Summary

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

Details

Caselist.CitesClass[34]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,14 +1,0 @@
1		-A. Counterplan Text – the USFG ought to abolish the Department of Homeland Security.
2		-C. Solvency –  Militia News is the solvency advocate – CP will target border patrol funding through the DHS. Militia News 14
3		-(Militia News, "It Is Time To Defund And Abolish The Department of Homeland Security (DHS)", http://www.militianews.com/time-defund-abolish-dhs/, March 14, 2014)
4		-Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was formed as a result of the 911, when 19 jihadists, Radical Muslim terrorists, most of whom came from Saudi Arabia, who were armed with box-cutter knives, took over the planes and flew them into the Pentagon and the twin Towers. Since its awkward birth in 2003, it’s safe to say the baby never learned to walk, or stopped flinging its food or sucking its thumb. But it has grown. An umbrella agency that now incorporates 22 different agencies and components with some 240,000 employees, it has survived mostly because of natural bureaucratic intransigence, but fed also, by the lingering specter of 9/11, which gives it near-impenetrable political security. It is currently receiving appropriations of $39 billion for fiscal year 2013 (and that is after sequestration). Of course most of that money goes to DHS components that were independent or part of other agencies before DHS came along. They includinge the U.S Coast Guard, the Secret Service, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Federal Protective Service, Customs and Border Patrol, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and everyone’s friend, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). But some $4.5 billion of the total budget goes to front office operations and programs, as well as new DHS directorates created after 2003. They involve department management, research and development, security training, the inspector general’s office, the Office of Health Affairs, Analysis and Operations, and a Domestic Nuclear Detection Office. And don’t forget its cybersecurity directorate – every agency’s got one! – for which its getting more than a half a billion dollars a year to operate. In other words, the DHS administration has become a bureaucratic planet onto itself and no one can deny it. Case in point: the old St. Elizabeth’s mental hospital in Washington, the site of the (still unfinished) new 4.5 million square foot DHS headquarters, in 2011. I was told by my handlers that the old imposing 19th century main hall, which used to house hundreds of patients and the administration of the hospital – the size of two football fields – would be, once refurbished, for the secretary’s staff only. Another major hall would be for the agency’s lawyers. The rest of the 14,000 employees from other components would be working elsewhere on the 176-acre property. Ben Friedman over at CATO called DHS a “bureaucratic monstrosity” and there are plenty of people outside and inside government who would agree with him. Isn’t it time to consider that this experiment – inspired by the politically driven, essentially emotional, misplaced need to do something after the 9/11 attacks and fueled accordingly by neoconservative grandstanders like Sen. Joe Lieberman (D) and Rep. Peter King (R), who have used the new agency and its corresponding congressional committees as a platform for anti-Muslim tirades and more government intrusion our lives – has failed? Put aside all of the money the government would save, getting rid of the Department of Homeland Security would be a first step at scaling back post-9/11 domestic counterterrorism and law enforcement hubris – not to mention the militarization of domestic security. They’ve already began testing domestic drone surveillance (in addition to the military blimps and aerostats, drones are already used on the border and in the Drug War), and the agency is always on the lookout for the best in spy camera technology, because, of course, they are looking out for our best interest. DHS has also helped local police build up their own armories by giving them money to buy military surplus. “The buying spree has transformed local police departments into small, army-like forces, and put intimidating equipment into the hands of civilian officers,” wrote Andrew Becker for The Daily Beast in 2011. The problem with the DHS administration is that it doesn’t have a clear mission beyond coordinating homeland security efforts already exercised by its major components and working with outside agencies – FBI, the Pentagon, the Centers for Disease Control and state and local homeland security offices, etc. – to share information, launch joint programs, training, policy, whatever. One of the agencies it helped to get off its feet was the new TSA, and from day one, DHS has fumbled and bumbled down the runway, from the enormous amount of money lost in failed contracts, to the conveyor belt of bad press regarding the screening procedures (like old ladies and toddlers getting humiliating pat-downs while explosives and guns sail through checkpoints time and again during undercover inspections). For the last several years, millions of fliers have endured full-body scanners that snap near-naked pictures of their bodies while they “stick ’em up” obediently in something that resembles a mini-transporter but is infinitely not as cool. DHS has insisted these machines are safe and necessary (ironically, the Rapiscan models that ex-DHS chief Chertoff lobbied for when he left the agency to go into the private sector are being pulled from the airports – more millions wasted – because they emit the more dangerous ionizing radiation). But officials still can’t guarantee that full-body scans will detect all explosives hidden on the human body, leading many of us to wonder uneasily about what fresh tortures TSA may have in store for us down the road. Meanwhile, the ACLU is demanding more information about DHS agents detaining thousands of individuals at the borders each year, confiscating their laptops and other electronic devices, even when there is no suspicion of wrongdoing. From the ACLU in May: Essentially DHS has adopted a policy of peering into anyone’s data, at any time, for any reason. Through a FOIA request filed three years ago we discovered that more than 6,500 travelers had their devices searched under this policy between October 2008 and June 2010. Almost half of those were U.S. citizens. Flying, to many Americans, has become a very stressful undertaking – and forget it if you’re suddenly put on the “no fly list” by mistake – the DHS redress program, which is supposed to help get you scrubbed from the list (supposedly 21,000 names strong as of 2011, double from the year before) has done nothing of the sort for anyone, according to critics.
