Last modified by Administrator on 2017/08/29 03:40

From version < 7.1 >
edited by Drew Thorburn
on 2016/10/29 17:58
To version < 30.1 >
edited by Drew Thorburn
on 2017/01/15 06:56
< >
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[0]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +0
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1 -2016-10-29 17:58:53.972
1 +2016-10-29 17:58:53.0
Caselist.CitesClass[0]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,32 @@
1 +First, the judge as an adult ensures decisions made do not negatively impact abused children. Oppression faced by all beings is bad, including animals. Prefer a) Children do not have rights, which causes the abused children to be helpless in the eyes of societal law. b) Adults have obligations to prevent and mitigate the ongoing child abuse, Muhr 14:
2 +https://www.adn.com/author/adam-muhr
3 +Adam Muhr serves as manager of Alaska CARES, an outpatient clinic of Providence Alaska Medical Center that provides sexual and physical abuse evaluations for children. Our job as adults and health care professionals is to protect children and to maintain standards that keep children safe within our community and hospital. Sadly, even when hiring processes and background checks are correctly performed and policies for reporting abuse are properly followed, abuse may still occur. When we hear that a child has been harmed by sexual abuse we feel anger at the perpetrator. Our anger increases when we learn, as in many cases, the abuse happened more than once. According to the resource book "Children Can't Protect Themselves: It's Your Job," sexual abuse affects at least 20 percent of children in the United States. This is an alarmingly high number. As adults, we can all help reduce the prevalence of childhood sexual abuse. Children are vulnerable. It's our responsibility as adults to keep them safe.
4 +To clarify, my argument isn’t that child abuse is the worst form of oppression, but rather in decision making processes an adult has an obligation to ensure the decision made best benefits the abused child whom society voids basic rights. If we focus on other forms of oppression the abused child will never be helped, O’Neill 88 2
5 +(O'Neill. O., 1988, ‘Children's Rights and Children's Lives’, Ethics, 98: 445–463.)
6 +She is an Emeritus Professor of Philosophy at the University of Cambridge, a former President of the British Academy 1988–1989 and chaired the Nuffield Foundation 1998–2010.1 In 2003, she was the founding President of the British Philosophical Association (BPA)
7 +No doubt oppression takes its toll, and those who have been treated as dependent all their adult lives often lack confidence and are more subservient and less autonomous that they may become: but the potential for empowerment is there, and activity and agitation to claim rights that denied may itself builds confidence and autonomy. But the dependence of children is very different from the dependence of oppressed social groups on those who exercise power over them. Younger children are completely and unavoidably dependent on those who have power over their lives. Theirs is not a dependence which has been artificially produced (although it can be artificially prolonged); nor can it be ended merely by social or political changes, nor are others reciprocally dependent on children.
8 + The dependence of oppressed social groups, on the other hand, is often limited, artificially produced, reducible and frequently matched by the reciprocal dependence of the privileged on the oppressed, who provide servants, workers, and soldiers. It is not uprising that oppressors often try to suggest that they standing a parental relation to those whom they oppress: in that way they suggest that the latter’s dependence is natural and irremediable and their own exercise of power a burden which they bear with benevolent fortitude. The vocabulary and trappings of paternalism are often misused to mask the unacceptable faces of power. It is not mere metaphor, but highly political rhetoric, when oppressors describe what they do as paternalistic.
9 +The crucial difference between childhood dependence and the dependence of oppressed social groups is that childhood is a stage of life, from which children normally emerge and are helped and urged to merge by those who most power over them. Those with power over children’s lives usually have some interest in ending childish dependence. Oppressors usually have an interest in maintain the oppression of social group. Children have both less need and less capacity to exert “pressure from below,” and less potential for using the rhetoric of rights as a political instrument.
10 +
11 +Thus, the role of the ballot and judge is to vote for the better policy that protects the abused youth. More warrants:
12 +1. Children are particularly excluded and not considered relevant by academics, allowing willful ignorance of violence that costs them their lives. Only a focus on children as an important group can stop systemic structural violence – otherwise all oppression towards them is rendered unseen. GIROUX 2K:
13 +Public Pedagogy and the Responsibility of Intellectuals: Youth, Littleton, and the Loss of Innocence Henry A. Giroux. jac 20.1 (2000)
14 +Unfortunately, as the post-Littleton debate has clearly shown, educators in a variety of fields, including rhetoric and composition studies, have had little to say about how young people increasingly have become the victims of adult mistreatment, greed, neglect, and domination. The question of how young people experience, resist, challenge, and mediate the complex cultural politics and social spaces that mark their everyday lives does not seem to warrant the attention such issues deserve, especially in light of the ongoing assaults on minority youth of color and class that have taken place since the 1980s. Figures of youth and age circulate almost unnoticed. While educators in rhetoric and composition have learned to consider gender, race, class, and sexuality as part of a politics of education, they have not begun to think of youth as a critical category for social analysis or of the politics of youth and its implications for a radical democracy. The category of youth have has not yet been factored into a broader discourse on politics, power, and social change. In what follows, I attempt to address this lacunae in rhetoric and composition studies in particular and in educational theory in general by analyzing the current assault on youth, and I suggest that educators rethink the interrelated dynamics of politics, culture, and power as they increasingly erode those social spaces necessary for providing young people with the intellectual and material resources they need to participate in and shape the diverse economic, political, and social conditions influencing their lives. I also attempt to develop a critical language that both engages youth as a critical category and offers suggestions for the political and pedagogical roles that educators might play in addressing the crisis of youth, which is itself part of the broader crisis ofpubliclife, and I maintain that understanding the crisis of youth must be central to any notion of literacy, pedagogy, and cultural politics. Central to the view developed here is the assumption that any viable notion of cultural politics must make the pedagogical more political because it is through the pedagogical force of culture that identities are constructed, citizenship rights are enacted, and possibilities are developed for translating acts of interpretation into forms of intervention. Pedagogy, in my view, is about putting subject positions in place and linking the construction of agency to issues of ethics, politics, and power. Recognizing the educational force of the cultural sphere also suggests making the political more pedagogical by addressing how agency unfolds within power-infused relations-that is, how the very processes of learning constitute the political mechanisms through which identities are produced, desires mobilized, and experiences take on specific forms and meanings. This broad definition of pedagogy is not limited to what occurs in institutionalized forms of schooling; it encompasses every relationship that young people imagine to be theirs in the world, where social agency is both enabled and constrained across multiple sites and where meanings enter the realm of power and function as public discourses. Cultural politics, in this instance, must include the issue of youth culture and can not longer be abstracted from considerations of what happens to the bodies and minds of young people at a time in history when the state is being hollowed out and policies of surveillance, regulation, and disciplinary control increasingly replace a welfare state that once provided minimal social services (food stamp programs, child nutrition programs, child health programs, funds for family planning) designed to prevent widespread poverty, suffering, and deprivations among large numbers of youth. Children have been made our lowest national priority, a fact that is most evident as social policy in this country has shifted from social investment to a politics of containment.2 The crisis of youth does not simply reflect the loss of social vision, the ongoing corporatization of public space, and the erosion of democratic life; it also suggests the degree to which youth have been "othered" across a wide range of ideological positions, rendered unworthy of serious analysis as an oppressed group, or deemed to be no longer at risk but rather to be a risk to democratic public life (see Stephens 13). Indifference coupled with demonization make an unholy alliance that fails to foreground the importance of children's agency and the role that young people can play in shaping a future that will not simply repeat the present, a present in which children are increasingly regarded as a detriment to adult society rather than as a valuable resource.
15 +2. Debate is a unique forum for high-schooler’s to advocate for children – children are denied participation due to the current structure of society. GODWIN 11: Children's Oppression, Rights and Liberation by Samantha Godwin 2011
16 +While childhood similarly marks a stage of life that each of us will pass through, it is unlike old age, excluded from the consideration in the majoritarian process. While all adult voters were once children, they will not become children again at some point in the future so they need not worry about the legal disadvantages of children being applied to them, whereas adults anticipate becoming elderly and therefore have a self-preservation motive to prevent discrimination against the elderly. Another obvious difference is simply that the elderly, unlike children, can vote, and in practice they vote disproportionately. Children are also de facto denied the right to assemble: their ability to travel to demonstrations or to political meetings can be restricted by their parents and truancy laws, with the state ready to use its police power to enforce parental authority if necessary. Access to the media is further curtailed not only because children lack the financial means to popularize their views but because they lack the legal rights to have the opportunity to acquire those means.
17 +Part 1: Counter Plan U.S. Department of Health and Human Service 13 Counter Plan Text: Limit qualified immunity in all instances except police investigation of child abuse in which, absolute immunity available under the state’s child abuse and neglect reporting act extends not only to making of initial report of child abuse, but also to the conduct giving rise to an obligation to report, such as collection of data, or observation, examination, or treatment of suspected victim performed in a professional capacity, and to subsequent communications between reporter and public authorities responsible for investigating or prosecuting child abuse. REPORT TO CONGRESS ON IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTATION IN SUSPECTED AND KNOWN INSTANCES OF CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT June 2013 U.S. the solvency advocate, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Service 2, clarifies the need for this policy:
18 +(U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Administration on Children, Youth and Families Children’s Bureau) The reauthorization required the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to consult with experts in healthcare, law enforcement, education, and local child welfare administration, and examine how immunity from prosecution under state and local laws and regulations facilitate or inhibit individuals cooperating, consulting, or assisting in making good faith reports of suspected child abuse or neglect. The Secretary of HHS must submit a report to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions of the Senate and the Committee on Education and the Workforce of the House of Representatives with information about the study conducted and any recommendations for When Placing a Child in Emergency Protective Custody, Officers who become involved in a child abuse case through social services should consider all information that has been provided to them. Based on this information, officers should ask a basic question: “If we leave and obtain a court order to remove this child, is the child likely to be injured before we return?” If the answer is yes, then the officer should remove the child. All actions should be in accordance with State guidelines and departmental policy and procedure: Depending on the jurisdiction, the officer may be obligated to remove the child if direct disclosure of physical or sexual abuse is made, if such abuse is alleged, or if evidence of an abusive incident is present. Moreover, in most jurisdictions, State law allows an officer to decide to remove a child based on observation of the facts and judgment of the information given. In some situations an
19 +officer may remove a child because he or she feels that the child may suffer further physical or emotional harm or trauma or be hidden or abducted before a court order can be obtained. In some jurisdictions law enforcement may be called upon by child protective services to investigate allegations of child abuse, to officially place a child in emergency protective custody, or to assist with such placement. Officers in such situations need to know the laws in their State. they furtherFailure to understand their legally mandated r
20 +oles and responsibilities could result in: A child being left in a dangerous situation. A child being removed illegally. The officer and the department being placed in a situation of civil liability. However, if a mistake is to be made, it is better to err in the attempt to safeguard the physical well-being of the child. In jurisdictions where law enforcement has sole responsibility for deciding to remove a child from the home, the child is usually placed in the custody of the department of social services until a final determination regarding custody of the child can be made by the courts. Social services is responsible for placing the child in a licensed foster care facility. Officers 14 need to be aware of the legalities regarding parental rights and their responsibilities for providing written notification of the child’s removal. In most States it is not acceptable for law enforcement to take a child from one parent and place him or her in the custody of another parent or of a relative without a court order or verification of legal authority. Also, in most States the placement of a child in the custody of another individual is the sole responsibility of the department of social services and not law enforcement. However, if social services chooses to place the child in the custody of a parent or someone other than a licensed foster care facility, law enforcement should be aware of the jurisdiction’s policies and practices before participating in or agreeing to this placement.
21 +When it appears that a child is in danger of being harmed, or has already been seriously abused or neglected, a police officer can place the child in protective custody. Custody of the child is then transferred to CPS which places the child with a relative or in foster care. By law, a child can be kept in protective custody for no more than 72 hours, excluding weekends and legal holidays. If the child is not returned to the parents or some other voluntary arrangement made within 72 hours, the matter must be reviewed by a court. Four implications: a) The neg challenges class based oppression by supplying the ability for care to every child. b) Shows the plan shifts the current values of the state toward that of commitment to best aiding abused children. c) It is more beneficial for the child if the police are able to err on the side caution d) The negs implementation is that of a moral necessity in order to ensure abused youth best receive aid Part 2: Harms First roughly 20 of the population experiences childhood abuse: NCA (National Children’s Alliance) 13: 2013 National Abuse Statistics 
22 +An estimated 679,000 children were victims of abuse and neglect (unique instances). 47 states reported approximately 3.1 million children received preventative services from Child Protective Services agencies in the United States. Children in the first year of their life had the highest rate of victimization of 23.1 per 1,000 children in the national population of the same age. Of the children who experienced maltreatment or abuse, nearly 80 suffered neglect; 18 suffered physical abuse; and 9 suffered sexual abuse. Just under 80 of reported child fatalities as a result of abuse and neglect were caused by one or more of the child victim’s parents.
