Changes for page Warren Okunlola Aff
Summary
-
Attachments (0 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
-
Objects (1 modified, 5 added, 0 removed)
Details
- Warren-Okunlola-Aff-NSDA District-Round5.docx
-
- Author
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +XWiki.okunlolanelson@gmailcom - Size
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +56.9 KB - Content
- Caselist.RoundClass[42]
-
- Cites
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +14 - EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@ 1 -2017-04-12 23:21:27. 3561 +2017-04-12 23:21:27.0
- Caselist.CitesClass[14]
-
- Cites
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,56 @@ 1 +===Framework=== 2 +====I value morality as per evaluative ought in the resolution which is defined as used to express duty or moral obligation by Merriam Webster==== 3 +https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ought 4 +====Ethics arise from the subject, always social and changed by surroundings and environment==== 5 +**Butler 92**. Judith. 1992. "Continent Foundations: Feminism and the Question of "Postmodernism" Feminists Theorize the Political. 6 +In a sense, The subject is constituted through an exclusion and differentiation, perhaps a repression, that is subsequently concealed, covered over, by the effect of autonomy. In this sense, autonomy is the logical consequence of a disavowed dependency, which is to say that the autonomous subject can maintain the illusion of its autonomy insofar as it covers over the break out of which it is constituted. This dependency and this break are already Social relations, ones which precede and condition the formation of the subject. As a result, this is not a relation in which the subject finds itself, as one of the relations that forms it situation. The subject is constructed through acts of exclusion and differentiation that distinguish the subject from its constitutive outside, a domain of abjected alterity. There is no ontologically intact reflexivity to the subject which is then placed within a cultural context; that cultural context, as it were, is already there as the disarticulated process of that subject’s production, one that is concealed by the frame that would situate a ready-made subject in an external web of cultural relations. We may be tempted to think that to assume the subject in advance is necessary in order to safeguard the agency of the subject. But to claim that the subject is constituted is not to claim that it is determined; on the contrary, the constituted character of the subject is the very precondition of its agency. For what is it that enables a purposive and significant reconfiguration of cultural and political relations, if not a relation that can be turned against itself, reworked, resisted? Do we need to assume theoretically from the start a subject with agency before we can articulate the terms of a significant social and political task of transformation, resistance, radical democratization? If we do not offer in advance the theoretical guarantee of that agent, are we doomed to give up transformation and meaningful political practice? My suggestion is that agency belongs to a way of thinking about persons as instrumental actors who confront an external political field. But if we agree that politics and power exist already at the level at which the subject and its agency are articulated and made possible, then agency can be presumed only at the cost of refusing to inquire into its construction. Consider that "agency" has no formal existence or, if it does, it has no bearing on the question at hand. In a sense, The epistemological model that offers us a pregiven subject or agent is one that refuses to acknowledge that agency is always and only a political prerogative. As such, it seems crucial to question the conditions of its possibility, not to take it for granted as an a priori guarantee. We need instead to ask, what possibilities of mobilization that are produced on the basis of existing configurations of discourse and power? Where are the possibilities of reworking that very matrix of power by which we are constituted, of reconstituting the legacy of that constitution, and of working against each other those processes of regulation at can destabilize existing power regimes? For if the subject is constituted by power, that power does not cease at the moment the subject is constituted, for that subject is never fully constituted, but is subjected and produced time and again. That subject is neither a ground nor a product, but the permanent possibility of a certain resignifying process, one which gets detoured and stalled through other mechanisms of power, but which is power’s own possibility of being reworked. The subject is an accomplishment regulate and produced in advance. And is as such fully political; indeed, perhaps most political at the point in which it is claimed to be prior to politics itself. 7 + 8 +====Precariousness makes the subject invisible and makes ethics impossible, means resolving that comes first. They operate through frames.==== 9 +**Butler 2**. Judith. Frames of War: When Is Life Grievable? London: Verso, 2009. Print. 10 +The precarity of life imposes an obligation upon us. We have to ask about the conditions under which it becomes possible to apprehend a life or set of lives as precarious, and those that make it less possible, or indeed impossible. Of course, it does not follow that if one apprehends a life as precarious one will resolve to protect that life or secure the conditions for its persistence and flourishing. It could be, as both Hegel and Klein point out in their different ways, that the apprehension of precariousness leads to a heightening of violence, an insight into the physical vulnerability of some set of others that incites the desire to destroy them. And yet, I want to argue that if we are to make broader social and political claims about rights of protection and entitlements to persistence and flourishing, we will first have to be supported by a new bodily ontology, one that implies the rethinking of precariousness, vulnerability, injurability, interdependency, exposure, bodily persistence, desire, work and the claims of language and social belonging. To refer to "ontology" in this regard is not to lay claim to a description of fundamental structures of being that are distinct from any and all social and political organization. On the contrary, none of these terms exist outside of their political organization and interpretation. The "being" of the body to which this ontology refers is one that is always given over to others, to norms, to social and political organizations that have developed historically in order to maximize precariousness for some and minimize precariousness for others. It is not possible first to define the ontology of the body and then to refer to the social significations the body assumes. Rather, To be a body is to be exposed to social crafting and form, and that is what makes the ontology of the body a social ontology. In other words, the body is exposed to socially and politically articulated forces as well as to claims of sociality-including language, work, and desire-that make possible the body's persisting and flourishing. The more or less existential conception of "precariousness" is thus linked with a more specifically political notion of "precarity." And it is the differential allocation of precarity that, in my view, forms the point of departure for both a rethinking of bodily ontology and for progressive or left politics in ways that continue to exceed and traverse the categories of identity.1 The epistemological capacity to apprehend a life is partially dependent on that life being produced according to norms that qualify it as a life or, indeed, as part of life. In This way, the normative production of ontology thus produces the epistemological problem of apprehending a life, and this in turn gives rise to the ethical problem of what it is to acknowledge or, indeed, to guard against injury and violence. Of course, we are talking about different modalities of "violence" at each level of this analysis, but that does not mean that they are all equivalent or that no distinctions between them need to be made. The "frames" that work to differentiate the lives we can apprehend from those we cannot (or that produce lives across a continuum of life) not only organize visual experience but also generate specific ontologies of the subject. Subjects are constituted through norms which, in their reiteration, produce and shift the terms through which subjects are recognized. These normative conditions for the production of the subject produce an historically contingent ontology, such that our very capacity to discern and name the "being" of the subject is dependent on norms that facilitate that recognition. At the same time, it would be a mistake to understand the operation of norms as deterministic. Normative schemes are interrupted by one another, they emerge and fade depending on broader operations of power, and very often come up against spectral versions of what it is they claim to know: thus, there are "subjects" who are not quite recognizable as subjects, and there are "lives" that are not quite—or, indeed, are never-recognized as lives. In what sense does life, then, always exceed the normative conditions ofits recognizability? To claim that it does so is not to say that "life" has as its essence a resistance to normativity, but only that each and every construction of life requires time to do its job, and that no job it does can overcome time itself. In other words, the job is never done "once and for all." This is a limit internal to normative construction itself, a function of its iterability and heterogeneity, without which it cannot exercise its crafting power, and which limits the finality of any of its effects. 11 + 12 +====Thus the standard is rendering life grievable==== 13 + 14 +====Thus I affirm that the United States ought to limit the use of qualified immunity. I affirm the entire resolution – specifying a specific court case or intricate policy makes no sense – I defend disad ground but ld debate is about values – we will argue limiting qualified immunity is good and the neg can still read counterplans or disads to why it is bad – but they simply have to prove why the aff is a bad idea.