Changes for page Trinity Spallone Neg
on 2017/01/24 18:25
on 2017/01/24 18:34
Summary
-
Objects (0 modified, 1 added, 1 removed)
Details
- Caselist.RoundClass[0]
-
- EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -2017-01-24 18:25:18.368 - Judge
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -All Judges - Opponent
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -All Opponents - Round
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -1 - Tournament
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -All Tournaments
- Caselist.CitesClass[0]
-
- Cites
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,11 @@ 1 +A: Interpretation: Debaters must have the full text in print or electronic form of Supreme Court case decisions they use as offense in their evidence. These are very easily downloadable from many websites including findlaw.com or supcourt.ntis.gov/ 2 + 3 +A: Interpretation: If debaters spec a form of constitutionally protected speech they MUST have proof there aren’t restrictions on it already in 1 arbitrary college town or college city on hand, in round to prove the plan is unique and has magnitude. 4 +http://library.law.columbia.edu/guides/Municipal_Law 5 +https://www.municode.com/library/ 6 + 7 + 8 +HEY LOOK DOWN HERE! :-) 9 + 10 + 11 +NOTE: You can meet this interp from 1 saved query search or screenshot. To clarify, this is is simply a litmus test. - EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +2017-01-24 18:28:34.0 - Judge
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +All Judges - Opponent
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +All Opponents - ParentRound
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +0 - Round
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +1 - Team
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Trinity Spallone Neg - Title
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +1 - Theory Interps - Tournament
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +All Tournaments