23 +Second, victims of child abuse face increasing danger later in life: Child Welfare . Gov 13
24 +The impact of child abuse and neglect is often discussed in terms of physical, psychological, behavioral, and societal consequences. In reality, however, it is impossible to separate the types of impacts. Physical consequences, such as damage to a child’s growing brain, can have psychological implications, such as cognitive delays or emotional difficulties. Psychological problems often manifest as high-risk behaviors. Depression and anxiety, for example, may make a person more likely to smoke, abuse alcohol or drugs, or overeat. High-risk behaviors, in turn, can lead to long-term physical health problems, such as sexually transmitted diseases, cancer, and obesity. Not all children who have been abused or neglected will experience long term consequences, but they may have an increased susceptibility.
25 +The immediate physical effects of abuse or neglect can be relatively minor (bruises or cuts) or severe (broken bones, hemorrhage, or even death). In some cases, the physical effects are temporary; however, the pain and suffering they cause a child should not be discounted. Child abuse and neglect can have a multitude of long-term effects on physical health. NSCAW researchers found that, at some point during the 3 years following a maltreatment investigation, 28 percent of children had a chronic health condition (Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation ACF/OPRE, 2007). Below are some outcomes other researchers have identified: Abusive head trauma. Abusive head trauma, an inflicted injury to the head and its contents caused by shaking and blunt impact, is the most common cause of traumatic death for infants. The injuries Long-Term Consequences of Child Abuse and Neglect https://www.childwelfare.gov 4 This material may be freely reproduced and distributed. However, when doing so, please credit Child Welfare Information Gateway. Available online at https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/factsheets/long_term_consequences.cfm may not be immediately noticeable and may include bleeding in the eye or brain and damage to the spinal cord and neck. Significant brain development takes place during infancy, and this important development is compromised in maltreated children. One in every four victims of shaken baby syndrome dies, and nearly all victims experience serious health consequences (CDC, n.d.). Impaired brain development. Child abuse and neglect have been shown to cause important regions of the brain to fail to form or grow properly, resulting in impaired development. These alterations in brain maturation have long-term consequences for cognitive, language, and academic abilities and are connected with mental health disorders (Tarullo, 2012). Disrupted neurodevelopment as a result of maltreatment can cause children to adopt a persistent fear state as well as attributes that are normally helpful during threatening moments but counterproductive in the absence of threats, such as hypervigilance, anxiety, and behavior impulsivity Poor mental and emotional health. Experiencing childhood trauma and adversity, such as physical or sexual abuse, is a risk factor for borderline personality disorder, depression, anxiety, and other psychiatric disorders. One study using ACE data found that roughly 54 percent of cases of depression and 58 percent of suicide attempts in women were connected to adverse childhood experiences (Felitti and Anda, 2009). Child maltreatment also negatively impacts the development of emotion regulation, which often persists into adolescence or adulthood (MessmanMorre, Walsh, and DiLillo, 2010). Cognitive difficulties. NSCAW researchers found that children with substantiated reports of maltreatment were at risk for severe developmental and cognitive problems, including grade repetition (ACF/OPRE, 2012b). In its final report on the second NSCAW study (NSCAW II), more than 10 percent of school-aged children and youth showed some risk of cognitive problems or low academic achievement, 43 percent had emotional or behavioral problems, and 13 percent had both (ACF/OPRE, 2011). Social difficulties. Children who experience neglect are more likely to develop antisocial traits as they grow up. Parental neglect is associated with borderline personality disorders, attachment issues or affectionate behaviors with unknown/little-known people, inappropriate modeling of adult behavior, and aggression (Perry, 2012)
26 +Juvenile delinquency and adult criminality. Several studies have documented the correlation between child abuse and future juvenile delinquency. Children who have experienced abuse are nine times more likely to become involved Long-Term Consequences of Alcohol and other drug abuse. Research consistently reflects an increased likelihood that children who have experienced abuse or neglect will smoke cigarettes, abuse alcohol, or take illicit drugs during their lifetime. In fact, male children with an ACE Score of 6 or more (having six or more adverse childhood experiences) had an increased likelihood—of more than 4,000 percent—to use intravenous drugs later in life (Felitti and Anda, 2009). Abusive behavior. Abusive parents often have experienced abuse during their own childhoods. Data from the Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health showed that girls who experienced childhood physical abuse were 1–7 percent more likely to become perpetrators of youth violence and 8–10 percent more likely to be perpetrators of interpersonal violence (IPV). Boys who experienced childhood sexual violence were 3–12 percent more likely to commit youth violence and 1–17 percent more likely to commit IPV (Xiangming and Corso, 2007) Four impacts: a) Outweighs aff offense on magnitude; giving child abuse investigators ability to better aid the child avoids chronic health conditions, cognitive disabilities, suicide, rates of crime, use of drugs, self-harm, and future chances of perpetrating abuse . b) Shows the necessity of the policing body, even if it’s not perfect it’s definitely better than the harms in the neg c) Means there is an infinite net disadvantage to waiting since it forces the abused to sit by defenseless during which they are continuously abused d) neg offense outweighs potential aff K impacts because the neg has immediate solvency. Part 3: Solvency First, the immediate removal of the alleged abused child instantly removes threats of abuse, and while the child’s safety is ensured an official thorough investigation can be conducted: Mason 9
27 +(Mason, Yvonne. "Fourth Amendment Rights." How Child Protection Services Buys and Sells Our Children. N.p., 20 Nov. 2009. Web. 26 Oct. 2016.) Education: After a 34 year absence, returned to college in 2004. Graduated with honors in Criminal Justice with an Associate’s degree from Lanier Technical College in 2006.
28 +Awards: Nominated for the prestigious GOAL award in 2005 which encompasses all of the technical colleges. This award is based not only on excellence in academics but also leadership, positive attitude and the willingness to excel in one’s major.
29 +"The right of the police to enter and investigate in an emergency . . . is inherent in the very nature of their duties as peace officers, and derives from the common law."16 However, in order to qualify for the "exigent circumstances" exception to probable cause there must be a showing of true necessity that is, an imminent and substantial threat to life, health, or property. "17 To put it another way, state actors making the search must have reason to believe that life or limb is in immediate jeopardy and that the intrusion is reasonably necessary to alleviate the threat.18 When a social worker or law enforcement officer seeks to enter a home, a parent should ask to see a search warrant. If no warrant has been issued, the social worker or law enforcement officer will be forced to decide whether there is imminent danger to a child inside in order to proceed into the home. Often, the social worker or law enforcement officer will not wish to make such a conclusion if there is no evidence. The state may then either close the investigation or obtain a warrant. Courts have held that the states temporary assertion of custodial authority in the face of a reasonably perceived emergency does not violate due process.70 "When a child's safety is threatened, that is justification enough for action first and hearing afterwards."71 Thus, while the courts have acknowledged that a parent's rights to retain care and custody over their children are fundamental, they have also held that the state has a compelling interest in the health and safety of its children which may justify interference with that care and custody.72 Most states provide that a child may be taken from the home if there is a reasonable belief that a child is in imminent danger.75 States differ on who may actually take physical custody, however. Some states allow a law enforcement officer or a social worker to take a child into emergency protective custody, and others allow only a law enforcement officer to do so. When a social worker or law enforcement officer seeks to take custody, a parent should ask to see a court order. If the social worker or law enforcement officer does not possess a court order they will be forced to determine whether the child is in imminent danger in order to proceed with the removal of the child into protective custody. Often a social worker or law enforcement officer will not wish to make such a conclusion and will leave the home. The investigation may be closed if there is no evidence of imminent danger, or the investigator may obtain a court order. In either case, the parent has forced the state to accord him/her due process before the removal of the child occurs.
30 +
31 +Second, the sooner the cause of abuse is removed, the better chance the child has at recovery: Web Md 16
32 +Early treatment gives an abused or neglected child the best chance for recovery. Treatment for the child The first step is to provide a safe environment to prevent further harm. The sooner this happens, the better the child's chance for physical and emotional recovery. This includes separating the child, as well as any other children in the household, from the person suspected of abuse. Any physical injuries will be treated, either in a hospital or at a doctor's office, depending on how serious they are. Counseling is always recommended for abused or neglected children. It usually focuses on: How they feel about themselves. Their past experiences. Fears and concerns they may have about the present and future. For very young children, counseling may involve play therapy. Treatment for parents or caregivers Parents or caregivers who have abused or neglected a child also need treatment. The type of treatment depends on the specific abuse that occurred. Some people need to learn more about how to raise and care for children. Others may need treatment for other serious problems, such as: Drug or alcohol abuse. Depression or other mental health problems. Low self-esteem. Violent behavior. Parents who have lost custody of their children can sometimes regain it. It depends on how bad the abuse or neglect was and how far they have come in realizing what their problems are and how to prevent them. In severe cases, the parent can see the child only when someone else is present. Sometimes a judge permanently ends the parent-child relationship.
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2016-10-29 17:58:55.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Daniel Shatzkin
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +LMHS Speech GG
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +0
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Strake Jesuit Thorburn Neg
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Round 2 NC
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Blue Key
Caselist.CitesClass[1]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +I reserve the right to read anything off of my teammates' wikis.
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2016-11-19 13:51:07.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Schmack
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Jack
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +1
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Finals
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Strake Jesuit Thorburn Neg
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Read Me
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Read Me
Caselist.CitesClass[2]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,53 @@
1 +A. Interpretation:
2 +Limit’ is defined by Merriam-Webster as:
3 +http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/limit
4 +To curtail or reduce in quantity or extent.
5 +
6 +
7 +1
8 +Culpability NC
9 +I value morality. First, morality must address the nature of individual personhood and reasons for actions, Morse: Stephen Morse is a Ferdinand Wakeman Hubbell Professor of Law; Professor of Psychology and Law in Psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania. “Rationality and Responsibility”
10 +In brief, the law’s concept of the person is a creature who acts for reasons and is potentially able to be guided by reason. Physical causes explain all the moving parts of the universe, but only human action can also be explained by reasons. It makes no sense to ask the winds or the tides or infrahuman species why they do what they do, but this question makes sense of and is central to our explanations of human behavior. When we want to know why an agent intentionally behaved as she did, we do not desire a biophysical explanation, as if the person were simply biophysical flotsam and jetsam. Instead, we seek the reason she acted, the desires and beliefs that formed the practical syllogism that produced intentional conduct.
11 +Only a conception of morality with an understanding of reasons for why people act is able to assess conduct. Just as we don’t place noteworthy blame on a hurricane for killing people, morality must account for the responsibility of its actors, Morse 2, Stephen Morse is a Ferdinand Wakeman Hubbell Professor of Law; Professor of Psychology and Law in Psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania. “Rationality and Responsibility”
12 +The law’s concept of responsibility follows from its view of the person and the nature of law itself. Unless human beings are rational creatures who can understand the applicable rules and standards, and can conform to those legal requirements through intentional action, the law would be powerless to affect human behavior. Legally responsible agents are therefore people who have the general capacity to grasp and be guided by good reason in particular legal contexts. They must be capable of rational practical reasoning. The law presumes capability and that the same rules may be applied to all people with this capacity. The law We do does not presume that all people act for good reason all the time. It is sufficient for responsibility that the agent has the general capacity for rationality, even if the capacity is not exercised on a particular occasion. Indeed, it is my claim that lack of the general capacity for rationality explains precisely those cases, such as infancy or certain instances of severe mental disorder or dementia, in which the law now excuses agents or finds them not competent to perform some task.
13 +Thus the standard is consistency with individual capabilities. You can only be held to obligations if you are responsible for the reason those obligations are necessary and capable of performing them. Prefer the standard:
14 +1. Accounting for agent capacity is key to a functional theory of morality as different people necessitate different responsibilities for instance if I’m being mugged a policeman and an old lady should respond differently, otherwise morality would be self-defeating and devolve to nihilism since individuals couldn’t meet its requirements and it’d be a moot guide for action.
15 +2. Equality is part of all moral theories because otherwise moral discourse would be impossible as those considered lesser would be categorically excluded, making our moral knowledge skewed. And considering individual capabilities is key to equality since otherwise those who are less well-off will be perpetually held to more demanding standards they can never meet.
16 +Contention
17 +I contend that Limiting qualified immunity would make police officers liable for actions that they are not capable of acting otherwise or ethically culpable for.