==== 15 + 16 +===Contention 1 is Disposability=== 17 +====Analyzing the historical starting point of Qualified immunity is important – it was created as a response to systemic violence white officers committed against blacks in the civil war. This culture of "allowing" police violence had roots starting in the 19th century.==== 18 +**Kirby 2000**. John D. Kirby, Qualified Immunity for Civil Rights Violations: Refining the Standard , 85 Cornell L. Rev. 461. 2000. http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol85/iss4/11 HSLASC 19 +A. Constitutional Remedies The Qualified immunity doctrine grew out of the use of section 1983 and the Bivens doctrine by individuals seeking redress for violations of their constitutional rights.2' The Court's expansive reading of section 1983,22 and its announcement of a new cause of action in Bivens v. Six Unknown Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics,23 created the potential for a vast increase in personal liability for federal and state officials. The Court reacted to this new potential for liability by carving out pockets of immunity for certain classes of officials. 24 1. Section 1983 At its inception, section 198325 was specifically intended as a response to the systematic violence and injustice against southern blacks in the wake of the Civil War.26 The Act, written in broad terms, provides a remedy against "any person" who, under color of state law, deprives any person of "any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws .... 27 20 + 21 +====Specifically, black men and women experience oppressions that situate them as precarious or disposable through the interactions with the police. These killings and rulings 22 +A) create material injustices 23 +B.) feed the positive feedback loop of blackness = disposable==== 24 +**Butler and Yancy 15**. Judith, George. January 12, 2015. What’s Wrong With ‘All Lives Matter’? The New York Times, The Opinion Pages, The Stone. http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/01/12/whats-wrong-with-all-lives-matter/?'r=0. AKB. 25 +George Yancy: In your 2004 book, "Precarious Life: The Powers of Mourning and Violence," you wrote, "The question that preoccupies me in the light of recent global violence is, Who counts as human? Whose lives count as lives?" You wrote that about the post-9/11 world, but it appears to also apply to the racial situation here in the United States. In the wake of the recent killings of unarmed black men and women by police, and the failure to prosecute the killers, the message being sent to black communities is that they don’t matter, that they are "disposable." Posters reading "Black Lives Matter," "Hands Up. Don’t Shoot," "I Can’t Breathe," communicate~~s~~ the reality of a specific kind of racial vulnerability that black people experience on a daily basis. How does all this communicate to black people that their lives don’t matter? Judith Butler: Perhaps we can think about the phrase "black lives matter." What is implied by this statement, a statement that should be obviously true, but apparently is not? If black lives do not matter, then they are not really regarded as lives, since a life is supposed to matter. So what we see is that some lives matter more than others, that some lives matter so much that they need to be protected at all costs, and that other lives matter less, or not at all. And When that becomes the situation, then the lives that do not matter so much, or do not matter at all, can be killed or lost, can be exposed to conditions of destitution, and there is no concern, or even worse, that is regarded as the way it is supposed to be. The callous killing of Tamir Rice and the abandonment of his body on the street is an astonishing example of the police murdering someone considered disposable and fundamentally ungrievable. When we are taking about racism, and anti-black racism in the United States, we have to remember that Under slavery black lives were considered only a fraction of a human life, so the prevailing way of valuing lives assumed that some lives mattered more, were more human, more worthy, more deserving of life and freedom, where freedom meant minimally the freedom to move and thrive without being subjected to coercive force. But when and where did black lives ever really get free of coercive force? One reason the chant "Black Lives Matter" is so important is that it states the obvious but the obvious has not yet been historically realized. So it is a statement of outrage and a demand for equality, for the right to live free of constraint, but also a chant that links the history of slavery, of debt peonage, segregation, and a prison system geared toward the containment, neutralization and degradation of black lives, but also a ~~Now~~ police system~~s~~ that more and more easily and often can take away a black life in a flash all because some officer perceives a threat. So let us think about what this is: the perception of a threat. One man is leaving a store unarmed, but he is perceived as a threat. Another man is in a chokehold and states that he cannot breathe, and the chokehold is not relaxed, and the man dies because he is perceived as a threat. Mike Brown and Eric Garner. We can name them, but in the space of this interview, We cannot name all the black men and women whose lives are snuffed out all because a police officer perceives a threat, sees the threat in the person, sees the person as pure threat. Perceived as a threat even when unarmed or completely physically subdued, or lying in the ground, as Rodney King clearly was, or coming back home from a party on the train and having the audacity to say to a policeman that he was not doing anything wrong and should not be detained: Oscar Grant. We can see the videos and know what is obviously true, but it is also obviously true that police and the juries that support them obviously do not see what is obvious, or do not wish to see. So the police see a threat when there is no gun to see, or someone is subdued and crying out for his life, when they are moving away or cannot move. These figures are perceived as threats even when they do not threaten, when they have no weapon, and the video footage that shows precisely this is taken to be a ratification of the police’s perception. The perception is then ratified as a public perception at which point we not only must insist on the dignity of black lives, but name the racism that has become ratified as public perception. In fact, the point is not just that black lives can be disposed of so easily: they are targeted and hunted by a Police force that is becoming increasingly emboldened to wage its race war by every grand jury decision that ratifies the point of view of state violence. Justifying lethal violence in the name of self-defense is reserved for those who have a publicly recognized self to defend. But those whose lives are not considered to matter, whose lives are perceived as a threat to the life that embodies white privilege can be destroyed in the name of that life. That can only happen when a recurrent and institutionalized form of racism has become a way of seeing, entering into the presentation of visual evidence to justify hateful and unjustified and heartbreaking murder. So it is not just that black lives matter, though that must be said again and again. It is also that stand-your-ground and racist killings are becoming increasingly normalized, which is why intelligent forms of collective outrage have become obligatory. 26 + 27 +====Qualified immunity harms the groups and communities most victimized by police wrongdoing. ==== 28 +**Crockford ’15** - Kade Crockford, "Militarization of Police and Racial Justice Gone Wrong: The Eurie Stamps Tragedy", ACLU, Speak Freely, 09/29/2015 29 +Duncan invokes the qualified immunity doctrine, which holds that police officers cannot be sued for conduct that doesn’t clearly violate the law, conduct which at the time appeared reasonable. By that theory, while the actions that preceded the shooting – taking the gun off safety, pointing it at Stamps – were clearly unconstitutional, as soon as Duncan (accidentally) pulled the trigger, he became immune from liability for his conduct. As my colleagues write in a friend-of-the-court brief, the defendant’s argument is dangerous and bizarre. It would, if accepted, produce a legal doctrine that provides incentive for police officers to injure or kill people they have subjected to unconstitutional police practices. It inoculates officers if, but only if, their unreasonable actions cause injury. As applied to the facts of this case, this rule means that an officer who unreasonably aims a firearm at a civilian’s head would incur liability if the civilian is not shot, but not if the firearm discharges and the civilian is killed. Other possibilities abound. For example, if an officer seeks to extract a confession by dangling a suspect over the ledge of a high-rise, the officer will be liable under if he later pulls the suspect back to safety. Yet, under the defendants’ rule, the officer will acquire immunity if his grip should fail and he accidentally – but as a consequence of his prior, intentional, and unreasonable conduct – the suspect to this death. A ruling accepting this argument would be terrible and absurd under any circumstances, but particularly given the climate of militarized policing in the United States today – a burden borne disproportionately by Americans with darker skin. Across the nation, police departments armed with military weapons and flash-bang "grenade" bombs barge into people’s homes in the early morning, simply to serve search warrants or arrest suspects. More often than not, these raids are conducted to look for drugs or someone suspected of selling them. An ACLU survey of departments throughout the nation found that 71 percent of the targets of these militarized raids are people of color. Moreover, as my colleagues argue in their brief, Black and Latino people are subjected to more police stops than whites, even when controlling for crime and other factors. Studies show that "race can influence the probability that the police will erroneously harm an innocent person during an encounter." Other studies "have extensively documented unconscious negative associations about people of color, including an association between Blacks and crime." Americans are more likely to think Black people holding innocuous objects are holding guns, and to erroneously "shoot" those Black people when given the opportunity. Subjected to more dangerous SWAT raids and police stops, and the targets of racist tropes about criminality and Blackness, people with darker skin are much more likely than whites to suffer the repercussions of unconstitutional policing. Therefore, a legal doctrine establishing that officers cannot be held liable for the final, accidental twitch in a string of unconstitutional actions would further endanger individuals and communities already bearing the brunt of disparate, aggressive policing. It’s our hope that the court will clearly rebuke the defense’s dangerous argument, sending an unmistakable message to police officers throughout the northeast: You will be held liable for your mistakes when the likelihood of making them is compounded by prior illegal actions. You cannot turn the safety off your gun and then illegally point it at someone, only to claim that the final act of shooting them was accidental and so absolves your prior conduct. 