5		-D. Net Benefits
6		-COURTS UNLIKELY TO SOLVE POLICE MILITARIZATION. Rahall 15
7		-Karena Rahall (Visiting Assistant Professor, Seattle University School of Law.), The Green to Blue Pipeline: Defense Contractors and the Police Industrial Complex, 36 Cardozo L. Rev. 1785 (2015).
8		-
9		-As laid out in Part II, courts have been slow to respond to the harmful effects of police militarization. Given the current state of jurisprudence, relief is unlikely to be found in the Supreme Court.335 Since the Court is more focused on violations involving the scope of searches rather than the manner in which they are executed, SWAT transgressions are difficult to regulate in the judicial arena. However, as the landscape shifts and citizens begin to demand redress, the Court may find itself forced into action in the near future, not to change its recent precedents, but to recognize that a gap exists that must be filled by more than legislation. The Court may come to recognize that there are constitutional implications to manner violations that have not found a forum to accommodate them as cases proliferate and public outcry amplifies the extent of the problem. Meanwhile, policymakers in other arenas have made efforts to slow-and even end-the practice of arming and training domestic police with military equipment and tactics. Part JJJ.B analyzes these efforts and offers some possible remedies to slow or even stop the precipitous transformation of police, from peace officers to soldiers.
10		-
11		-SMALL REFORMS LEAD TO PACIFICATION WHICH UNDERMINE CHANCE OF RADICAL CHANGE. Butler 15
12		-Butler, Paul (Professor of Law, Georgetown Law Center). "The System Is Working the Way It Is Supposed to: The Limits of Criminal Justice Reform." Geo. LJ 104 (2015): 1419.
13		-
14		-Indeed, in some instances, ratchets get in the way of change because they placate and take energy and focus away from the actual transformative work. Professors Carol Steiker and Jordan Steiker have made a related point about the death penalty—efforts to make implementation of capital punishment more “fair” may have the perverse consequence of furthering what is a fundamentally unjust practice.322 Further, recall Los Angeles, for example, where after the DOJ intervention, more than two thirds of the black and Latino citizens felt that the police are doing a good or excellent job.323 Despite this newly placated response to policing, the statistics suggest that the level of policing in Los Angeles has increased substantially since the DOJ intervention.324 In essence, the police are still serving as the government for the black and Latino residents of the city.325 Those residents remain disproportionately the victims of police violence. In this sense, the LAPD is not doing good or excellent work for the black and Latino citizens they are supposed to serve and protect. A related dynamic occurred in Prince George’s County Maryland. As discussed above, after the DOJ intervention, the number of complaints about use of force decreased. At the same time, however, the use of force by the police actually increased. In other words, the police used force more and received fewer complaints about it.326 One concern about reform is that it has a pacification effect. It calms the natives even when they should not be calm.327 “False consciousness” is the term some theorists have used to describe the tendency of liberal reforms to “dupes those at the bottom of the social and economic hierarchy” with promises of “equality, fairness, and neutrality.” In the context of civil rights and anti-discrimination law, Kimberle´ Crenshaw warned that the “limited gains” of civil rights legislation could “hamper efforts of African-Americans to name their reality and to remain capable of engaging in collective action in the future.”329 Even though civil rights laws passed in the 1960s succeeded in breaking down some formal barriers, subtle and invidious forms of discrimination persisted. Moreover, the perception of progress may have mollified communities of color and sapped the energy needed for a continued push for substantive equality. Some criminal justice scholars and policy makers have focused on perceptions of the fairness of the criminal process. A newsletter from the Department of Justice’s Community Oriented Policing Services office, entitled “The Case for Procedural Justice: Fairness as a Crime Prevention Tool,” describes the work of the leading procedural justice scholar: Professor Tom Tyler of Yale Law School, has identified several critical dimensions of procedural fairness: (1) voice (the perception that your side of the story has been heard); (2) respect (perception that system players treat you with dignity and respect); (3) neutrality (perception that the decision-making process is unbiased and trustworthy); (4) understanding (comprehension of the process and how decisions are made); and (5) helpfulness (perception that system players are interested in your personal situation to the extent that the law allows). The problem with reform that is focused on improving perceptions about the police is that it can cloak aggressive policing in enhanced legitimacy, and it has the potential to blunt the momentum for rising up against overcriminalization, wealth inequality, and white supremacy.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-2016-12-03 16:49:31.0

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-Ryan Stephens

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-Westwood JA

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-25

Round

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-4

Team

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-Strake Jesuit Li Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-ND - Abolish DHS CP

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-Longhorn Classic