18 +Subpoint A- Police officers often have to make split-second decisions in their line of work – it’s inevitable. McGuinness 02
19 +J. Michael McGuinness, Law Enforcement Use of Force: The Objective Reasonableness Standards under North Carolina and Federal Law, 24 Campbell L. Rev. 201 (2002). - http://scholarship.law.campbell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1387andcontext=clr
20 +In a split second, officers are required to evaluate and employ force against criminal suspects to thwart apparent dangers to citizens and themselves.' ° The officer is often alone in this nightmare, like a "pedestrian in Hell."'" The officer's environment in use of force deci- 5. Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 206 (2001). 6. See Brown v. Gilmore, 278 F.3d 362, 370 (4th Cir. 2002); Schwartz, 2002 WL 312501; Volpe, 224 F.3d 72. 7. One of the three primary United States Supreme Court cases arose from North Carolina. See Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989). In North Carolina, even investigations into alleged excessive force have generated high profile litigation. See In re Brooks, 143 N.C. App. 601, 548 S.E.2d 748 (2001), where an unprecedented ex parte procedure was used by the State Bureau of Investigation, but ultimately declared improper, to obtain confidential personnel and internal affairs files of officers without a warrant and without notice to the officers and opportunity to be heard. 8. See THOMAS T. GILLESPIE ET AL., Police Use of Force: A Line Officer's Guide (Varro 1998); DR. ALEXIS ARTWOHL and LOREN W. CHRISTENSEN, DEADLY FORCE ENCOUNTERS: WHAT Cops NEED TO KNOW TO MENTALLY AND PHYSICALLY PREPARE FOR AND SURVIVE A GUNFIGHT ( Penguin Press 1997). 9. See Saucier, 533 U.S. 194; Graham, 490 U.S. 386; Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985). This trilogy provides the parameters for the typical use of force case. See Bd. of Comm'rs v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397 (1997)(reviewing governmental liability issues). 10. See Saucier, 533 U.S. 194; Park v. Shiflett, 250 F.3d 843, 853 (4th Cir. 2001); Anderson v. Russell, 247 F.3d 125, 129 (4th Cir. 2001); McLenagan v. Karnes, 27 F.3d 1002, 1007 (4th Cir. 1994). "An officer oftentimes only has a split second to make the critical judgment of whether to use his weapon." Ford v. Childers, 855 F.2d 1271, 1276 (7th Cir. 1988). 11. "The policeman's world is spawned of degradation, corruption and insecurity .... he walks alone, a pedestrian in Hell." WILLIAM A. WEsTLEY, VIOLENCE AND THE POLICE: A SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY OF LAW, CUSTOM and MORALITY V. (MIT Press 1970). "A police officer's life is always at risk, no matter how routine the assignment might seem." National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, Inc., Police Deaths Mount Nationwide, , at 1. "On average, one police officer dies within the line of duty nationwide every 54 hours." Id. "There are more than 3 McGuinness: Law Enforcement Use of Force: The Objective Reasonableness Standa Published by Scholarly Repository @ Campbell University School of Law, 2002 CAMPBELL LAW REVIEW decision-making is particularly unique because of the time pressures to act immediately without "armchair reflection"12 and because the lives of officers and bystanders are often at immediate risk. Many of these split second decisions by officers to employ force are correct, while some are mistaken. Under what circumstances does a mistaken belief that deadly force is necessary subject an officer to civil, criminal or civil rights liability? Generally, if the officer's mistaken belief is objectively reasonable under the circumstances, then the officer is not subject to any liability. The perceived danger must only be apparent, not actual, in order to justify the use of deadly force. North Carolina and federal law provide that where officers make reasonable mistakes, there is generally no liability. Professor Rubin of the Institute of Government at the University of North Carolina has observed that "despite its place in North Carolina jurisprudence, however, the excessive force element has been difficult to apply. The principle difficulty has been with distinguishing the requirement that the Defendant's force not be excessive, or unreasonable, from the reasonable belief requirement embodied" in the law. 13 Recent cases have clarified these issues, especially Saucier v. Katz, 14 where the Supreme Court reaffirmed recognition of the doctrine of mistaken beliefs in use of force cases
21 +Subpoint B- Culpability falls on the government and police departments for inadequate training of their officers when they make mistakes, they’re culpable, not the officer. Holland 15 Joshua Holland, Are We Training Cops to be Hyper-Aggressive Warriors, 2015
22 +What got less attention is that less than two weeks before the shooting, the officer who shot Crawford had been trained to respond to “active shooter situations” by shooting first and asking questions later.According to The Guardian, officer Sean Williams and his colleagues were “taught to keep in mind that ‘the suspect wants a body count’ and therefore officers should immediately engage a would-be gunman with ‘speed, surprise and aggressiveness.’” At that training, they were told to imagine that a crazed gunman was threatening their own relatives. Dispatchers led Williams and his partner to believe that an active-shooter situation was underway. Store surveillance videoshowed that Crawford was shot and killed just seconds after police made contact with him, and probably had no idea what was happening. They followed their training, acting with speed, surprise, and aggressiveness. Thanks in large part to pressure brought by Black Lives Matter activists, some police experts are calling for a complete overhaul in the way cops are trained, both as cadets and during the “in-service” training they receive over the course of their careers. There are no national standards for training police, and the amount and quality of their instruction varies from agency to agency. But a survey of 280 police departments conducted by the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF), a Washington, DC–based think tank, found that American cops are given extensive preparation for using violence, and very little guidance on how to avoid it. The median police recruit in the United States will receive 129 hours of instruction on defensive techniques and using his or her gun, baton, OC-spray, and Taser. That cadet will receive another 24 hours of scenario-based training, drilling on things like when to shoot or hold fire. The median trainee also gets 48 hours of instruction on constitutional law and his or her department’s use-of-force policies.But that same future police officer will receive only eight hours of training in conflict de-escalation. And despite the fact that a quarter of the 838 citizens shot dead by police this year showed symptoms of mental-health issues, according to The Washington Post, the median cadet gets only eight hours of training in crisis intervention. The study paints a similar picture with in-service training. A total of 59 percent of a cop’s time is spent on using their weapons or defending themselves. That’s more than four times as much time that he or she will spend on de-escalation and crisis intervention. Almost all of the agencies surveyed offer their cops continual training with firearms, but over a third offer zero in-service instruction on conflict de-escalation.
23 +2
24 +Cincinnati Model CP
25 +
26 +CP Text: Aff actors ought to adopt the Cincinnati Model of policing while maintaining qualified immunity – this entails
27 +A) Community problem-oriented policing 
28 +B) A system that allows complaints against officers, and discipline for those officers
29 +C) Press conferences immediately following police shootings to communicate with the public 
30 +
31 +Semeuls 15: Semeuls, Alana Contributor, The Atlantic “How to Fix a Broken Police Department.” The Atlantic. May 2015.
32 +Some of the changes were small: The police department vowed to hold a press conference within 12 hours of any officer-involved shooting and to provide information as well as camera footage from the event. It agreed to track officers who received an inordinate number of complaints or who violated policies, and take disciplinary action if needed. It established a Citizen Complaint Authority with investigative and subpoena powers over police. It adopted new use-of-force policies, changed guidelines on when to use chemical spray, and established a mental-health response team to deal with incidents in which a suspect may have mental-health problems. But those changes were tiny in contrast to what Herold and others say completely altered the department over the course of a decade: the adoption of a new strategy for how to police. The settlement agreement for the ACLU lawsuit, dubbed the Collaborative, required Cincinnati police to adopt community problem-oriented policing, or CPOP. The strategy required them to do fewer out-and-out arrests, and instead focus on solving the problems that cause people to commit crimes in the first place.
33 +
34 +You don’t get the perm:
35 +A) Textually competitive: The perm is irresolvable if you pass a policy that limits qualified immunity and maintains it at the same time.
36 +B) Functionally competitive: It’s impossible to maintain qualified immunity while limiting it at the same time. That’s incoherent.
37 +C) If I lose mutual exclusivity, any disad to the affirmative is a reason to vote on the CP.
38 +
39 +Problem oriented policing solves the ROOT CAUSE of poverty and stops police brutality. Semeuls 2
40 +Semeuls: Semeuls, Alana Contributor, The Atlantic “How to Fix a Broken Police Department.” The Atlantic. May 2015.
41 +Problem-oriented policing was developed in 1979 by Herman Goldstein, a University of Wisconsin professor, and was first adopted in Newport News, Virginia. Other police departments, such as Baltimore, have used the method and then abandoned it, said John Eck, a criminologist at the University of Cincinnati who helped the city adopt problem-oriented policing (which it calls Community Problem-Oriented Policing). The strategy suggests that police should not just respond to calls for service. It says they should also look for patterns in these calls to service, determine what is causing the patterns and then implement solutions to solve them, he said. If hospitals notice an inordinate number of emergency patients coming in with facial injuries due to glass beer bottles being broken over their heads in fights, as was the case in on British precinct, police work with the bottle manufacturer to make bottles are made out of material that won’t break, he said. If police notice a woman is a repeat victim of domestic violence because her partner breaks into her ground-floor apartment, they work with the landlord to move her to a higher floor, link her to a social-services agency and help her find free daycare so she doesn’t have to rely on her abusive spouse for help. In another example, when police noticed an increase in metal thefts in a neighborhood, they worked with property owners to paint their copper pipes green, posted signs about the pipes being painted green and then informed scrap yards of the program to gain support, which led to a reduction in copper thefts. The strategy requires that police intimately know members of the community and listen to their concerns, even if doing so doesn’t lead to arrests. It requires that they get out of their cars and walk the streets, and it requires that they reach out to partners they traditionally would battle, such as the owners of buildings in high-crime spots, or community groups like Legal Aid. New policing approaches come and go, seemingly every year, but leaders such as Herold say that problem-oriented policing differs in important ways from other strategies. Broken-windows policing, for example, holds that police can prevent bigger crimes by cracking down on disorder and small crimes in a neighborhood. But law-enforcement officers often end up just making a lot of arrests with broken-windows policing, instead of addressing the problems that lead to small or big crimes in the first place. Similarly, Compstat, which was pioneered in New York City in the 1990s, uses statistics and mapping to identify crime patterns and direct resources there. It’s been credited with lowering crime in New York City, but also criticized by some criminologists for focusing on the numbers of arrests different officers make, rather than on protecting residents with the help of community input. Hot-spots policing uses data to deploy officers to areas where crime and disorder are concentrated, but its effects are usually short-term because the approach rarely focuses on the causes of the crime, Eck said. “Most cops, in any organization, have seen the reform du jour come through, and it varies from wearing your hats in a certain way to something more sophisticated,” Eck told me. “Police chiefs come, polices chiefs go, just as dumb ideas come, dumb ideas go.” When I asked Eck how he knew that problem-oriented policing, which is also called problem-solving, isn’t just another fad, he admitted that sometimes he wonders the same thing. But when he tries to think of an alternative, he always comes back to the fact that unlike Compstat or other approaches, problem-solving deals with the complexity of what’s going on in a community. The police department, he says, is the only government institution that has a strong hierarchy and works around the clock, and so it can most effectively marshal resources and other departments to solve difficult problems.
42 +Few Implications:
43 +A) Solves the root cause of the aff, which means your perm is incoherent. Any risk of defense against the aff is a voting issue.
44 +B) The Semeuls evidence also points out multiple different methods of policing and addresses to why those don’t have any type of solvency. That’s the world after the aff even if you limit qualified immunity.
45 +C) The CP creates a spill-over effect. Outweighs aff on magnitude because the spillover the other departments is regressive which means it has exponential growth.
46 +Metastudy proves that problem oriented policing has empirically led to reduction in crime. Weisburd 10
47 +David Weisburd 2010 American Society of Criminology Hebrew University, George Mason University “Is problem-oriented policing effective in reducing crime and disorder http://www.smartpolicinginitiative.com/sites/all/files/POP20Weisburd_et_al.pdf
48 +As noted, we also collected pre/post studies that did not have a control or comparison condition. Typically, these studies examined official crime data before and after a POP intervention to determine how the POP project affected crime. These studies rarely took statistical steps to account for “history”—the idea that crime rates might be rising or falling independent of the specific POP project. We should note that these studies vary somewhat in methodological quality and not all can be categorized as “simple pre-post.”18 These studies also covered various problems that ranged from neighborhood disorder to homicide. As with our main analyses, responses also varied greatly but frequently included a combination of increased community involvement, targeted enforcement, and situational/environmental improvements (see Weisburd et al., 2008, for more information on each study). Thirty two of the 45 studies come from Goldstein or Tilley Award submissions. The fact that more than 70 of the studies are submissions for an award leads to a potential publication bias (Rothstein, 2008) or, rather, to a “nonpublication” bias. In our case, these nonpublished award submissions would be expected to be more positive than the published literature. We will address this issue later. In Figure 7, we use a bar graph to display the percent change in crime and disorder reported in each study. When more than one primary outcome was present in a study, we averaged to create a single outcome. The results are overwhelmingly in favor of POP effectiveness. Of our 45 pre/post studies, 43 report a decline in crime or disorder after the POP intervention. Thus, even though 32 of our studies were award submissions, and 31 of these showed a positive impact, 12 of our 13 other studies also reported a beneficial impact of POP. Only one study (Maguire and Nettleton, 2003) reported an increase in crime after using POP. The average percent change in crime across all studies was a sizeable 44.45 decrease. To account for variation in sample size (i.e., crime incidents or calls for service) between studies, we calculated a weighted average percent change by weighting each study by the in verse of its variance and assuming crime follows a Poisson distribution.19 With this sampling variance, we constructed a confidence interval around the percentage change for each study. A plot of proportion change with confidence intervals is presented in Figure 8. After weighting each study by the inverse of its variance, we recalculated the average percent change. Even with weighting, the average decrease in crime was still 32.49. Accordingly, although these before and after studies did not employ the methodological rigor of a randomized experiment, they did show consistently a substantial impact of POP on crime and disorder in both the award submissions and the published journal articles.
49 +Multiple reasons to prefer the study – definitely outweighs your analytics
50 +A) 32 of the 45 or over 70 of the studies come from Goldstein or Tilley Award submissions. That means there is no publication bias.
51 +B) The study accounted for multiple variables that could lead to changes in outcome, yet the resulting decrease stayed the same.
52 +C) Lastly, the study was compared to an inverse in variance meaning the chance of a flawed study is extremely low.
53 +3Overview: You should vote negative if I win sufficient solvency defense against the aff showing that it’s unlikely that there will be significant change. This is specifically more real world- policymakers do not take action if they know the effect will be minimal since there is always an opportunity cost to implementing a plan. There is always an innate time and opportunity disadvantage to doing any aff.