30 + 31 +====Police brutality is a common experience in communities of color.==== 32 +**Coates 2015** - Ta-Nehisi Coates ~~Writer; Journalist; Educator; McArthur Fellow~~, Between the World and Me. New York: Spiegel and Grau (2015). p. 9 33 +I write you in your fifteenth year. I am writing you because this was the year you saw Eric Garner choked to death for selling cigarettes; because you know now that Renisha McBride was shot for seeking help, that John Crawford was shot down for browsing in a department store. And you have seen men in uniform drive by and murder Tamir Rice, a twelve-year-old child whom they were oath-bound to protect. And you have seen men in the same uniforms pummel Marlene Pinnock, someone’s grandmother, on the side of a road. And you know now, if you did not before, that the police departments of your country have been endowed with the authority to destroy your body. It does not matter if the destruction is the result of an unfortunate overreaction. It does not matter if it originates in a misunderstanding. It does not matter if the destruction springs from a foolish policy. Sell cigarettes without the proper authority and your body can be destroyed. Resent the people trying to entrap your body and it can be destroyed. Turn into a dark stairwell and your body can be destroyed. The destroyers will rarely be held accountable. Mostly they will receive pensions. And destruction is merely the superlative form of a dominion whose prerogatives include friskings, detainings, beatings, and humiliations. All of this is common to black people. And all of this is old for black people. No one is held responsible. 34 + 35 + 36 +===Contention 2 is Trauma=== 37 +====THE 1AC IS KEY – police violence without accountability creates psychological, racial trauma within the black community ==== 38 +**Turner and Richardson 16** ~~Erlanger A. Turner, PhD (Assistant Professor of Psychology, University of Houston-Downtown) and Jasmine Richardson, 7-14-2016, "Racial Trauma is Real: The Impact of Police Shootings on African Americans," Psychology Benefits Society, https://psychologybenefits.org/2016/07/14/racial-trauma-police-shootings-on-african-americans/ ~~ 39 +There have been many changes within the criminal justice system as a means to deter crime and to keep citizens safe. However, research demonstrates that often times men of color are treated harshly which leads to negative perceptions of police officers. The recent shootings in Baton Rouge, Falcon Heights, and Dallas have exposed many individuals and their families to incidents of police brutality that reminds us that as a society work needs to be done to improve police and community relations. In light of these recent events, many people have witnessed these traumatic incidents through social media or participation in marches in their cities. The violence witnessed towards people of color from police continues to damage perceptions of law enforcement and further stereotype people of color negatively. In a study published in the American Journal of Public Health (Geller, Fagan, Tyler, and Link, 2014), the authors reported that 85 of the participants reported being stopped at least once in their lifetime and 78 had no history of criminal activity. What is more concerning is that the study also found that those who reported more intrusive police contact experienced increased trauma and anxiety symptoms. Furthermore, those who reported fair treatment during encounters with law enforcement had fewer symptoms of PTSD and anxiety. What is Racial Trauma? In addition to the mental health symptoms of individuals who have encounters with law enforcement, those who witness these events directly or indirectly may also be impacted negatively. In an attempt to capture how racism and discrimination negatively impacts the physical and mental health of people of color, many scholars have coined the term "racial trauma" or race-based traumatic stress. Racial trauma may result from racial harassment, witnessing racial violence, or experiencing institutional racism (Bryant-Davis, and Ocampo, 2006; Comas-Díaz, 2016). The trauma may result in experiencing symptoms of depression, anxiety, low self-esteem, feelings of humiliation, poor concentration, or irritability. . 40 + 41 +====AND – The brutal deaths of black people at the hands of police officers are replayed over and over by major mainstream news outlets and has detrimental psychological impacts on the lives black americans daily. This is especially true when police officers are let of the hook based on qualified immunity ==== 42 +**Smith 10** ~~Walter Howard Smith, Jr., Ph.D. February 16, 2010. The Heinz Endowments. African American Men and Boys Advisory Board "The Impact of Racial Trauma on African Americans"~~ 43 +Large-scale social events that traumatically impact thousands and millions of persons commonly occur in human life. Hurricanes, earthquakes, social upheavals, genocide, terrorist incidents, and war are dangerous events and require people to recover. Racism and other social biases describe social 4 conditions that of persons. Traumas related to race have three forms. African Americans experience specific events of danger related to race that overwhelm the nervous system and require us to recover. These dangers may be real or perceived discrimination, threats of harm and injury, police incidents, and humiliating and shaming events. The aggressors may be black or white. These events stand out in our memory and have long-term impact on our perception of ourselves and our social environments. As mentioned in the previous discussion, some African Americans are stronger after recovering from these events, and others have long-term declines in their ability to cope with future stresses and threats. A second way African Americans experience danger is witnessing harm and injury to other African Americans because of real or perceived racism. This secondary trauma is widely recognized in the child abuse treatment field and occurs to therapists that repeatedly experience the traumas of abused children. Repeatedly witnessing African Americans suffering on television news is painful, and for some triggers very strong emotion. For example, the Rodney King incident triggered very strong emotional reactions to a publically viewed altercation between police and an African American male. Of course, not every African American watching the incident on television is traumatized but some viewers experienced traumatic responses and needed to recover. A third way African Americans experience danger related to race is living in difficult social conditions because of poverty and race, and traumatic events occur because of these conditions. Segregation by race and social class is common in the United States, and very common in the Pittsburgh region. Living in black and poor neighborhoods increases one’s risk of experiencing traumatic events like community violence, police incidents, and domestic violence, and it increases the risk of experiencing secondary traumas in witnessing these dangers. These communities are socially isolated, monitored vigorously by police, have fewer resources for daily living (food stores, gasoline stations, hardware stores), and have high levels of exposure to drugs and alcohol. During a casual conversation, my cousin’s seventeen year-old son who lives in Homewood counted eleven friends who died from drug overdose or murder. He recounted each one without emotion, citing their names and how they died, recalling their funeral services. His numb, matter-of-fact manner of recounting his experiences was stunning and a clear indicator of trauma.. 