage Argument in the 21st Century, Victory Briefs, 2014,
	12	+Despite the pronouncement ….. contemporary moral parameters.
	13	+Inherency
	14	+Previously, to disregard qualified immunity, courts first determined if officers violated clearly established constitutional law and then determined if it was reasonable for the officer to act the way they did. Pearson v Callahan in 2009 allowed lower courts to decide the order in which they answered those questions, which has led to lower courts skipping the first question—stats prove.
	15	+Walker 15Christopher J. Walker, Assistant Professor of Law, Michael E. Moritz College of Law, The Ohio State University, Aaron L. Nielson, Associate Professor of Law, J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University, “The New Qualified Immunity,” Southern California Law Review, Vol. 89, pp. 1-65, Oct. 19, 2015 JW
	16	+On the other hand, …. stagnation theory discussed in Part I.D
	17	+
	18	+Plantext
	19	+Thus the plan text—Resolved: Using White v. Pauly, a case in that is currently in the 10th circuit court of appeals, the Supreme Court of the United States ought to limit qualified immunity for police officers by forcing lower courts to give reason for exercising Pearson constitutional discretion, effectively overturning the precedent set in Pearson v. Callahan.
	20	+Walker 2 Christopher J. Walker, Assistant Professor of Law, Michael E. Moritz College of Law, The Ohio State University, Aaron L. Nielson, Associate Professor of Law, J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University, “The New Qualified Immunity,” Southern California Law Review, Vol. 89, pp. 1-65, Oct. 19, 2015 JW
	21	+Whereas the core …. for not doing so.”235
	22	+
	23	+Advantage 1: Decision-Making
	24	+A requirement would lead to better judicial rulings-multiple warrants
	25	+Walker 3 Christopher J. Walker, Assistant Professor of Law, Michael E. Moritz College of Law, The Ohio State University, Aaron L. Nielson, Associate Professor of Law, J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University, “The New Qualified Immunity,” Southern California Law Review, Vol. 89, pp. 1-65, Oct. 19, 2015 PW
	26	+The reasons for reason .. be somewhat mitigated.
	27	+
	28	+Advantage 2: Judicial Legitimacy
	29	+Judicial Legitimacy is low now- the court is in danger.
	30	+Posner 15, Eric, The Supreme Court’s Loss of Prestige, 2015, http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/2015/10/the_supreme_court_is_losing_public_approval_and_prestige.html
	31	+The Supreme Court … 70 percent range.
	32	+
	33	+Providing reasons is the keystone of court legitimacy
	34	+Walker 4 Christopher J. Walker, Assistant Professor of Law, Michael E. Moritz College of Law, The Ohio State University, Aaron L. Nielson, Associate Professor of Law, J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University, “The New Qualified Immunity,” Southern California Law Review, Vol. 89, pp. 1-65, Oct. 19, 2015 PW
	35	+Not only does reason … the liberal, administrative state.”269
	36	+
	37	+Judicial Legitimacy is key to the Court’s power
	38	+Gibson et al 14, James Gibson, Department of Political Science Professor of African and African American Studies Director, Program on Citizenship and Democratic Values Weidenbaum Center on the Economy, Government, and Public Policy and Michael Nelson, Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Political Science Graduate Student Associate, Center for Empirical Research in the Law, 2014, http://mjnelson.wustl.edu/papers/AnnualReview.pdf
	39	+The Supreme Court … accepted by the Nation (865-866).
	40	+
	41	+Court power is key to check back the legislator from hugely oppressive laws- Brown v. Board proves.
	42	+Somin 16, Ilya, The Supreme Court Is a Check on Big Government, Protection for Minorities, 2016, http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/07/06/is-the-supreme-court-too-powerful/the-supreme-court-is-a-check-on-big-government-protection-for-minorities
	43	+The Supreme Court … of such outrages.
	44	+
	45	+Most recent empirics of late elim rounds show huge neg side bias
	46	+Adler 15 brackets for clarity, Are Judges Just Guessing? A Statistical Analysis of LD Elimination Round Panels by Steven Adler http://nsdupdate.com/2015/03/30/are-judges-just-guessing-a-statistical-analysis-of-ld-elimination-round-panels-by-steven-adler/
	47	+Yet a plausible objection … late elimination rounds:
	48	+
	49	+The aff deploys the state as a heuristic to learn scenario planning- even if politics is bad, scenario analysis of politics is pedagogically valuable- it enhances creativity, deconstructs biases and teaches advocacy skills
	50	+Barma et al 16 – (May 2016, Advance Publication Online on 11/6/15, Naazneen Barma, PhD in Political Science from UC-Berkeley, Assistant Professor of National Security Affairs at the Naval Postgraduate School, Brent Durbin, PhD in Political Science from UC-Berkeley, Professor of Government at Smith College, Eric Lorber, JD from UPenn and PhD in Political Science from Duke, Gibson, Dunn and Crutcher, Rachel Whitlark, PhD in Political Science from GWU, Post-Doctoral Research Fellow with the Project on Managing the Atom and International Security Program within the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard, “‘Imagine a World in Which’: Using Scenarios in Political Science,” International Studies Perspectives 17 (2), pp. 1-19, http://www.naazneenbarma.com/uploads/2/9/6/9/29695681/using_scenarios_in_political_science_isp_2015.pdf)
	51	+What Are Scenarios …. in international affairs.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2017-02-23 20:08:59.657

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Regan

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Oakwood AW

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+43

Round

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

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Phoenix Country Day Whitfil Aff

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Nov- Dec Scotus Aff

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Glenrbooks