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2016-12-03 01:32:53.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Linsday Wilson
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Connal AK
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +1
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Strake Jesuit Thorburn Neg
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +UT NC
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Longhorn Classic at the University of Texas Austin
Caselist.CitesClass[4]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +A. Interpretation: The affirmative must defend not restricting any and all constitutionally protected speech—to clarify, they may not specify a constitutionally protected speech.
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2017-01-14 20:50:06.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Strake Jesuit JS
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Strake Jesuit JS
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +4
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +1
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Strake Jesuit Thorburn Neg
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +T interps
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Na
Caselist.CitesClass[5]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,34 @@
1 +The sufficient negative burden is to show there exists one instance where free speech ought not be constitutionally protected. This means you should frame all negative arguments as PICs out of the resolution- the affirmative has to show that we can make universal claims to every instance.
2 +Google Dictionary defines “not” as https://www.google.com/search?q=not+definitionandoq=not+definitionandaqs=chrome.0.0l6.2170j0j7andsourceid=chromeandie=UTF-8 “used with an auxiliary verb or “be” to form the negative.” Google Dictionary defines “any” as https://www.google.com/search q=not+definitionandoq=not+definitionandaqs=chrome.0.0l6.2170j0j7andsourceid=chromeandie=UTF-8#q=any+definition “whichever of a specified class might be chosen.” So this means the resolution says we can not choose a case to restrict speech. Whatever case might be chosen should not be restricted. So to prove the resolution true, you should show that there does not exist a case where we restrict constitutionally protected speech, else you negate. This is the topical division of ground that’s most grammatically correct- any other interpretation is incorrect. Semantics Outweigh A. They have lexical priority. A pragmatic approach would say “I’ll give you a million dollars if 2+2=5.” Even though you want the money, the pragmatic approach only offers a reason to want the statement to be true, not an actual reason for it to be true. B. Being semantically in line controls the internal link to pragmatic benefits. Nebel 15 Jake “The Priority of Resolutional Semantics” vbriefly February 20th 2015 http://vbriefly.com/2015/02/20/the-priority-of-resolutional-semantics-by-jake-nebel/ 
3 +1.1 The Topicality Rule vs. Pragmatic Considerations There is an obvious objection to my argument above. If the topicality rule is justified for reasons that have to do with fairness and education, then shouldn’t we just directly appeal to such considerations when determining what proposition we ought to debate? There are at least three ways I see of responding to this objection. One way admits that such pragmatic considerations are relevant—i.e., they are reasons to change the topic—but holds that they are outweighed by the reasons for the topicality rule. It would be better if everyone debated the resolution as worded, whatever it is, than if everyone debated whatever subtle variation on the resolution they favored. Affirmatives would unfairly abuse (and have already abused) the entitlement to choose their own unpredictable adventure, and negatives would respond (and have already responded) with strategies that are designed to avoid clash—including an essentially vigilantist approach to topicality in which debaters enforce their own pet resolutions on an arbitrary, round-by-round basis. Think here of the utilitarian case for internalizing rules against lying, murder, and other intuitively wrong acts. As the great utilitarian Henry Sidgwick argued, wellbeing is maximized not by everyone doing what they think maximizes wellbeing, but rather (in general) by people sticking to the rules of common sense morality. Otherwise, people are more likely to act on mistaken utility calculations and engage in self-serving violations of useful rules, thereby undermining social practices that promote wellbeing in the long run. That is exactly what happens if we reject the topicality rule in favor of direct appeals to pragmatic considerations.
4 +Contention Universal rules fail. Any application of rules can never be verified because rules are indeterminate, as they require prior knowledge to understand them, which can never be the basis for truth.
5 +Kripke Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language” by Saul A. Kripke Harvard University Press Cambridge, Massachusetts 1982
6 +“Normally, when we consider a mathematical rule such as addition, we think of ourselves as guided in our application of it to each new instance. Just this is the difference between someone who computes new values of a function and someone who calls out numbers at random. Given my past intentions regarding the symbol ‘+’, one and only one answer is dictated as the one appropriate to ‘68+57'. On the other hand, although an intelligence tester may suppose that there is only one possible continuation to the sequence 2, 4, 6, 8,…, mathematical and philosophical sophisticates know that an indefinite number of rules (even rules stated in terms of mathematical functions as conventional as ordinary polynomials) are compatible with any such finite initial segment. So if the tester urges me to respond, after 2, 4, 6, 8, . . ., with the unique appropriate next number, the proper response is that no such unique number exists, nor is there any unique (rule determined) infinite sequence that continues the given one. The problem can then be put this way: Did I myself, in the directions for the future that I gave myself regarding plus ‘+’, really differ from the intelligence tester? True, I may not merely stipulate that plus ‘+’ is to be a function instantiated by a finite number of computations. In addition, I may give myself directions for the further computation of plus ‘+', stated in terms of other functions and rules. In turn, I may give myself directions for the further computation of these functions and rules, and so on. Eventually, however, the process must stop, with ‘ultimate’ functions and rules that I have stipulated for myself only by a finite number of examples, just as in the intelligence test. If so, is not my procedure as arbitrary as that of the man who guesses the continuation of the intelligence test? In what sense is my actual computation procedure, following an algorithm that yields ‘125’, more justified by my past instructions than an alternative procedure that would have resulted in ‘5'? Am I not simply following an unjustifiable impulse?" Of course, these problems apply throughout language and are not confined to mathematical examples, though it is with mathematical examples that they can be most smoothly brought out. I think that I have learned the term 'table' in such a way that it will to apply to indefinitely many future items. So I can apply the term to a new situation, say when I enter the Eiffel Tower for the first time and see a table at the base. Can I answer a sceptic who supposes that by `table' in the past I meant tabair, where a 'tabair' is anything that is a table not found at the base of the Eiffel Tower, or a chair found there? Did I think explicitly of the Eiffel Tower when I first `grasped the concept of' a table, gave myself directions for what I meant by `table'? And even if I did think of the Tower, cannot any directions I gave myself mentioning it be reinterpreted compatibly with the sceptic's hypothesis? Most important for the ‘private language’ argument, the point of course applies to predicates o f sensations, visual impressions, and the like, as well: “How do I know that in working out the series -f 2 I must write “ 20,004, 20,006” and not “ 20,004, 20,008” ? - (The question: “How do I know that this color is-‘red’?” is similar.)” (Remarks on the Foundations ofMathematics, I, §3.) The passage strikingly illustrates a central thesis of this essay: that Wittgenstein regards the fundamental problems o f the philo­ sophy of mathematics and of the ‘private language argument’ - the problem of sensation language ~ as at root identical, stemming from his paradox. The whole o f §3 is a succinct and beautiful statement o f the Wittgensteinian paradox; indeed the whole initial section of part I of Remarks' on the Foundations of Mathematics is a development o f the problem with special reference to mathematics and logical inference. It has been supposed that all Ineed to do to determine my use ofthe word ‘green’ is to have an image, a sample, of green that I bring to mind whenever I apply the word in the future. When I use this tojustify my application of‘green’to anew object, should not the sceptical problem be obvious to any reader of Goodman?14 Perhaps by ‘green’, in the past I meant grue,15 and the color image, which indeed was grue, was meant to direct me to apply the word ‘green’ tourne objects always. If the blue object before me now is grue, then it falls in the extension o f‘green’, as I meant it in the past. It is no help to suppose that in the past I stipulated that ‘green’ was to apply to all and only those things ‘of the same color as’ the sample. The sceptic can reinterpret ‘same color’ as same schmolor, l 6 where things have the same schmolor if . . .” (17-20)
7 +Even if the AC specifies instances where constitutionally protected speech is good, its still a universal application of those instances, since there are still instances that fall outsides of the rule.
8 +Dancy“Ethics Without Principles” by Jonathan Dancy 2004 “But there are forms of holism that do not go so far as particularism. That is, we can accept the context-sensitivity, the variability, of reasons, but still suppose that there are the sorts of general truths about how reasons behave that might be expressed by moral principles. So even if we do reject Ross's position, there remains some distance to go before we get to particularism. Consider the following series of conditionals offered by Robert Brandom (2000: 88): 1. If I strike this dry, well-made match, then it will light. (this is p→q) 2. If p and the match is in a very strong electromagnetic field, then it will not light. ((p and r)→−q) 3. If p and r and the match is in a Faraday cage, then it will light. ((1 additions to the premises cannot make a good or cogent inference less good or cogent. Deductive reasoning is like this; an inference, once logically valid, remains so no matter what one adds as a premise (even if it be the negation of one of the original premises). Brandom's in the example is non- monotonic, since the cogent inference in (1) is reversed by the addition of the further consideration that the match is in a strong electromagnetic field. If one allows that this sort of thing can happen, is one therefore a holist in my sense? One would be a holist if the fact that I am striking a dry, well-made match is functioning as a reason for believing that it will light in the first case, but not in the second or the fourth. But Brandom is not trying to allude to that sort of possibility by his example. His point is rather the sort of phenomenon we find in chemistry: a feature may have a certain effect when alone, even though its combination with another feature will have the opposite effect. One could call this a ‘holistic’ point perfectly sensibly, but it is not holistic in my sense of that term. Holism in my sense is the claim that a feature which has a certain effect when alone can have the opposite effect in a combination. It is one thing to say, as Brandom does, that though a alone speaks in favour of action, a+b speaks as a whole against it; it is another to say that though a speaks in favour of action when alone, it speaks against action when in combination. The difference lies in what is doing the speaking against in cases where features are combined. In the former case (Brandom's) it is the combination; in the latter case (mine) it is the feature that originally spoke in favour. If there is an instance where speech would be bad, your framework auto-negates If they read non-ideal theory, that negatesthe burden from pappas- univeralism is bad- burden says aff intent is one of universalism For oppression affs Additionally, any case turn outweighs on particularity- root cause claims fail to understand specific instances of oppression and cannot guide action. Gregory Fernando Pappas Texas AandM University “The Pragmatists’ Approach to Injustice”, The Pluralist Volume 11, Number 1, Spring 2016. The pragmatists’ approach should be distinguished from nonideal theories whose starting point seems to be the injustices of society at large that have a history and persist through time, where the task of political philosophy is to detect and diagnose the presence of these historical injustices in particular situations of injustice. For example, critical theory today has inherited an approach to social philosophy characteristic of the European tradition that goes back to Rousseau, Marx, Weber, Freud, Marcuse, and others. Accord- ing to Roberto Frega, this tradition takes society to be “intrinsically sick” with a malaise that requires adopting a critical historical stance in order to understand how the systematic sickness affects present social situations. In other words, this approach assumes that¶ a philosophical critique of specific social situations can be accomplished only under the assumption of a broader and full blown critique of soci- ety in its entirety: as a critique of capitalism, of modernity, of western civilization, of rationality itself. The idea of social pathology becomes intelligible only against the background of a philosophy of history or of an anthropology of decline, according to which the distortions of actual social life are but the inevitable consequence of longstanding historical processes. (“Between Pragmatism and Critical Theory” 63)¶ However, this particular approach to injustice is not limited to critical theory. It is present in those Latin American and African American political philosophies that have used and transformed the critical intellectual tools of ¶ critical theory to deal with the problems of injustice in the Americas. For instance, Charles W. Mills claims that the starting point and alternative to the abstractions of ideal theory that masked injustices is to diagnose and rectify a history of an illness—the legacy of white supremacy in our actual society.11 The critical task of revealing this illness is achieved by adopting a historical perspective where the injustices of today are part of a larger historical narrative about the development of modern societies that goes back to how Europeans have progressively dehumanized or subordinated others. Similary, radical feminists as well as Third World scholars, as reaction to the hege- monic Eurocentric paradigms that disguise injustices under the assumption of a universal or objective point of view, have stressed how our knowledge is always situated. This may seem congenial with pragmatism except the locus of the knower and of injustices is often described as power structures located in “global hierarchies” and a “world-system” and not situations.12¶ Pragmatism only questions that we live in History or a “World-System” (as a totality or abstract context) but not that we are in history (lowercase): in a present situation continuous with others where the past weighs heavily in our memories, bodies, habits, structures, and communities. It also does not deny the importance of power structures and seeing the connections be- tween injustices through time, but there is a difference between (a) inquiring into present situations of injustice in order to detect, diagnose, and cure an injustice (a social pathology) across history, and (b) inquiring into the his- tory of a systematic injustice in order to facilitate inquiry into the present unique, context-bound injustice. To capture the legacy of the past on present injustices, we must study history but also seek present evidence of the weight of the past on the present injustice.¶ If injustice is an illness, then the pragmatists’ approach takes as its main focus diagnosing and treating the particular present illness, that is, the particular situation-bound injustice and not a global “social pathology” or some single transhistorical source of injustice. The diagnosis of a particular injustice is not always dependent on adopting a broader critical standpoint of society in its entirety, but even when it is, we must be careful to not forget that such standpoints are useful only for understanding the present evil. The concepts and categories “white supremacy” and “colonialism” can be great tools that can be of planetary significance. One could even argue that they pick out much larger areas of people’s lives and injustices than the categories of class and gender, but in spite of their reach and explanatory theoretical value, they are nothing more than tools to make reference to and ameliorate particular injustices experienced (suffered) in the midst of a particular and unique re- lationship in a situation. No doubt many, but not all, problems of injustice are a consequence of being a member of a group in history, but even in these cases, we cannot a priori assume that injustices are homogeneously equal for all members of that group. Why is this important? The possible pluralism and therefore complexity of a problem of injustice does not always stop at the level of being a member of a historical group or even a member of many groups, as insisted on by intersectional analysis. There may be unique cir- cumstances to particular countries, towns, neighborhoods, institutions, and ultimately situations that we must be open to in a context-sensitive inquiry. If an empirical inquiry is committed to capturing and ameliorating all of the harms in situations of injustice in their raw pretheoretical complexity, then this requires that we try to begin with and return to the concrete, particular, and unique experiences of injustice.¶ Pragmatism agrees with Sally Haslanger’s concern about Charles Mills’s view. She writes: “The goal is not just a theory that is historical (v. ahistori- cal), but is sensitive to historical particularity, i.e., that resists grand causal narratives purporting to give an account of how domination has come about and is perpetuated everywhere and at all times” (1). For “the forces that cause and sustain domination vary tremendously context by context, and there isn’t necessarily a single causal explanation; a theoretical framework that is useful as a basis for political intervention must be highly sensitive to the details of the particular social context” (1).13¶ Although each situation is unique, there are commonalities among the cases that permit inquiry about common causes. We can “formulate tentative general principles from investigation of similar individual cases, and then . . . check the generalizations by applying them to still further cases” (Dewey, Lectures in China 53). But Dewey insists that the focus should be on the indi- vidual case, and was critical of how so many sociopolitical theories are prone to starting and remaining at the level of “sweeping generalizations.” He states that they “fail to focus on the concrete problems which arise in experience, allowing such problems to be buried under their sweeping generalizations” (Lectures in China 53).¶ The lesson pragmatism provides for nonideal theory today is that it must be careful to not reify any injustice as some single historical force for which particular injustice problems are its manifestation or evidence for its exis- tence. Pragmatism welcomes the wisdom and resources of nonideal theories that are historically grounded on actual injustices, but it issues a warning about how they should be understood and implemented. It is, for example, sympathetic to the critical resources found in critical race theory, but with an important qualification. It understands Derrick Bell’s valuable criticism as context-specific to patterns in the practice of American law. Through his inquiry into particular cases and civil rights policies at a particular time and place, Bell learned and proposed certain general principles such as the one of “interest convergence,” that is, “whites will promote racial advantages for blacks only when they also promote white self-interest.”14 But, for pragma- tism, these principles are nothing more than historically grounded tools to use in present problematic situations that call for our analysis, such as deliberation in establishing public policies or making sense of some concrete injustice. The principles are falsifiable and open to revision as we face situation-specific injustices. In testing their adequacy, we need to consider their function in making us see aspects of injustices we would not otherwise appreciate.15
9 +1. Cyber bullying Currently Constitutionally protected speech extends to the Internet: ACLU 17 ACLU. "Internet Speech." American Civil Liberties Union. ACLU, 2017. Web. 04 Jan. 2017. https://www.aclu.org/issues/free-speech/internet-speech?redirect=technology-and-liberty2Finternet-free-speech. The ACLU has been at the forefront of protecting online freedom of expression in its myriad forms. We brought the first case in which the U.S. Supreme Court declared speech on the Internet equally worthy of the First Amendment’s historical protections. In that case, Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, the Supreme Court held that the government can no more restrict a person’s access to words or images on the Internet than it can snatch a book out of someone’s hands or cover up a nude statue in a museum.