44 + 45 +====AND – Racial trauma is REAL. The idea of seeing your people constantly murdered with no accountability results in horrible impacts. It is also uniquely problematic since black people in racially segregated populations show poor responses to trauma that result in domestic violence and depression – limiting qualified immunity represents understanding the harms of allowing police officers to kill black people and the psychological effects of them getting away with it in the black community ==== 46 +**Smith 2** ~~Walter Howard Smith, Jr., Ph.D. February 16, 2010. The Heinz Endowments. African American Men and Boys Advisory Board "The Impact of Racial Trauma on African Americans"~~ 47 +Some persons will function better after recovery, some will return to their previous levels of functioning, and others will function poorly and have lower abilities to cope with future stresses and danger. However, increasing the total number of traumatic events in a person’s life and clustering several traumatic events into a small period will increase the risk of poor recovery. Poor responses to trauma are visible in large numbers of African Americans living in racially segregated neighborhoods. Some signs include: • Increase aggression – Street gangs, domestic violence, defiant behavior, and appearing tough and impenetrable are ways of coping with danger by attempting to control our physical and social environment • Increase vigilance and suspicion – Suspicion of social institutions (schools, agencies, government),avoiding eye contact, only trusting persons within our social and family relationship networks • Increase sensitivity to threat – Defensive postures, avoiding new situations, heightened sensitivity to being disrespected and shamed, and avoid taking risks • Increase psychological and physiological symptoms – Unresolved traumas increase chronic stress and decrease immune system functioning, shift brains to limbic system dominance, increase risks for depression and anxiety disorders, and disrupt child development and quality of emotional attachment in family and social relationships • Increase alcohol and drug usage – Drugs and alcohol are initially useful (real and perceived) in managing the pain and danger of unresolved traumas but become their own disease processes when dependency occurs • Narrowing sense of time – Persons living in a chronic state of danger do not develop a sense of future, do not have long-term goals, and frequently view dying as an expected outcome 48 + 49 +====A limit is key — It also still allows police a limited defense – the 1ac is not saying police are inherently bad but a limitation of their rights can reduce black racial trauma==== 50 +**Hassel 09,** ~~Diana, EXCESSIVE REASONABLENESS, Professor, Roger Williams University School of Law, 2009, https://mckinneylaw.iu.edu/ilr/pdf/vol43p117.pdf~~ 51 +The Court’s development of the qualified immunity doctrine has stretched the rationale underlying the defense to a breaking point. Instead of providing protection only to those government actors who violate the law unwittingly and reasonably, qualified immunity has metastasized into an almost absolute defense to all but the most outrageous conduct. The values of deterrence of unlawful behavior and compensation for civil rights victims have been overshadowed by the desire to protect government agents, particularly police officers, from almost all claims against them. The balance originally struck by the qualified immunity defense—protection for the innocent wrongdoer versus compensation for the victim—has gone awry. This Article focuses on the most significant feature of the imbalance that now exists in the qualified immunity doctrine: the Court’s insistence on applying the objective reasonableness standard of qualified immunity in conjunction with a duplicative underlying constitutional standard. This problem is most acute in excessive force claims. An apparent duplication of the objective reasonableness standard of the Fourth Amendment in excessive force cases and the same objective reasonableness standard in the qualified immunity doctrine has created a nearly impenetrable defense to excessive force claims. Despite critical scholarly commentary and the Supreme Court’s own attempts to quiet the controversy created by this excessive reasonableness, the problem remains unresolved. Meanwhile, far removed from the debate over doctrinal niceties, the operational problem of how to address the use of unjustified force by police officers persists. The current legal regime has largely failed in its attempt to control excessive police violence. At least in part that failure flows from the 8 difficulty faced by claimants under § 1983 to overcome the insulation from liability that defendants derive from both the Fourth Amendment requirements and the qualified immunity standard. Until the nearly insurmountable barrier to recovery created by excessive reasonableness is somehow relieved, civil actions based on the Fourth Amendment will not effectively deter police violence. Addressing the problem of police violence, providing balance to doctrine overly protective of defendants, and simplifying the procedural morass that qualified immunity has created in excessive force cases requires a radical modification of the doctrine. In excessive force cases, the doctrine should be modified to protect a defendant only when there has been a genuine change in the legal standard governing his actions—not merely an application of established doctrine to a somewhat new set of facts. Currently, qualified immunity prevents liability if the defendant’s actions do not violate clearly established law "of which a reasonable person would have known." Instead, the standard should be 9 that the defendant will be liable unless his actions violate a newly developed legal standard. In the excessive force context, the protection provided by the reasonableness standard of Fourth Amendment, in conjunction with this more limited defense based on a newly developed law, will provide ample protection for the reasonably mistaken officer and will make compensation for the victim possible. 52 + 53 +===Contention 3 is Intersectionality=== 54 +====Overpolicing of LGBTQ+ communities creates a lack of trust in the police which decreases trust, and hurts these communities.==== 55 +**Mallory**, Christy, Amira Hasenbush, and Brad Sears. ~~Law and policy expert at UCLA school of law, specializing in policies impacts on LGBT people~~ "Discrimination and harassment by law enforcement officers in the LGBT community." The Williams Institute (20**15**). 56 + For decades, the LGBT community has been subjected to entrapment, discrimination, harassment, and violence by law enforcement. Recent research indicates that such mistreatment of LGB people, and especially transgender people, is still ongoing. Tensions between law enforcement and the LGBT community can hinder effective policing in several ways. First, when communities are persistently targeted, profiled and harassed by law enforcement, trust will be lost between the police and the communities they are supposed to protect. For example, a recent study asked gay and bisexual identified men to report how helpful they thought that police would be if called in response to an intimate partner violence incident involving gay or bisexual men. Forty percent of respondents indicated that they believed that contacting the police in such a situation would be unhelpful or very unhelpful, and 59 reported that police would be less helpful to gay or bisexual men experiencing intimate partner violence than to heterosexual women. 120 Second, lack of trust due to fear of discrimination, harassment, and violence likely discourages LGBT citizens from working in cooperation with law enforcement. Community willingness to engage with law enforcement is helpful to effective policing, which may seek to combat crime and improve the criminal justice system by involving the community in crime control strategies. - EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +2017-04-12 23:21:29.0 - Judge
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Devan Jajal - Opponent
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +ESD NH - ParentRound
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +42 - Round
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +1 - Team
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Warren Okunlola Aff - Title
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +6 - Butler Affirmative - 1AC - University of Texas Round 1 - Tournament
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +University of Texas
- Caselist.CitesClass[15]
-
- Cites
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,112 @@ 1 +==1AC== 2 + 3 +===Framing=== 4 +====The standard is maximizing expected well-being. Prefer==== 5 + 6 +====1 States do and should act in a utilitarian manner.==== 7 +**Woller 97** ~~Gary, Brigham Young University, "A Forum On The Role of Environmental Ethics in Restructuring Environmental Policy and Law for the Next Century", Policy Currents, 1997, WHS//NAO~~ 8 +Moreover, virtually all public policies entail some redistribution of economic or political resources, such that one group's gains must come at another group's expense. Consequently, public policies in a democracy must be justified to the public, and especially to those who pay the costs of those policies. Such justification cannot simply be assumed by invoking some a priori higher-order moral principle. Appeals to a priori moral principles, such as environmental preservation, also often fail to acknowledge that public policies inevitably entail trade-offs among competing values. Thus since policymakers cannot justify inherent value conflicts to the public in any philosophical sense, and since public policies inherently imply winners and losers, the policymakers' duty to the public interest requires them to demonstrate that the redistributive effects and value trade-offs implied by their polices are somehow to the overall advantage of society. At the same time, deontologically based ~~other~~ ethical systems have severe practical limitations as a basis for public policy. It therefore follows that in a democracy, policymakers have an ethical duty to establish a plausible link between policy alternatives and the problems they address, and the public must be reasonably assured ~~reasonable assurance~~ that a policy will actually do something about an existing problem; this requires the means-end language and methodology of utilitarian ethics. Good intentions, lofty rhetoric, and moral piety are an insufficient, though perhaps at times a necessary, basis for public policy in a democracy. 9 + 10 +====2 You should default to util if I win defense on their standard—we naturally want to make the world better.==== 11 +**Sinnott-Armstrong 14** ~~Walter, American philosopher. He specializes in ethics, epistemology, and more recently in neuroethics, the philosophy of law, and the philosophy of cognitive science, "Consequentialism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed), WHS//NAO~~ 12 +Even if consequentialists can accommodate or explain away common moral intuitions, that might seem only to answer objections without yet giving any positive reason to accept consequentialism. However, most people begin with the presumption that we morally ought to make the world better when we can. The question then is only whether any moral constraints or moral options need to be added to the basic consequentialist factor in moral reasoning. (Kagan 1989, 1998) If no objection reveals any need for anything beyond consequences, then consequences alone seem to determine what is morally right or wrong, just as consequentialists claim. 