10 +This means Hate Speech online and cyber bullying is constitutionally protected: UNC University of North Carolina. "Legality of Hate Speech." Legality of Hate Speech. UNC.edu, n.d. Web. 04 Jan. 2017. https://www.unc.edu/courses/2010spring/law/357c/001/HateSpeech/Legality.html. In general, 1st Amendment protection for hate speech on the Internet has been supported by the courts, which have held that the Internet is entitled to the highest level of First Amendment protection, akin to the print medium. Cyber bullying is the third largest cause of suicide amongst persons under 18: Cyber Bully Hotline 13
11 +Cyber Bully Hotline. "Cyberbullying Rampant on the Internet." Cyberbullying Stats Show Massive Occurance Rate. Cyber Bully Hotline, 2013. Web. 04 Jan. 2017. http://www.cyberbullyhotline.com/07-10-12-scourge.html.
12 +42 of teenagers with tech access report being cyberbullied over the past year Of the 69 of teens that own their own computer or smart phone, 80 are active on social media. The average teen sends 60 texts per day - reducing face-to-face communication skills. Teen texting rate is DOUBLE the adult texting rate. Girls 14-17 text more - 100 per day. 7.5 million Facebook users are under 13 years old. 81 of teens say bullying online is easier to get away with. 3 million kids per month are absent from school due to bullying. 20 of kids cyberbullied think about suicide, and 1 in 10 attempt it. 4500 kids commit suicide each year. Suicide is the No. 3 killer of teens in the US. (Car accidents #1, Homicide #2) 2. Revenge Porn
13 +First Amendment protections extend to revenge porn Larkin 14 Paul J. Larkin Jr., Senior Legal Research Fellow, The Heritage Foundation, “Revenge Porn, State Law, and Free Speech,” Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, Oct. 1, 2014 The Internet serves as a forum for publication or exchange of ideas, expression, or images. Parties who post images on the Internet will claim an entitlement to the same First Amendment protection that the owner of a bookstore or a movie theater receives.152 They will argue that the government cannot criminalize as legally “obscene” simple depictions of nudity,153 nor can the government prohibit the publication of “indecent” photographs on the Internet.154 State tort law permitting recovery for the online posting of nude photographs raises the same First Amendment issues because an award of damages also can have the same censorious or deterrent effect.155 The result, a defendant will argue, is that revenge porn is constitutionally protected speech despite its offensive character.156 The Free Speech Clause has proved to be a formidable barrier to attempts to use the tort or criminal laws to prevent disclosure of offensive communications, on the Internet or elsewhere.157 A victim or a prosecutor would face a well-fortified barricade. As explained below, however, they can break through that barricade in some instances.158 A. First Amendment Precedent Defendants likely would rely heavily on several Supreme Court rulings that the government cannot hold someone liable for the publication of true information. For example, in Florida Star v. B.J.F., the Court held that the First Amendment protects a newspaper for publishing the name of a rape victim that the paper lawfully acquired from a police report placed in the department’s pressroom.159 In Bartnicki v. Vopper, the Court held that the First Amendment protects the right of a newspaper to publish the transcript of a wiretap in which the newspaper had played no role even though the wiretap itself was illegal.160 Defendants in revenge porn cases would maintain that cases such as Florida Star and Bartnicki disallow a state from imposing civil or criminal liability on the publication of truthful information regardless of the nature or strength of the privacy interest that the state seeks to protect. Defendants also would rely on Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell, 161 which involved the publication of offensive material depicting the plaintiff as part of a parody. Falwell, a well-known minister and public figure, sued Hustler magazine over a liquor advertisement that parodied him. The ad, which “clearly played on the sexual double entendre of the general subject of ‘first times,’” referred to the first time that Falwell allegedly sampled a particular liquor, but also implied that Falwell had engaged in a drunken incestuous relationship with his mother in an outhouse.162 Falwell sued, claiming that he was the victim of defamation, an invasion of his privacy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress due to the way in which he was portrayed in the ad. At the end of trial, the district court granted Hustler a directed verdict on Falwell’s privacy claim, and the jury rejected his claim of defamation but returned a verdict in his favor on his emotional distress claim.163 After the district court and court of appeals upheld the verdict on that ground, Hustler sought review in the Supreme Court. As the Court saw it, the case presented “a novel question involving First Amendment limitations upon a State’s authority to protect its citizens from the intentional infliction of emotional distress.”164 The question was “whether a public figure may recover damages for emotional harm caused by the publication of an ad parody offensive to him, and doubtless gross and repugnant in the eyes of most.”165 The Court answered, “No.”
14 +Revenge porn is the Internet evolution of stalking and begets real stalking. It is constitutively psychological harassment.
15 +Robertson 15 Hope Robertson (3L student at Campbell Law School), "The Criminalization of Revenge Porn" Campbell Law Observer. July 21, 2015. http://campbelllawobserver.com/the-criminalization-of-revenge-porn/
16 +With the advancement of the Internet and continued heightened sexualization of younger generations, Revenge Porn will never go away. However, just like any other crime, making the act illegal will hopefully deter both the posters and the website hosts. Some will start to balance the satisfaction gained from posting the photos against criminal punishment and a criminal record, and decide posting these photos is not worth it. Unlike consensual pornography, the only goal of posting Revenge Porn is to humiliate and harass the subject. It is the cyber equivalent of sexual harassment and stalking, which are already illegal. Photos on the Internet never go away; thus focusing efforts towards liability only after photos are posted should not be the ultimate goal. Legislation should work towards deterring people from posting the photos and hosting these websites in the first place. Criminal codes across the nation should catch up with technology and culture by criminalizing Revenge Porn practices of both those who create the websites and those who post on the websites. 3. Endowment’s DA
17 +Promoting free speech on colleges would entail rejecting endowments from partisan donors Kurtz 15 Stanley Kurtz, senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and a former adjunct fellow with Hudson Institute,“A Plan to Restore Free Speech on Campus,” The National Review, December 7, 2015, http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/428122/plan-restore-free-speech-campus-stanley-kurtz Fifth: Colleges and universities ought to adopt policies on institutional political neutrality based on the University of Chicago’s Kalven Committee Report of 1967. The Kalven Report explains that the ability of a university to foster political dissent and criticism by faculty and students actually depends upon the political neutrality of the institution itself. The principles of academic freedom and institutional neutrality embodied in the Kalven Report are the surest antidote to demands that universities divest themselves of stock in fossil-fuel providers, Israeli companies, and other political targets. Advocates who attempt to inject universities into the political process by means of their endowments substantially inhibit the intellectual freedom of faculty and students who wish to explore contrary points of view. The National Association of Scholars’ recent reports on campus sustainability and fossil-fuel divestment detail the illiberal implications of these movements. The American Council of Trustees and Alumni includes the text of the Kalven Report and an excellent commentary by civil libertarian attorney Harvey Silverglate in its guide to academic freedom. Trustees should take note.
18 +Schools with large endowments are able to recruit more low-income students which creates more material equalities on campus.
19 +Freedman 13 Josh Freedman, policy analyst in the Economic Growth Program at the New America Foundation, “Why American Colleges Are Becoming a Force for Inequality,” The Atlantic, May 16, 2013, http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/05/why-american-colleges-are-becoming-a-force-for-inequality/275923/ Not all colleges, however, would need to raise tuition drastically to pay for a larger number of low-income students. Schools with large endowments can cover the shortfall in tuition by drawing money from these reserves. But keeping tuition constant and paying more from the endowment is only an option for schools with monstrous endowments. Many writers cite Amherst College as a success story, which has "aggressively recruited poor and middle-class students in recent years" and has increased its share of low-income students. But Amherst has a very large endowment for the size of its student body. Its strategy is only viable when backed with an endowment of more than three quarters of a million dollars per student from which it can draw additional funds to cover its costs while remaining competitive in its levels of spending.
20 +Endowments are key to college tech innovation – multiple warrants
21 +Leigh 14 Steven R. Leigh, dean of CU-Boulder’s College of Arts and Sciences, “Endowments and the future of higher education,” University of Colorado, Boulder College of Arts and Sciences, March 4, 2014, http://www.colorado.edu/artsandsciences/news-events/message-dean/endowments-and-future-higher-education These broad trends point directly to the need for CU-Boulder’s College of Arts and Sciences to increase endowment funding across the college. Endowments drive improvements in the quality of an institution and reflect alums, donors and supporters who recognize the importance of research universities in the 21st century. Endowed professorships are the first and most important component of increasing our academic quality. Named chairs recognize significant faculty achievements and help the university support faculty salary and research. CU-Boulder professors are among the most productive in the nation and are heavily recruited by competitors, including Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Cornell, Berkeley, Illinois, UC Irvine and many others. Often, these competitors offer our faculty endowed professorships, conferring prestige and research support. CU must provide its faculty with comparable support to be competitive. A second major area for endowments is student scholarships and, for graduate students, fellowships. A stable source of income that helps pay tuition is the most direct and effective way to offset the costs of education. Endowed scholarships are also effective recruiting tools for admitting the nation’s best to CU. Our dynamic programs, departments and majors are attracting more and more applicants, including the best in the nation. Like faculty support, endowed scholarships and fellowships confer prestige and, most importantly, allow students to focus entirely on academics without balancing jobs and worrying about future loan repayments. Finally, endowment funding for programs greatly enriches the institution, providing capabilities that are difficult to attain when tuition revenue provides the majority of funding. Institutions funded mainly by tuition must make sure that expenditures directly benefit students, which sometimes limits options for innovation and risk-taking. Programmatic funding enables faculty and students to take risks in their research and creative work. For example, in my own field, this might involve traveling to an unexplored region to prospect for human fossils or archaeological sites. Support for high-risk projects allows our faculty and students to develop new areas of knowledge, benefitting society by broadening the capacity of the institution to innovate. The future of higher education, including CU’s future, depends to a large degree on how successfully we can build major endowments. Ultimately, U.S. competitiveness and leadership in the global knowledge economy depends on this as well. For alums, donors and supporters, endowments indelibly affirm the importance of higher education and enduringly preserve its viability and vitality. 4. ILaw DA International law banned hate speech Matsuda 89 Mari J. Matsuda (Associate Professor of Law, University of Hawaii, the William S. Richardson School of Law), "Public Response to Racist Speech: Considering the Victim's Story," Michigan Law Review, 1989
22 +The international community has chosen to outlaw racist hate propaganda. Article 4 of the International Convention on the Elimi- nation of All Forms of Racial Discrimination states: Article 4 States Parties condemn all propaganda and all organizations which are based on ideas or theories of superiority of one race or group of per- sons of one colour or ethnic origin, or which attempt to justify or pro- mote racial hatred and discrimination in any form, and undertake to adopt immediate and positive measures designed to eradicate all incite- ment to, or acts of, such discrimination and, to this end, with due regard to the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the rights expressly set forth in article 5 of this Convention, inter alia: (a) Shall declare as an offence punishable by law all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimi- nation, as well as all acts of violence or incitement to such acts against any race or group of persons of another colour or ethnic origin, and also the provision of any assistance to racist activities, including the financing thereof; (b) Shall declare illegal and prohibit organizations, and also organ- ized and all other propaganda activities, which promote and incite racial discrimination, and shall recognize participation in such organization or activities as an offence punishable by law; and (c) Shall not permit public authorities or public institutions, national or local, to promote or incite racial discrimination.105 Under this treaty, states are required to criminalize racial hate messages. Prohibiting dissemination of ideas of racial superiority or hatred is not easily reconciled with American concepts of free speech. The Convention recognizes this conflict. Article 4 acknowledges the need for "due regard" for rights protected by the Universal Declara- tion of Human Rights and by article 5 of the Convention - including the rights of freedom of speech, association, and conscience. Recognizing these conflicting values, and nonetheless concluding that the right to freedom from racist hate propaganda deserves affirm- ative recognition, represents the evolving international view. An American lawyer, trained in a tradition of liberal thought, would read article 4 and conclude immediately that it is unworkable. Acts of vio- lence, and perhaps imminent incitement to violence are properly pro- hibited, but the control of ideas is doomed to failure. This position was voiced continually in the debates'06 preceding adoption of the Convention, leading to the view that article 4 is both controversial and troublesome. 107 To those who struggled through early international attempts'08 to deal with racist propaganda, the competing values had a sense of ur- gency. 09 The imagery of both book burnings and swastikas was clear in their minds. 10 Hitler had banned ideas. He had also murdered six million Jews in the culmination of a campaign that had as a major theme the idea of racial superiority. While the causes of fascism are complex,11 the knowledge that anti-Semitic hate propaganda and the rise of Nazism were clearly connected guided development of the emerging international law on incitement to racial hatred. In 1959 and 1960, the United Nations faced an "outburst of anti- Semitic incidents in several parts of the world.""'2 The movement to implement the human rights goals of the United Nations Charter and of the Universal Declaration gained momentum as member states sought effective means of eliminating discrimination. Compliance with ILaw is key to preventing global disaster- US compliance with ILaw shapes global ILaw compliance
23 +IEER 02 Institute for Energy and Environmental Research and the Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy. Rule of Power or Rule of Law? An Assessment of U.S. Policies and Actions Regarding Security-Related Treaties. May 2002. http://www.ieer.org/reports/treaties/execsumm.pdf The evolution of international law since World War II is largely a response to the demands of states and individuals living within a global society with a deeply integrated world economy. In this global society, the repercussions of the actions of states, non-state actors, and individuals are not confined within borders, whether we look to greenhouse gas accumulations, nuclear testing, the danger of accidental nuclear war, or the vast massacres of civilians that have taken place over the course of the last hundred years and still continue. Multilateral agreements increasingly have been a primary instrument employed by states to meet extremely serious challenges of this kind, for several reasons. They clearly and publicly embody a set of universally applicable expectations, including prohibited and required practices and policies. In other words, they articulate global norms, such as the protection of human rights and the prohibitions of genocide and use of weapons of mass destruction. They establish predictability and accountability in addressing a given issue. States are able to accumulate expertise and confidence by participating in the structured system offered by a treaty. However, influential U.S. policymakers are resistant to the idea of a treaty-based international legal system because they fear infringement on U.S. sovereignty and they claim to lack confidence in compliance and enforcement mechanisms. This approach has dangerous practical implications for international cooperation and compliance with norms. U.S. treaty partners do not enter into treaties expecting that they are only political commitments by the United States that can be overridden based on U.S. interests. When a powerful and influential state like the United States is seen to treat its legal obligations as a matter of convenience or of national interest alone, other states will see this as a justification to relax or withdraw from their own commitments. If the United States wants to require another state to live up to its treaty obligations, it may find that the state has followed the U.S. example and opted out of compliance. Impact (Human Rights) US adherence to international law concerning hate speech is key to credibility in international human rights Cohen 15 Tanya Cohen, "It’s Time To Bring The Hammer Down On Hate Speech In The U.S." Thought Catalog, Recent scandals involving right-wing hatemongers like Phil Robertson, Donald Sterling, Bill Maher, and the Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity have brought to light one of America’s biggest embarrassments: the fact that America remains the only country in the world without any legal protections against hate speech. In any other country, people like Phil Robertson and Donald Sterling would have been taken before a Human Rights Commission and subsequently fined and/or imprisoned and/or stripped of their right to public comment for making comments that incite hatred and violence against vulnerable minorities. But, in the US, such people are allowed to freely incite hatred and violence against vulnerable minorities with impunity, as the US lacks any legal protections against any forms of hate speech – even the most vile and extreme forms of hate speech remain completely legal in the so-called “land of the free”. Not only is this a violation of the most basic and fundamental human rights principles, but it’s also an explicit violation of legally-binding international human rights conventions. For many decades, human rights groups around the world – from Amnesty International to Human Rights First to the United Nations Human Rights Council – have told the United States that it needs to pass and enforce strong legal protections against hate speech in accordance with its international human rights obligations. As of 2015, the US is the only country in the world where hate speech remains completely legal. This is, in fact, a flagrant violation of international human rights law. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) both mandate that all countries outlaw hate speech, including “propaganda for war” and the dissemination of any “ideas based on racial superiority or hatred”. The ICCPR and ICERD are both legally-binding international human rights conventions, and all nations are required to uphold them in the fullest. By failing to prosecute hate speech, the US is explicitly and flippantly violating international human rights law. No other country would be allowed to get away with this, so why would the US? The United Nations has stated many times that international law has absolute authority. This is quite simply not optional. The US is required to outlaw hate speech. No other country would be able to get away with blatantly ignoring international human rights standards, so why should the US be able to? The US is every bit as required to follow international human rights law as the rest of the world is. Improving human rights and preventing violations helps billions materially facing oppression across the globe. CFR 13 - Council on Foreign Relations: June 19, 2013 (“The Global Human Rights Regime” From the multimedia Global Governance Monitor of the International Institutions and Global Governance program Available at http://www.cfr.org/human-rights/global-human-rights-regime/p27450#p1 Although the concept of human rights is abstract, how it is applied has a direct and enormous impact on daily life worldwide. Millions have suffered crimes against humanity. Millions more toil in bonded labor. In the last decade alone, authoritarian rule has denied civil and political liberties to billions. The idea of human rights has a long history, but only in the past century has the international community sought to galvanize a regime to promote and guard them. Particularly, since the United Nations (UN) was established in 1945, world leaders have cooperated to codify human rights in a universally recognized regime of treaties, institutions, and norms. An elaborate global system is being developed. Governments are striving to promote human rights domestically and abroad, and are partnering with multilateral institutions to do so. A particularly dynamic and decentralized network of civil-society actors is also involved in the effort. Together, these players have achieved marked success, though the institutionalization and implementation of different rights is progressing at varying rates. Response to mass atrocities has seen the greatest progress, even if enforcement remains inconsistent. The imperative to provide people with adequate public health care is strongly embedded across the globe, and substantial resources have been devoted to the challenge. The right to freedom from slavery and forced labor has also been integrated into international and national institutions, and has benefited from high-profile pressure to combat forced labor. Finally, the steady accumulation of human-rights-related conventions has encouraged most states to do more to implement binding legislation in their constitutions and statutes. 5. Hate Speech Hate speech is permissible under the first amendment despite the exceptions Volokh 15
24 +Eugene Volokh, Law Professor at UCLA, “No, there’s no “hate speech” exception to the First Amendment,” The Washington Post, May 7, 2015, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/05/07/no-theres-no-hate-speech-exception-to-the-first-amendment/?utm_term=.9e1ed85e9262 I keep hearing about a supposed “hate speech” exception to the First Amendment, or statements such as, “This isn’t free speech, it’s hate speech,” or “When does free speech stop and hate speech begin?” But there is no hate speech exception to the First Amendment. Hateful ideas (whatever exactly that might mean) are just as protected under the First Amendment as other ideas. One is as free to condemn Islam — or Muslims, or Jews, or blacks, or whites, or illegal aliens, or native-born citizens — as one is to condemn capitalism or Socialism or Democrats or Republicans. To be sure, there are some kinds of speech that are unprotected by the First Amendment. But those narrow exceptions have nothing to do with “hate speech” in any conventionally used sense of the term. For instance, there is an exception for “fighting words” — face-to-face personal insults addressed to a specific person, of the sort that are likely to start an immediate fight. But this exception isn’t limited to racial or religious insults, nor does it cover all racially or religiously offensive statements. Indeed, when the City of St. Paul tried to specifically punish bigoted fighting words, the Supreme Court held that this selective prohibition was unconstitutional (R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul (1992)), even though a broad ban on all fighting words would indeed be permissible. Empirics prove that hate speech leads to hate crimes
25 +Singh 12 Hansdeep Singh, Co-Founder and Director of Legal Programs for the International Center for Advocates Against Discrimination, Simran Jeet Singh, a scholar and activist who writes primarily on culture and religion “The Rise of Hate Crimes Can Be Tied Directly to Hateful Speech,” The Daily Beast, Sept. 6, 2012, http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/09/06/the-rise-of-hate-crimes-can-be-tied-directly-to-hateful-speech.html
26 +Although there are flaws in the FBI’s method of tracking and monitoring hate crimes, their statistics provide a consistent framework to analyze trends. For example, from 2005 to 2010, hate crimes motivated by religious bias show a consistent upward trajectory—whereas hate crimes against religious communities constituted 17.1 percent of all bias-based crimes in 2005, that number has reached 20 percent in the most recent report published in 2010. This is the highest rate of hate crimes motivated by religious bias in the 18 years since the FBI started tracking hate crimes nationwide in 1992. Furthermore, while one might assume that the pattern of anti-Muslim violence would have decreased a decade after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, official statistics show that hate crimes against Muslims are at their highest levels since 2001. The most recent FBI data indicates that in a one-year period, from 2009 to 2010, there was a staggering 42 percent increase in hate crimes against Muslims in this country. The recent shooting rampage at a Sikh Gurdwara (house of worship) in Oak Creek, Wisc., emphasizes the importance of allocating adequate resources to prevent domestic terrorist attacks. The shooter, Wade Michael Page, was a member of the Hammerskin Nation, one of the most violent white supremacist groups in the country. We are deluding ourselves if we do not see the parallel between intolerant or hateful rhetoric and its inevitable consequence. Key issues in our national discourse in 2010 correlate to the rise in anti-Muslim hate crimes. For example, the controversy surrounding the Park 51 Muslim community center in lower Manhattan, the building of “mega-mosques” around the country, and the threat by a Florida pastor to burn the Quran on the anniversary of 9/11—all of these instances contributed to a rising anti-Muslim sentiment in America. The vitriolic discourse can also be linked to bias-based violence against other communities. For instance, hate crime against the LGBT community has risen 36 percent from 2005 to 2010. This is in part because of the extreme rhetoric of opponents of the marriage equality movement. Such targeted violence is one symptom of a deeper and more widespread illness plaguing this great nation—the discrimination and “othering” of minority communities.