13 + 14 +====3 The government has an obligation to guarantee everyone can exercise this right==== 15 +**NESRI ’10** ~~National Economic and Social Rights Initiative, 2010. http://www.nesri.org/programs/what-is-the-human-right-to-housing WHS//NAO~~ 16 +Everyone has a fundamental human right to housing, which ensures access to a safe, secure, habitable, and affordable home with freedom from forced eviction. It is the government’s obligation to guarantee that everyone can exercise this right to live in security, peace, and dignity. This right must be provided to all persons irrespective of income or access to economic resources. There are seven principles that are fundamental to the right to housing and are of particular relevance to the right to housing in the United States: Security of Tenure: Residents should possess a degree of security of tenure that guarantees protection against forced evictions, harassment, and other threats, including predatory redevelopment and displacement. -Availability of Services, Materials, Facilities, and Infrastructure: Housing must provide certain facilities essential for health, security, comfort, and nutrition. For instance, residents must have access to safe drinking water, heating and lighting, washing facilities, means of food storage, and sanitation. -Affordability: Housing costs should be at such a level that the attainment and satisfaction of other basic needs are not threatened or compromised. For instance, one should not have to choose between paying rent and buying food. -Habitability/Decent and Safe Home: Housing must provide residents adequate space that protects them from cold, damp, heat, rain, wind, or other threats to health; structural hazards; and disease. -Accessibility: Housing must be accessible to all, and disadvantaged and vulnerable groups must be accorded full access to housing resources.-Location: Housing should not be built on polluted sites, or in immediate proximity to pollution sources that threaten the right to health of residents. The physical safety of residents must be guaranteed, as well. Additionally, housing must be in a location which allows access to employment options, health-care services, schools, child-care centers, and other social facilities.-Cultural Adequacy: Housing and housing policies must guarantee the expression of cultural identity and diversity, including the preservation of cultural landmarks and institutions. Redevelopment or modernization programs must ensure that the cultural significance of housing and communities is not sacrificed. 17 + 18 +===Inherency=== 19 +====Current housing is too expensive. Lack of affordable housing leads to homelessness. ==== 20 +**NLCHP ‘15** ~~National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, "HUMAN RIGHT TO HOUSING REPORT CARD" 2015 https://www.nlchp.org/documents/Right'to'Housing'Report'Card'2015 WHS//NAO~~ 21 +Over half of all American renters pay more than 30 of their income for housing. For extremely low income (ELI) households, the percentage paying more than half of their income in rent jumps to 75. This problem is caused in part by the lack of available, affordable housing for low-income renters. Average rents have increased for 23 straight quarters, and were 15.2 higher in 2014 than in 2009. On top of the existing gap in availability of affordable units, the supply of low-cost rental units has declined since 2007.106 While ELI renter households may qualify for federal and local subsidy programs, demand for these programs far exceeds the supply: there is only enough funding for one in four eligible renters to receive assistance. 107 The remaining threefourths of eligible ELI households desperately in need of housing find themselves on multi-year waiting lists, or find that waiting lists for affordable housing in their area are closed altogether.108 While the affordable housing stock declines each year and more families and individuals are unstably housed, the rental market for higher-income households continues to grow, foreclosed homes stand vacant, and abandoned government-owned properties remain empty.109 Lack of affordable housing is a primary cause of homelessness, and the ongoing crisis has led to an increase in the numbers of homeless persons. While HUD’s point-in-time count of homeless persons living in shelters and public places has decreased over the past four years, this number is almost certainly a significant undercount of homelessness. It does not include people living doubled up with family or friends; this number increased by 9.4 to 7.4 million people in 2011, and remained stable during 2012. Moreover, close to 1.4 million school children were homeless during the 2013-2014 school year—and almost 2.5 million children overall were homeless in 2013. The school numbers represent an 8 increase since the previous year, and have almost doubled since the beginning of the economic crisis in 2007. 22 + 23 +===Advantage 1 is International Law=== 24 +====US commitment to international law requires a right to housing- multiple contracts. ==== 25 +**Fasanelli 1** ~~Antonia Fasanelli ~~Chair Commission on Homelessness and Poverty~~ August 2013. American Bar Association Adopted by the House of Delegates. August 12-13. WHS//NAO~~ 26 +The U.S. commitment to the human right to housing was reaffirmed in its signature to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) in 1977. The ICESCR was submitted to the Senate for ratification in late 1978, with an ABA resolution endorsing ratification in early 1979.10 The ICESCR codifies the right to housing in Article 11, which states, "~~t~~he States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing... The States Parties will take appropriate steps to ensure the realization of this right."11 Although the Senate has yet to ratify the treaty, law professor David Weissbrodt notes signing a covenant indicates that "the United States accepts the responsibility to refrain from acts calculated to frustrate the objects of the treaty."12 The U.S. has also already ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (both with endorsement from the ABA), both of which recognize the right to be free from discrimination, including in housing.13 27 + 28 +====This is the make of break issue- the international community sees US commitment as necessarily key. ==== 29 +**Fasanelli 1** ~~Antonia Fasanelli ~~Chair Commission on Homelessness and Poverty~~ August 2013. American Bar Association Adopted by the House of Delegates. August 12-13. WHS//NAO~~ 30 +Moreover, the international community has increasingly taken note of America’s failure to uphold the right to housing. In 2006, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concern about the disparate racial impact of homelessness in the U.S. and called for "adequate and adequately implemented policies, to ensure the cessation of this form of racial discrimination."17 In 2008, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination again recognized racial disparities in housing and ongoing segregation in the U.S.18 Since then, numerous U.N. experts, on official missions to the U.S., have addressed U.S. violations of the human right to housing and related rights.19 31 + 32 +====Domestic intervention key to shaping international norms- not affirming relinquishes power to other nations and makes America influence less important. ==== 33 +**Fasanelli 1** ~~Antonia Fasanelli ~~Chair Commission on Homelessness and Poverty~~ August 2013. American Bar Association Adopted by the House of Delegates. August 12-13. WHS//NAO~~ 34 +The U.S. has a strong tradition of promoting affordable, accessible housing, but programs have been under-funded and under-implemented. Moreover, while the human rights framework demands progressive implementation of the right to housing, and prohibits retrogressive policies, over the past 30 years there has been a significant disinvestment in public and subsidized housing at the federal level.32 Recent years have seen innovations such as the Rental Assistance Demonstration and Choice Neighborhoods Initiative, which attempt to "do more with less" while preserving important rights and protections for lowincome residents, but these programs still fail to meet the need in communities.33 Furthermore, many long-term contracts for affordable housing built under the Section 8 program during the 1960’s are now coming to term, threatening a further loss of affordable units.34 The contours of the human right to adequate housing continue to be developed at the international level by the CESCR and other U.N. experts, and at the regional level by regional human rights bodies, in response to ever-changing conditions. The U.S. should always seek to be a leader in applying these developing standards to its policies. 35 + 36 +====Independently- following ilaw is key to international consensus and deliberation. ==== 37 +**Thiele** ~~Bret Thiele. JD. May 2002. The Human Right to Adequate Housing: A Tool for Promoting and Protecting Individual and community Health. 92(5): 712-715. American Journal of Public Health. WHS//NAO~~ 38 +There are other reasons to use international human rights law as a model for national legislation. For example, reliance on international law to inform domestic law will result in greater consistency across domestic legal systems with respect to universally recognized human rights. Furthermore, states that turn to international law for guidance benefit from the process by which international law is derived. This process often takes a "best practices" approach. International law is influenced by a variety of ideas stemming from diverse legal, political, economic, and cultural traditions. The process of codifying norms into international law reflects the acceptance of those ideas that have been deemed by the international community to be not only "best practices" but also universally applicable. It is therefore important for states to turn to international human rights law to inform their domestic legislation and policy, including legislation and policy designed to protect and improve the health of their respective populations. The international human right to adequate housing should thus be implemented through domestic law. 39 + 40 + 41 +====Effective international law solves every impact—US commitment uniquely key. ==== 42 +**IEER 2:** ~~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 WHS//NAO~~ 43 +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 practical27 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~~s~~ 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. 44 + 45 +**Johansen ‘6 elaborates** Johansen, Robert C. 2006. ~~Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame and Senior Fellow at the Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies~~. The Impact of US Policy toward the International Criminal Court on the Prevention of Genocide, War Crimes, and Crimes Against Humanity. Human Rights Quarterly. ProjectMuse. 46 +Double standards undermine law enforcement and peoples’ willing compliance with the law, especially in a decentralized international legal system. A legal fabric torn by exemptions for a major actor is a weakened fabric, less able to deter future infractions and more likely to instill hatred and outrage against the inequities imposed by the United States. US denial of reciprocal rights for others also interferes with building a strong worldwide coalition to increase compliance with international norms against terrorism and to stop terrorist acts that are crimes against humanity 47 + 48 +====The only alternative to international law is genocide and nuclear war==== 49 +**Shaw ‘1:** Shaw, Martin ~~Professor of International Relations and Politics at the University of Sussex~~. "The unfinished global revolution: intellectuals and the new politics of international relations." October 3, 2001. http://www.martinshaw.org/unfinished.pdf WHS/NAO 50 +The new politics of international relations require us, therefore, to go beyond the anti-imperialism of the intellectual left as well as of the semi-anarchist traditions of the academic discipline. We need to recognize three fundamental truths. First, in the twenty-first century people struggling for democratic liberties across the non- Western world are likely to make constant demands on our solidarity. Courageous academics, students and other intellectuals will be in the forefront of these movements. They deserve the unstinting support of intellectuals in the West. Second, the old international thinking in which democratic movements are seen as purely internal to states no longer carries conviction—despite the lingering nostalgia for it on both the American right and the anti-American left. The idea that global principles can and should be enforced worldwide is firmly established in the minds of hundreds of millions of people. This consciousness will become a powerful force in the coming decades. Third, global state-formation is a fact. International institutions are being extended, and (like it or not) they have a symbiotic relation with the major centre of state power, the increasingly internationalized Western conglomerate. The success of the global-democratic revolutionary wave depends first on how well it is consolidated in each national context—but second, on how thoroughly it is embedded in international networks of power, at the centre of which, inescapably, is the West. From these political fundamentals, strategic propositions can be derived. First, democratic movements cannot regard non-governmental organizations and civil society as ends in themselves. They must aim to civilize local states, rendering them open, accountable and pluralistic, and curtail the arbitrary and violent exercise of power. Second, democratizing local states is not a separate task from integrating them into global and often Western-centred networks. Reproducing isolated local centres of power carries with it classic dangers of states as centres of war. Embedding global norms and integrating new state centres with global institutional frameworks are essential to the control of violence. (To put this another way: the proliferation of purely national democracies is not a recipe for peace.) Third, while the global revolution cannot do without the West and the UN, neither can it rely on them unconditionally. We need these power networks, but we need to tame them too, to make their messy bureaucracies enormously more accountable and sensitive to the needs of society worldwide. This will involve the kind of ‘cosmopolitan democracy’ argued for by David Held. It will also require us to advance a global social-democratic agenda, to address the literally catastrophic scale of world social inequalities. This is not a separate problem: social and economic reform is an essential ingredient of alternatives to warlike and genocidal power; these feed off and reinforce corrupt and criminal political economies. Fourth, if we need the global-Western state, if we want to democratize it and make its institutions friendlier to global peace and justice, we cannot be indifferent to its strategic debates. It matters to develop international political interventions, legal institutions and robust peacekeeping as strategic alternatives to bombing our way through zones of crisis. It matters that international intervention supports pluralist structures, rather than ratifying Bosnia-style apartheid. As political intellectuals in the West, we need to have our eyes on the ball at our feet, but we also need to raise them to the horizon. We need to grasp the historic drama that is transforming worldwide relationships between people and state, as well as between state and state. We need to think about how the turbulence of the global revolution can be consolidated in democratic, pluralist, international networks of both social relations and state authority. We cannot be simply optimistic about this prospect. Sadly, it will require repeated violent political crises to push Western and other governments towards the required restructuring of world institutions. What I have outlined is a huge challenge; but the alternative is to see the global revolution splutter into partial defeat, or degenerate into new genocidal wars—perhaps even nuclear conflicts. The practical challenge for all concerned citizens, and the theoretical and analytical challenges 51 + 52 +===Advantage 2 is Crime=== 53 +====Cities often have policies that criminalize the homeless; ==== 54 +**Bauman et. al 15** ~~Bauman, Tristia, Jeremy Rosen, Eric Tars, Janelle Fernandez, Christian Robin, Eugene Sowa, Michael Maskin, Cheryl Cortemeglia, and Hannah Nicholes. "No Safe Place: The Criminalization of Homelessness in U.S. Cities." National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty. National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, 2015. Web. 18 July 2016. https://www.nlchp.org/documents/No'Safe'Place WHS//NAO~~ 55 +Homelessness is caused by a severe shortage of affordable housing. Over 12.8 of the nation’s supply of low income housing has been permanently lost since 2001, resulting in large part, from a decrease in funding for federally subsidized housing since the 1970s. The shortage of affordable housing is particularly difficult for extremely low-income renters who, in the wake of the foreclosure crisis, are competing for fewer and fewer affordable units. In many American cities there are fewer emergency shelter beds than homeless people. There are fewer available shelter beds than homeless people in major cities across the nation. In some places, the gap between available space and human need is significant, leaving hundreds or, in some cases, thousands of people with no choice but to struggle for survival in outdoor, public places. Despite a lack of affordable housing and shelter space, many cities have chosen to criminally punish people living on the street for doing what any human being must do to survive. The Law Center surveyed 187 cities and assessed the number and type of municipal codes that criminalize the life-sustaining behaviors of homeless people. The results of our research show that the criminalization of necessary human activities is all too common in cities across the country. Prevalence of laws that criminalize homelessness: • Laws prohibiting "camping"1 in public o 34 of cities impose city-wide bans on camping in public. o 57 of cities prohibit camping in particular public places. • Laws prohibiting sleeping in public o 18 of cities impose city-wide bans on sleeping in public. o 27 of cities prohibit sleeping in particular public places, such as in public parks. 1 Laws that criminalize camping in public are written broadly to include an array of living arrangements, including simply sleeping outdoors. • Laws prohibiting begging in public o 24 of cities impose city-wide bans on begging in public. o 76 of cities prohibit begging in particular public places. • Laws prohibiting loitering, loafing, and vagrancy o 33 of cities make it illegal to loiter in public throughout an entire city. o 65 of cities prohibit the activity in particular public places. • Laws prohibiting sitting or lying down in public o 53 of cities prohibit sitting or lying down in particular public places. • Laws prohibiting sleeping in vehicles o 43 of cities prohibit sleeping in vehicles. • Laws prohibiting food sharing o 9 of cities prohibit sharing food with homeless people 56 + 57 +====Homelessness is directly correlated to increasing crime.==== 58 +**Roberts 13** (CEO of PATH Partners "Could Housing the Homeless Solve Crime", August 13, 2013 WHS//NAO) 59 +In Britain, experts believe 20 of their "rough sleepers" (people who are homeless) have committed a crime. The conclusion, however, is that these crimes are usually acts of survival or ways for people to get off the streets. Prostitution, shoplifting, or theft are certainly illegal, but they are acts that some people on the streets perform to try and improve their situations. But there are certainly hardcore, violent criminals on the streets, too. The problem is that our communities have become so numb to homelessness that we allow homeless encampments to be scattered in the hills, beaches, rivers, and parks, so that these havens of homelessness become places where violent criminals can blend in and hide. Most of the time, homelessness is not the source of crime in an area, but the places where people experiencing homelessness gather could become havens of crime. Both crime against innocent people living on the streets and crime against innocent people who are already housed. The real solution is to eliminate these encampments of homelessness by helping people get housed. So, could ending homelessness reduce crime in our neighborhoods? Yes. When there is no more homelessness, there will be no more crimes against people who are homeless. When there is no more homelessness, people living on the streets will no longer have to break laws to try and get off the streets. 