27 +Hate speech leads to a genocidal increase in crimes against marginalized groups. Greenblatt 15  Jonathan Greenblatt, When Hateful Speech Leads to Hate Crimes: Taking Bigotry Out of the Immigration Debate, Huffington Post, 8/21/15, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jonathan-greenblatt/when-hateful-speech-leads_b_8022966.html When police arrived at the scene in Boston, they found a Latino man shaking on the ground, his face apparently soaked in urine, with a broken nose. His arms and chest had been beaten. One of the two brothers arrested and charged with the hate crime reportedly told police, “Donald Trump was right — all these illegals need to be deported.” The victim, a homeless man, was apparently sleeping outside of a subway station in Dorchester when the perpetrators attacked. His only offense was being in the wrong place at the wrong time. The brothers reportedly attacked him for who he was — simply because he was Latino. In recent weeks, anti-immigrant — and by extension anti-Latino — rhetoric has reached a fever pitch. Immigrants have been smeared as “killers” and “rapists.” They have been accused of bringing drugs and crime. A radio talk show host in Iowa has called for enslavement of undocumented immigrants if they do not leave within 60 days. There have been calls to repeal the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of citizenship to people born in the United States, with allegations that people come here to have so-called “anchor babies.” And the terms “illegal aliens” and “illegals” — which many mainstream news sources wiselywere rejected years ago because they dehumanize and stigmatize people — have resurged. The words used on the campaign trail, on the floors of Congress, in the news, and in all our living rooms have consequences. They directly impact our ability to sustain a society that ensures dignity and equality for all. Bigoted rhetoric and words laced with prejudice are building blocks for the pyramid of hate. Biased behaviors build on one another, becoming ever more threatening and dangerous towards the top. At the base is bias, which includes stereotyping and insensitive remarks. It sets the foundation for a second, more complex and more damaging layer: individual acts of prejudice, including bullying, slurs and dehumanization. Next is discrimination, which in turn supports bias-motivated violence, including apparent hate crimes like the tragic one in Boston. And in the most extreme cases if left unchecked, the top of the pyramid of hate is genocide. Just like a pyramid, the lower levels support the upper levels. Bias, prejudice and discrimination — particularly touted by those with a loud megaphone and cheering crowd — all contribute to an atmosphere that enables hate crimes and other hate-fueled violence. The most recent hate crime in Boston is just one of too many. In fact, there is a hate crime roughly every 90 minutes in the United States today. That is why last week ADL announced a new initiative, #50StatesAgainstHate, to strengthen hate crimes laws around the country and safeguard communities vulnerable to hate-fueled attacks. We are working with a broad coalition of partners to get the ball rolling. 6. Silencing The aff's trivialization of hate speech undermines the project against systemic racism and oppression as a whole. EVEN if you grant them their silencing impacts – that silencing is KEY to create a cultural shift. Watterson 91  (Kim M. Watterson, 'THE POWER OF WORDS: THE POWER OF ADVOCACY CHALLENGING THE POWER OF HATE SPEECH', 1991 by the University of Pittsburgh Law Review; Kim M. Watterson, 52 U. Pitt. L. Rev. 955 University of Pittsburgh Law Review Summer, 1991)
28 +Second, hate speech policies manifest our commitment to the elimination of invidious distinctions-both overt discrimination and culturally transmitted stereotypes-based on race. "Legal rights … should be understood as the language of a continuing process rather than the fixed rules.' 123 And the history of judicial decisions regarding racism reveals this process. In the past, racism has been supported and even authorized by the law. 24 More recently, however, we, as a nation, have stated unequivocally that racism is unacceptable. 25 Today, adjudication of hate speech policies tests our commitment to the elimination of racism. When victims of hate speech assert their rights "the claim... it initiates a form of communal dialogue and "seeks judicial statements that will articulate new boundaries and connections between the victim and the perpetrator. As such, decisions that trivialize the effects of hate speech either betray this commitment and perpetuate racism, or, worse yet, implicitly authorize it. If courts instead forge new ground and couch their analysis in rights discourse, the process of eradicating the pernicious effects of racism will be continued and our commitment to equal rights will be strengthened. 7. Title 9 da
29 + The only thing keeping graduation rates stable is financial aid ~-~~-~- allows students to study full-time, encourages academic progress, and is the only way low-income students can afford to enroll
30 +Johnson 14 (Hans Johnson – supported by the College Access Foundation of California and writing for the Public Policy Institute of California, “Making College Possible for Low-Income Students: Grant and Scholarship Aid in California”, http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/report/R_1014HJR.pdf, pg. 20-24,) Students fail to complete college for many reasons, including financial constraints. Certainly it is well known that low-income students are less likely to finish college than other students, even accounting for differences in academic preparation and records. Surveys of students who drop out of college find that, indeed, financial constraints play an important role. In one survey, respondents not only cited the need to work as the primary reason for leaving college but also said that work and family commitments were the reasons for not being able to return to school. More than half of the respondents said that financial aid “that completely covered tuition and books” would induce them to return to school (Johnson et al. 2009). Studies on the direct effect of grant and scholarship aid on college completion also suggest that financial aid leads to increases in graduation rates. Assigning causality in such work is difficult, however, because students who apply for aid might be more motivated than others to earn a degree and because college prices and grant aid programs vary dramatically across colleges. In general, most studies find that grant aid for low-income students increases persistence rates by as much as 10 percentage points and completion rates by at least a few percentage points (Dynarski 2005; Deming and Dynarski 2009; Kuh et al. 2008).16 A rigorous study of Florida’s “Student Access Grant” found that students whose family income made them just barely eligible for the grant of $1,300 were four percentage points more likely to earn a bachelor’s degree within seven years than students who were ineligible for the grant because their income was just above the required level (28 versus 24; Castleman and Long 2013). Using data from the National Center for Education Statistics “Beginning Postsecondary Survey,” we examined college completion rates among students in the United States who first entered college in 2003 and were followed through 2009.17 The data shows that grant aid is associated with higher rates of baccalaureate completion, even after controlling for institutional characteristics and student characteristics such as high school grade point average and family income. And our analysis indicated that the effect of grant aid is fairly strong: Every standard deviation increase in grant aid is associated with a 6.7 percentage point increase in the likelihood of graduating within six years. Our findings are consistent with but slightly different from those of Franke (2014). Restricting his analysis to students first enrolling in four-year colleges, Franke found that the effect of grant aid depends on its source: For every $1,000 in grant aid, federal aid (mostly Pell Grants) led to a 2.5 to 2.8 percent increase in degree attainment, state need-based aid led to a 2.4 to 2.6 percent increase, and institutional aid led to a 1.3 to 1.6 percent increase in degree attainment.18 A key consideration is whether the form of delivery of grant aid might lead to improvements in completion rates. It has been suggested, for example, that performance-based grants in which grant renewal depends on academic outcomes, such as grades and units completed, might be one way to improve college completion rates.19 However, studies have found only minimal if any effects of performance-based grants on student completion beyond the effects of other types of grants.20 The most rigorous of these evaluations, based on randomized controlled trials in seven states (including California), found mixed results (Patel et al. 2013). Among five states with findings related to persistence, the share of students registering at the beginning of the second year was slightly higher in only two of the states, including California (where persistence rates were 81.4 percent for program participants compared to 79.0 percent for the control group). In the six states with published findings on academic units (excluding California), the number of units earned in the first year increased slightly (but was not significant in two of the six states). Finally, in Ohio, the only state with several years of experience, completion rates (attainment of a vocational certificate, associate’s degree, or bachelor’s degree) increased by 3.5 percentage points (26.9 for program participants versus 23.4 for the control group), driven almost entirely by an increase in associate’s degrees. These generally positive results are consistent with, and of the same order of magnitude as, the effects of general grant aid and scholarship programs. In other words, increases in grant aid improve student persistence and completion, but performance-based grants do not seem to have greater effects than other types of grants. These results are not necessarily surprising, as almost all grants already have de facto performance requirements. For example, the amount of most grants depend on full-time versus part-time status, with full-time students receiving more aid. Moreover, the renewal of grant aid often depends on some measure of academic progress (such as not being on academic probation). Finally, and most obviously, students cannot receive grant aid if they fail to enroll in college. In addition to the direct effect on student persistence and completion, grant and scholarship aid can also indirectly improve student outcomes. For example, financial assistance enables students to work less and focus more on school. And to the extent that it allows students to attend college on a full-time rather than part-time basis, grant aid could reduce time to completion and increase completion rates. And finally, because the amount of grant aid offered is higher for full-time students, this form of assistance incentivizes full-time attendance. A second and perhaps more important indirect role of grant aid is that it can induce students to attend four-year colleges rather than community colleges. Because of high net prices at four-year colleges, some low-income students in California opt for community colleges because of their low fees and low net prices. Costs of attending community college can be particularly low for students who live at home, with sticker prices about $10,000 lower than for students with independent living arrangements. Among incoming freshmen at the state’s community colleges in 2007-2008, 50,000 were deemed ready for college-level work. Some of these students would have been eligible for CSU or even UC but instead opted for a community college. The downside of this is that students attending a community college rather than a four-year college are less likely to complete college. Using data from over 2,000 students who were awarded scholarships by the College Access Foundation of California (CAFC) and who were followed for six years, we estimated the probability of earning a bachelor’s degree based on the type of institution first attended. The CAFC students all intended to earn a bachelor’s degree, even if they first enrolled at a community college. However, as shown in Figure 6, students who began their college career at a four-year college were much more likely than those who enrolled at a community college to earn a bachelor’s degree, even when controlling for high school grade point average. Because we cannot control for all the differences between students first attending a community college and those first attending a four-year college, it is likely that our results overstate the causal effect of attending a four-year college on earning a bachelor’s degree. But even if we were able to account for all the differences between community college and four-year college students, we would certainly find that enrolling in a four-year college leads to much higher rates of degree attainment than starting first at a community college and then trying to transfer. 24 In this study, we examine the role of grant and scholarship aid in California in making college more accessible and in helping students complete college. Our primary findings are that: For many low-income students, college would probably not be possible without grant and scholarship aid, which has contributed greatly to keeping net prices from rising as fast as sticker prices. Grant and scholarship aid is associated with higher rates of baccalaureate completion. These findings hold even after controlling for institutional characteristics and student characteristics including high school grade point average and family income. Performance-based grants do not seem to have greater effect than other types of grants, largely because students already must meet institutional academic requirements to remain enrolled in college. An important role of aid is that it can induce students to attend four-year colleges rather than community colleges. Students are much more likely to earn a degree if they first enroll at a four-year college. Restrictions on free speech may be unconstitutional, but not doing so in cases involving sexual violence causes public colleges to lose federal funding under Title IX Bernstein 3 (David E. Bernstein – George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law with a focus on constitutional history, “You Can’t Say That: The Growing Threat to Civil Liberties From Antidiscrimination Laws”, “Censoring Campus Speech”, https://books.google.com/books?id=zU2QAAAAQBAJandpg=PA60andlpg=PA60anddq=public+colleges+could+lose+funding+if+they+allow+for+racistsandsource=blandots=W67N5E3bznandsig=xXeBW8YaTy_Ilb34MIbu grciy4andhl=enandsa=Xandved=0ahUKEwiBoqTkn_nQAhVBjFQKHcc7CIkQ6AEITDAI#v=onepageandq=public20colleges20could20lose20funding20if20they20allow20for20racistsandf=false, pg. 60-61,) Given these constitutional barriers, public university speech codes were on the way out until the federal Department of Education revived them in 1994. Male students at Santa Rosa Community College had posted anatomically explicit and sexually derogatory remarks about two female students in a discussion group hosted by the college’s computer network. Several aggrieved students filed a complaint against the college with the DOE’s Office for Civil Rights. The DOE found that the messages probably created a hostile educational environment on the basis of sex for one of the students. University toleration of such offensive speech, the government added, would violate Title IX, the law banning discrimination against women by education institutions that receive federal funding. Under this standard, to avoid losing federal funds, universities must proactively ban offensive speech by students and diligently punish any violations of that ban. The DOE failed to explain how its rule was consistent with the First Amendment. Speech codes enacted by public universities clearly violate the First Amendment even if the codes are enacted in response to the demands of the DOE, so requiring public universities to enact speech codes or forfeit public funds would obviously be unconstitutional. Nevertheless, facing this choice, public university officials have ignored the First Amendment issue and complied with DOE guidelines. Although a few schools may truly be concerned about the potential loss of federal funding, the prevailing attitude among university officials seems to be that the DOE’s Santa Rosa decision provides a ready excuse to indulge their preference for speech codes. University officials implicitly reason that if the DOE can get away with ignoring the First Amendment, then so can they. Unfortunately, they may be right.