60 + 61 +====This creates a new ending cycle of incarceration ==== 62 +**Roman 16 ** ~~Courtney S. Hardingcharding roman, Ph.D. in sociology and justice, law, and society from the American University. 11-29-2016, "Identifying Discrete Subgroups of Chronically Homeless Frequent Utilizers of Jail and Public Mental Health Services," No Publication, http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0093854816680838~~ 63 +Finally, although it is often individuals with mental illness who are most in need of housing when released from incarceration, these individuals have been labeled "hard to house" or "hard to serve" as the complexity of their problems (e.g., health, mental health, substance abuse, victimization) requires the resources of multiple agencies and comprehensive (expensive) solutions (Burt and Anderson, 2005; McNiel, Binder, and Robinson, 2005). Furthermore, there is little accountability across domains for providing housing to individuals recently released from jail (Roman and Travis, 2006). This leaves many vulnerable individuals homeless and in need of treatment during the time of reentry. Being homeless soon after release from jail has been shown to increase one’s chances of reincarceration, especially for those with a serious mental illness (Metraux and Culhane, 2004). The link between homelessness and incarceration is mediated by factors related to mental health and substance abuse, as well as socioeconomic disadvantage (Greenberg and Rosenheck, 2008). Preventing homelessness among individuals with complex health and mental issues at the time of release from jail is therefore a means of reducing repeat justice system involvement, poor health outcomes, and long-term housing instability. These findings highlight the importance of incorporating systems that address homelessness into the discussion of cross-system integration. They also implicate homelessness as a potentially important factor to incorporate into any comprehensive picture of complex patients in the criminal justice system. 64 + 65 +====Prison is the worst impact. It is dehumanizing and strips citizens of their subjectivity==== 66 +**Rodriguez 7 bracketed for clarity** ~~Dylan Rodriguez, University of California, Riverside .AMERICAN GLOBALITY AND THE U. S. PRISON REGIME: STATE VIOLENCE AND WHITE SUPREMACY FROM ABU GHRAIB TO STOCKTON TO BAGONG DIWA. Kritika Kultura, Issue 9, November 2007 49 WHS//NAO~~ 67 +We might imagine the U.S. prison, not as a discrete institution or reified place, but rather as ~~is~~ an abstracted site—a prototype—of organized punishment and (social, civil, and biological) death. I begin this section with two points of departure, in an attempt to initially provoke a conceptualization of the American prison regime that focuses on the intertwining of two structural logics: 1) white supremacy as a historical modality of social (dis)organization, and 2) the capacity of allegedly "local" or "domestic" U.S. social formations to circulate, militarize, and mobilize across global geographies. The emergence of the American prison industrial complex since the 1970s is generally addressed as a problem of the "American nation," and until recently has largely been situated by academic scholars, progressive activists, and imprisoned intellectuals within the domains of the domestic social formation. Yet, even the concise definition of the prison industrial complex penned in 2001 by U.S. political prisoner Linda Evans (released in 2001) and activist Eve Goldberg facilitates an inquiry that pushes past parochial geographies of the U.S. national form: "Like the military/industrial complex, the prison industrial complex is an interweaving of private business and government interests. Its twofold purpose is ~~for~~ profit and social control. Its public rationale is the fight against crime" (Evans and Goldberg). Beyond the strictures of conventional criminological approaches to the U.S. prison apparatus, Evans and Goldberg are suggesting ~~There is~~ an organic connection between the architecture of the prison industrial complex and the structuring forces of neoliberalism and globalization: the socioeconomic transformations of U.S. capital, alongside contemporary elaborations of the U.S. racist state in the post-Civil Rights moment, simultaneously a.) fabricate~~s~~ populations vulnerable to criminalization (black, brown, ~~and~~ poor, and generically redundant to the contemporary economic organization of the U.S.); b.) withdraw state social services for people most in need of resources for social and biological reproduction; c.) militarize and juridically empower the policing and criminal justice apparatuses in unprecedented ways while amplifying their fundamentally punitive institutional demeanours; and d.) generate a dynamic statecraft, public discourse, and popular culture of policing and imprisonment that organize a grammar of social necessity and ideological consent around the emergence and expansion of the prison industrial complex. Here we must remember that among the millions of people held captive by the U.S. state in prisons, jails, youth prisons, and immigration detention, people of African descent are imprisoned at rates astronomically high relative to their proportion of the national population (exceeding 400 of their national demographic proportion), and at rates dwarfing those of white Americans (see Gershowitz). Native Americans repeat this pattern, although their smaller demographic numbers often obscure their heightened criminalization by the U.S. state. Latinos, Latinas, and other racialized brown people are increasingly targeted in ways that directly derive from, and expand, the historical structures of white supremacist policing and imprisonment that target Black and indigenous people, in part through the specificities of migrant/immigrant policing and criminalization. Despite composing the national majority of the U.S. population, white Americans compose less than half of the incarcerated U.S. population. Black, Brown, and indigenous peoples constitute upwards of 60 held captive. For the unfamiliar, a few other facts assist in laying bare the accelerated nature of this massive state-sanctioned project: 1 Between 1972 and 2003, the imprisoned (jail and prison) population in the U.S. increased more than 600; for the five decades prior to the 1970s, the incarcerated population had remained relatively stable, hovering between 100,000-200,000. 2 The U.S. boasts of the highest rate of incarceration in the world, at 702 per 100,000 in the general population; this rate is between 500 and 800 that of comparable industrialized nations. 3 African Americans are incarcerated at nearly six times the rate of whites (2,290 per 100,000 versus 412 per 100,000), while Hispanics are incarcerated at nearly double the rate of whites (742 per 100,000). 4 According to one of the most rigorous criminological studies to date (examining the period 1980-1996), the imprisonment increase does not derive from objective changes in the commission of crimes, but rather is almost entirely owed to politically formed changes in sentencing and criminal justice policy (see Gershowitz). Thus, as the U.S. prison, jail, INS/Homeland Security detainee and incarcerated youth population approaches and surpasses the 2.5 million mark (as of this writing), the quantitative evidence refracts the prison’s qualitative transformation into a fundamental organ of state reproduction and civic ordering. Variable, overlapping, and mutually constituting white supremacist regimes have in fact been fundamental to the formation and movements of the United States, from racial chattel slavery and frontier genocide to recent and current modes of neoliberal land displacement and (domestic-to-global) warfare. Without exception, these regimes have been differently entangled with the state’s changing paradigms, strategies, and technologies of human incarceration and punishment (to follow the prior examples: the plantation, the reservation, the neoliberal sweatshop, and the domestic-to-global prison). The historical nature of these entanglements is widely acknowledged, although explanations of the structuring relations of force tend to either isolate or historically compartmentalize the complexities of historical white supremacy. For the theoretical purposes of this essay, white supremacy may be understood as a logic of social organization that produces regimented, institutionalized, and militarized conceptions of hierarchized "human" difference, enforced through coercions and violences that are structured by genocidal possibility (including physical extermination and curtailment of people’s collective capacities to socially, culturally, or biologically reproduce). As a historical vernacular and philosophical apparatus of domination, white supremacy is simultaneously premised on and consistently innovating universalized conceptions of the white (European and euroamerican) "human" vis-à-vis the rigorous production, penal discipline, and frequent social, political, and biological neutralization or extermination of the (non-white) sub- or non-human. To consider white supremacy as essential to American social formation (rather than a freakish or extremist deviation from it) facilitates a discussion of the modalities through which this material logic of violence overdetermines the social, political, economic, and cultural structures that compose American globality and constitute the common sense that is organic to its ordering. 68 + 69 +===Advantage 3 is Sex Trafficking=== 70 +====Homeless youth are at risk for sex trafficking.