31 +Federal funding is used to maintain financial aid resources and colleges are only growing more dependent on it as state funding goes down
32 +Pew 15 (The Pew Charitable Trusts – compiles evidence and non-partisan analysis to inform the public and create better public policy, “Federal and State Funding of Higher Education: A Changing Landscape”, http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/issue-briefs/2015/06/federal-and-state-funding-of-higher-education) States and the federal government have long provided substantial funding for higher education, but changes in recent years have resulted in their contributions being more equal than at any time in at least the previous two decades. Historically, states have provided a far greater amount of assistance to postsecondary institutions and students; 65 percent more than the federal government on average from 1987 to 2012. But this difference narrowed dramatically in recent years, particularly since the Great Recession, as state spending declined and federal investments grew sharply, largely driven by increases in the Pell Grant program, a need-based financial aid program that is the biggest component of federal higher education spending. Although their funding streams for higher education are now comparable in size and have some overlapping policy goals, such as increasing access for students and supporting research, federal and state governments channel resources into the system in different ways. The federal government mainly provides financial assistance to individual students and specific research projects, while state funds primarily pay for the general operations of public institutions. College credentials are crucial to social mobility and national economic growth – affects everything from health insurance to better marriages to lower unemployment rates
33 +White House 14 (Report by the Executive Office of the President, “Increasing College Opportunity for Low-Income Students: Promising Models and a Call to Action”, pgs. 10 – 11, https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/white_house_report_on_increasing_college_opportunity_for_low-income_students_1-16-2014_final.pdf,)
34 +The benefits of postsecondary education are well documented and have major implications for economic growth, equality, and social mobility. Getting a postsecondary credential leads to greater lifetime earnings, lower unemployment, and lower poverty. Over the course of one’s working lifetime, the median earnings of bachelor’s degree recipients are 65 percent higher than median earnings of high-school graduates. 30 College graduates are also more likely to find a job; the unemployment rate for bachelor’s degree recipients is half the unemployment rate of high school graduates – and this gap grew during the Great Recession, which hit lowwage, low-education workers especially hard.31 Gaining a postsecondary education has positive effects beyond higher earnings. Individuals with higher education levels are more likely have retirement benefits and health insurance through their employer.32 Education also leads to better decision making about health, marriage, and parenting; improves patience; and makes people more goal-oriented. College access and attainment also leads to positive externalities and benefits to taxpayers by reducing crime and the need for social services, and increasing taxes paid and civic engagement.34 Importantly, the returns to higher education have increased over time as the demand for college-educated workers has outpaced the number of students getting a college education.35 Over the past four decades, the median earnings gap for full-time workers aged 25-34 with and without a college degree increased substantially for women and more than doubled for men; from 1971 to 2011 the earnings premium for men increased from 25 percent to 69 percent.36 Likewise, the earnings gap between those with and without a college degree increases as workers age.37 In response to the growing earnings gap between those with and without postsecondary education, a report from the Pew Economic Mobility Project remarked that, “unless something is done to boost the number of young people earning postsecondary credentials, millions of Americans will continue to be limited in their economic mobility.”38 Without a college degree, children born in the lowest fifth of the income distribution children have a 45 percent chance of staying in the bottom, and just a 5 percent chance of moving to the top Figure 1. Yet when these same children go on to earn a college degree, their chances of making it to the top nearly quadruple, and their chances of moving out of the bottom increase by 50 percent.39
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2017-01-15 06:56:59.326
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Neel Yerneni
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Crosby BL
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +5
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2
Team
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Strake Jesuit Thorburn Neg
Title
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Burden Dump
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +UH Cougar Classic
Caselist.RoundClass[1]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +1
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2016-11-19 13:51:05.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Schmack
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Jack
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Finals
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Read Me
Caselist.RoundClass[2]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2016-12-03 01:32:50.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Linsday Wilson
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Connal AK
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +1
RoundReport
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Ac Nc 2 off
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Longhorn Classic at the University of Texas Austin
Caselist.RoundClass[4]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +4
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2017-01-14 20:50:04.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Strake Jesuit JS
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Strake Jesuit JS
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +1
RoundReport
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +T
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Na
Caselist.RoundClass[5]
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2017-01-15 06:56:55.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Neel Yerneni
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Crosby BL
Round
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2
RoundReport
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Ac - 2 off
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +UH Cougar Classic

Schools

Aberdeen Central (SD)
Acton-Boxborough (MA)
Albany (CA)
Albuquerque Academy (NM)
Alief Taylor (TX)
American Heritage Boca Delray (FL)
American Heritage Plantation (FL)
Anderson (TX)
Annie Wright (WA)
Apple Valley (MN)
Appleton East (WI)
Arbor View (NV)
Arcadia (CA)
Archbishop Mitty (CA)
Ardrey Kell (NC)
Ashland (OR)
Athens (TX)
Bainbridge (WA)
Bakersfield (CA)
Barbers Hill (TX)
Barrington (IL)
BASIS Mesa (AZ)
BASIS Scottsdale (AZ)
BASIS Silicon (CA)
Beckman (CA)
Bellarmine (CA)
Benjamin Franklin (LA)
Benjamin N Cardozo (NY)
Bentonville (AR)
Bergen County (NJ)
Bettendorf (IA)
Bingham (UT)
Blue Valley Southwest (KS)
Brentwood (CA)
Brentwood Middle (CA)
Bridgewater-Raritan (NJ)
Bronx Science (NY)
Brophy College Prep (AZ)
Brown (KY)
Byram Hills (NY)
Byron Nelson (TX)
Cabot (AR)
Calhoun Homeschool (TX)
Cambridge Rindge (MA)
Canyon Crest (CA)
Canyon Springs (NV)
Cape Fear Academy (NC)
Carmel Valley Independent (CA)
Carpe Diem (NJ)
Cedar Park (TX)
Cedar Ridge (TX)
Centennial (ID)
Centennial (TX)
Center For Talented Youth (MD)
Cerritos (CA)
Chaminade (CA)
Chandler (AZ)
Chandler Prep (AZ)
Chaparral (AZ)
Charles E Smith (MD)
Cherokee (OK)
Christ Episcopal (LA)
Christopher Columbus (FL)
Cinco Ranch (TX)
Citrus Valley (CA)
Claremont (CA)
Clark (NV)
Clark (TX)
Clear Brook (TX)
Clements (TX)
Clovis North (CA)
College Prep (CA)
Collegiate (NY)
Colleyville Heritage (TX)
Concord Carlisle (MA)
Concordia Lutheran (TX)
Connally (TX)
Coral Glades (FL)
Coral Science (NV)
Coral Springs (FL)
Coppell (TX)
Copper Hills (UT)
Corona Del Sol (AZ)
Crandall (TX)
Crossroads (CA)
Cupertino (CA)
Cy-Fair (TX)
Cypress Bay (FL)
Cypress Falls (TX)
Cypress Lakes (TX)
Cypress Ridge (TX)
Cypress Springs (TX)
Cypress Woods (TX)
Dallastown (PA)
Davis (CA)
Delbarton (NJ)
Derby (KS)
Des Moines Roosevelt (IA)
Desert Vista (AZ)
Diamond Bar (CA)
Dobson (AZ)
Dougherty Valley (CA)
Dowling Catholic (IA)
Dripping Springs (TX)
Dulles (TX)
duPont Manual (KY)
Dwyer (FL)
Eagle (ID)
Eastside Catholic (WA)
Edgemont (NY)
Edina (MN)
Edmond North (OK)
Edmond Santa Fe (OK)
El Cerrito (CA)
Elkins (TX)
Enloe (NC)
Episcopal (TX)
Evanston (IL)
Evergreen Valley (CA)
Ferris (TX)
Flintridge Sacred Heart (CA)
Flower Mound (TX)
Fordham Prep (NY)
Fort Lauderdale (FL)
Fort Walton Beach (FL)
Freehold Township (NJ)
Fremont (NE)
Frontier (MO)
Gabrielino (CA)
Garland (TX)
George Ranch (TX)
Georgetown Day (DC)
Gig Harbor (WA)
Gilmour (OH)
Glenbrook South (IL)
Gonzaga Prep (WA)
Grand Junction (CO)
Grapevine (TX)
Green Valley (NV)
Greenhill (TX)
Guyer (TX)
Hamilton (AZ)
Hamilton (MT)
Harker (CA)
Harmony (TX)
Harrison (NY)
Harvard Westlake (CA)
Hawken (OH)
Head Royce (CA)
Hebron (TX)
Heights (MD)
Hendrick Hudson (NY)
Henry Grady (GA)
Highland (UT)
Highland (ID)
Hockaday (TX)
Holy Cross (LA)
Homewood Flossmoor (IL)
Hopkins (MN)
Houston Homeschool (TX)
Hunter College (NY)
Hutchinson (KS)
Immaculate Heart (CA)
Independent (All)
Interlake (WA)
Isidore Newman (LA)
Jack C Hays (TX)
James Bowie (TX)
Jefferson City (MO)
Jersey Village (TX)
John Marshall (CA)
Juan Diego (UT)
Jupiter (FL)
Kapaun Mount Carmel (KS)
Kamiak (WA)
Katy Taylor (TX)
Keller (TX)
Kempner (TX)
Kent Denver (CO)
King (FL)
Kingwood (TX)
Kinkaid (TX)
Klein (TX)
Klein Oak (TX)
Kudos College (CA)
La Canada (CA)
La Costa Canyon (CA)
La Jolla (CA)
La Reina (CA)
Lafayette (MO)
Lake Highland (FL)
Lake Travis (TX)
Lakeville North (MN)
Lakeville South (MN)
Lamar (TX)
LAMP (AL)
Law Magnet (TX)
Langham Creek (TX)
Lansing (KS)
LaSalle College (PA)
Lawrence Free State (KS)
Layton (UT)
Leland (CA)
Leucadia Independent (CA)
Lexington (MA)
Liberty Christian (TX)
Lincoln (OR)
Lincoln (NE)
Lincoln East (NE)
Lindale (TX)
Livingston (NJ)
Logan (UT)
Lone Peak (UT)
Los Altos (CA)
Los Osos (CA)
Lovejoy (TX)
Loyola (CA)
Loyola Blakefield (MA)
Lynbrook (CA)
Maeser Prep (UT)
Mannford (OK)
Marcus (TX)
Marlborough (CA)
McClintock (AZ)
McDowell (PA)
McNeil (TX)
Meadows (NV)
Memorial (TX)
Millard North (NE)
Millard South (NE)
Millard West (NE)
Millburn (NJ)
Milpitas (CA)
Miramonte (CA)
Mission San Jose (CA)
Monsignor Kelly (TX)
Monta Vista (CA)
Montclair Kimberley (NJ)
Montgomery (TX)
Monticello (NY)
Montville Township (NJ)
Morris Hills (NJ)
Mountain Brook (AL)
Mountain Pointe (AZ)
Mountain View (CA)
Mountain View (AZ)
Murphy Middle (TX)
NCSSM (NC)
New Orleans Jesuit (LA)
New Trier (IL)
Newark Science (NJ)
Newburgh Free Academy (NY)
Newport (WA)
North Allegheny (PA)
North Crowley (TX)
North Hollywood (CA)
Northland Christian (TX)
Northwood (CA)
Notre Dame (CA)
Nueva (CA)
Oak Hall (FL)
Oakwood (CA)
Okoboji (IA)
Oxbridge (FL)
Oxford (CA)
Pacific Ridge (CA)
Palm Beach Gardens (FL)
Palo Alto Independent (CA)
Palos Verdes Peninsula (CA)
Park Crossing (AL)
Peak to Peak (CO)
Pembroke Pines (FL)
Pennsbury (PA)
Phillips Academy Andover (MA)
Phoenix Country Day (AZ)
Pine Crest (FL)
Pingry (NJ)
Pittsburgh Central Catholic (PA)
Plano East (TX)
Polytechnic (CA)
Presentation (CA)
Princeton (NJ)
Prosper (TX)
Quarry Lane (CA)
Raisbeck-Aviation (WA)
Rancho Bernardo (CA)
Randolph (NJ)
Reagan (TX)
Richardson (TX)
Ridge (NJ)
Ridge Point (TX)
Riverside (SC)
Robert Vela (TX)
Rosemount (MN)
Roseville (MN)
Round Rock (TX)
Rowland Hall (UT)
Royse City (TX)
Ruston (LA)
Sacred Heart (MA)
Sacred Heart (MS)
Sage Hill (CA)
Sage Ridge (NV)
Salado (TX)
Salpointe Catholic (AZ)
Sammamish (WA)
San Dieguito (CA)
San Marino (CA)
SandHoke (NC)
Santa Monica (CA)
Sarasota (FL)
Saratoga (CA)
Scarsdale (NY)
Servite (CA)
Seven Lakes (TX)
Shawnee Mission East (KS)
Shawnee Mission Northwest (KS)
Shawnee Mission South (KS)
Shawnee Mission West (KS)
Sky View (UT)
Skyline (UT)
Smithson Valley (TX)
Southlake Carroll (TX)
Sprague (OR)
St Agnes (TX)
St Andrews (MS)
St Francis (CA)
St James (AL)
St Johns (TX)
St Louis Park (MN)
St Margarets (CA)
St Marys Hall (TX)
St Thomas (MN)
St Thomas (TX)
Stephen F Austin (TX)
Stoneman Douglas (FL)
Stony Point (TX)
Strake Jesuit (TX)
Stratford (TX)
Stratford Independent (CA)
Stuyvesant (NY)
Success Academy (NY)
Sunnyslope (AZ)
Sunset (OR)
Syosset (NY)
Tahoma (WA)
Talley (AZ)
Texas Academy of Math and Science (TX)
Thomas Jefferson (VA)
Thompkins (TX)
Timber Creek (FL)
Timothy Christian (NJ)
Tom C Clark (TX)
Tompkins (TX)
Torrey Pines (CA)
Travis (TX)
Trinity (KY)
Trinity Prep (FL)
Trinity Valley (TX)
Truman (PA)
Turlock (CA)
Union (OK)
Unionville (PA)
University High (CA)
University School (OH)
University (FL)
Upper Arlington (OH)
Upper Dublin (PA)
Valley (IA)
Valor Christian (CO)
Vashon (WA)
Ventura (CA)
Veritas Prep (AZ)
Vestavia Hills (AL)
Vincentian (PA)
Walla Walla (WA)
Walt Whitman (MD)
Warren (TX)
Wenatchee (WA)
West (UT)
West Ranch (CA)
Westford (MA)
Westlake (TX)
Westview (OR)
Westwood (TX)
Whitefish Bay (WI)
Whitney (CA)
Wilson (DC)
Winston Churchill (TX)
Winter Springs (FL)
Woodlands (TX)
Woodlands College Park (TX)
Wren (SC)
Yucca Valley (CA)