==== 71 +**Clawson et al ’09** ~~Heather J. Clawson, Nicole Dutch, Amy Solomon, and Lisa Goldblatt Grace, 8-30-2009, "Human Trafficking Into and Within the United States: A Review of the Literature," ASPE, https://aspe.hhs.gov/basic-report/human-trafficking-and-within-united-states-review-literature~~#Other WHS//NAO~~ 72 +According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Uniform Crime Reports (2006), across the United States 36,402 boys and 47,472 girls younger than age 18 were picked up by law enforcement and identified as runaways. Girls who run from their homes, group homes, foster homes, or treatment centers, are at great risk of being targeted by a pimp (or trafficker) and becoming exploited. Research consistently confirms the correlation between running away and becoming exploited through prostitution. Researchers have found that the majority of prostituted women had been runaways; for example, 96 percent in San Francisco (Silbert and Pines, 1982), 72 percent in Boston (Norton-Hawk, 2002) and 56 percent in Chicago (Raphael and Shapiro, 2002). Among prostituted youth (both boys and girls), up to 77 percent report having run away at least once (Seng, 1989). Experts have reported that within 48 hours of running away, an adolescent is likely to be approached to participate in prostitution or another form of commercial sexual exploitation (Spangenberg, 2001); however, no definitive published research substantiates this claim. Like girls, boys exploited through prostitution are most often runaways or throwaways (Flowers, 2001; Lankenau et al., 2005; Moxley-Goldsmith, 2005). For example, one study found that two-thirds of males exploited through prostitution had run away from home prior to becoming involved (Allen, 1980). While many of the factors leading to a young person leaving home are similar for boys and girls, it is estimated that between 40 and 50 percent of boys exploited through prostitution had been thrown out of their homes because of sexual identity issues (Earls and David, 1989; Seattle Commission on Children and Youth, 1986). Approximately 2535 percent of prostituted boys self-identify as gay, bisexual, or transgender/transsexual (Estes and Weiner, 2001). Further, regardless of the boys self-identification, at least 95 percent of all prostitution engaged in by boys is provided to adult men (Estes and Weiner, 2001). Regardless of their sex, when minors leave their homes, it is to protect themselves, often because they view living on the streets as either less dangerous or no more dangerous than staying at home (Hyde, 2005; Martinez, 2006). Once on the street, homeless youth are at risk for being victimized because they lack the funds, interpersonal and job skills, and support systems necessary to survive on their own (Martinez, 2006). Having often come from chaotic families, runaways tend to lack strategies for problem solving, conflict resolution, and meeting basic needs such as food, clothing, and shelter (Martinez, 2006; Robertson and Toro, 1999; Whitbeck, Hoyt, and Yoder, 1999). Some minors turn to substance abuse, crime, and survival sex to meet their basic needs (Greene, Ennett, and Ringwald, 1999; Riley, Greif, Caplan, and MacAulay, 2004; Robertson and Toro, 1999). Furthermore, exposure to the dangers of the street makes them more visible and vulnerable to traffickers, and their risky lifestyles and routines put them at greater risk of being victimized (Kipke, Simon, Montgomery, Unger, and Iversen, 1997; MacLean, Embry, and Cauce, 1999; Tyler, Cauce, and Whitbeck, 2004). Most runaway/throwaway youth are likely to run to and congregate in urban areas, so it is not surprising that there is general consensus that a greater percentage of minors are exploited in the U.S. sex industry in urban areas, though they may be brought from suburban and rural areas (Flowers, 2001). However, an increase in minor arrests in suburban counties/areas and rural areas has experts speculating that the increase is indicative of an expansion of prostitution beyond city limits (Flowers, 2001). While these data are somewhat outdated, anecdotal evidence from service providers indicates that this trend continues (A. Adams, personal communication, March 2006; N. Hotaling, personal communication, June 2006). However, further research is needed to determine whether the increase in suburban arrests is due to better identification or an actual increase in incidence. WHAT ARE THE NEEDS OF VICTIMS OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING? NEEDS OF INTERNATIONAL VICTIMS An examination of the services provided to international victims of human trafficking (adults and children) reveals emergency, short-term, and long-term needs (Caliber Associates, 2007; Clawson, Small, Go, and Myles, 2004). Some victims initially may present to a service provider with basic needs for safety, housing, food, and clothing. In fact, the need for safe and secure housing and overall support and advocacy are primary needs for virtually all victims of trafficking. Needs of International Victims Emergency Safety, housing, food/clothing Short-term/Long-term Legal assistance Advocacy (emotional/moral support) Housing Medical care (including dental) Mental health services/trauma recovery Transportation Education Job training/employment Reunification/repatriation These basic needs often are accompanied by an immediate need for legal assistance/representation to handle issues related to immigration status, provide legal representation that may be required in an ongoing investigation and prosecution of the trafficking case, or provide counsel in a civil lawsuit against the trafficker or in a potential custody case (Caliber Associates, 2007; Florida University Center for Advancement of Human Rights, 2003). Interviews with service providers and NGOs reveal that beyond these common immediate needs, the needs of victims are as diverse as the countries from which the victims originate. Additionally, during the course of working with victims, their needs are likely to change (Caliber Associates, 2007). A needs assessment conducted with service providers working with victims of human trafficking identified a broad range of victims needs, including emergency, transitional, and permanent housing; food/clothing; medical services (including dental care); advocacy (moral/emotional support), legal services; transportation; and information/referral services (e.g., rights as a victim of human trafficking, available services) (Clawson et al., 2004). For international victims, more often than not, there is a need for language assistance, often requiring an interpreter/translator to help the victim communicate with first responders and those trying to provide assistance. Only after these immediate needs have been met can a victim benefit from treatment for depression, trauma, re-traumatization, and other issues (Misra, Connolly, Klynman, and Majeed, 2006). Addressing the symptoms exhibited by victims of human trafficking is critical to their long-term recovery. Victims of human trafficking have been described as exhibiting symptoms and needs for service similar to torture victims, victims of domestic violence/sexual assault, battered immigrant women, migrant workers, refugees, and asylum seekers (Clawson et al., 2004). Like torture victims, victims of human trafficking (both sex and labor trafficking) often experience post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depressive disorder, other anxiety disorders, and substance abuse (De Jong, et al, 2001; Shrestha, Sharma, Van Ommeren, Regmi, Makaju, et al., 1998). Specific symptoms exhibited by victims can include nightmares, difficulty concentrating, becoming easily upset, and having difficulty relaxing. Victims can frequently feel sad or angry, have difficulty thinking, experience feelings of hopelessness, and demonstrate sleep disorders. The trauma itself also may manifest as physical symptoms, such as headaches, chest pain, shaking, sweating, and dizziness (Center for Victims of Torture). Beyond trauma-recovery services, long-term service needs include permanent housing, legal assistance, job training, job placement, education, family reunification (within the United States), and repatriation (in some cases). For some victims, in particular victims of labor trafficking, the victim may have a need for long-term medical care to address physical disabilities resulting from the abuse and/or harsh labor conditions under which the person was forced to work (Bales, 2004; Caliber Associates, 2007). Based on research on the needs of unaccompanied refugee minors, minor international trafficking victims may experience depression and feelings of isolation, but given their culture, they may not know how to express or describe what they are feeling. They may display psychosomatic symptoms; experience high levels of anxiety (especially if language obstacles and cultural differences exist between the minor and the caregiver); experience survivor guilt (victims feel they do not deserve to be alive and in a safe place when friends, siblings, or other family members are suffering); exhibit behavioral problems, including aggression; and question their ethnic identity (Ryan, 1997). Intensive case management and medical, mental health, and social services are important for responding to the needs of these children. Additionally, educating and training foster care families about the dynamics of human trafficking, the needs of victims, and the symptoms of trauma are also needed to ensure appropriate placement for children in need of homes. Given the complex needs of international victims of human trafficking, it is not surprising that providers report working with clients for more than a year and often for several years, frequently on an intermittent basis. This makes sustained progress challenging (Caliber Associates, 2007; Clawson et al., 2004). NEEDS OF DOMESTIC VICTIMS Information specifically documenting the needs of victims of human trafficking is limited and has focused primarily on international victims. However, research on prostitution and on homeless and runaway youth can provide some insights about the needs of domestic trafficking victims and can help increase understanding about the similarities and differences across the victim types. Needs of Minor Domestic Victims Emergency Safety, housing, food/clothing Short-term/Long-term Legal assistance Intensive case management Medical care Alcohol and substance abuse counseling/treatment Mental health counseling Life skills training Education Job training/employment Family reunification Girls and women escaping prostitution report housing (both transitional and long-term) as an urgent need (Commercial Sexual Exploitation Resource Institute, 1998). Substance abuse treatment and mental health counseling are also common needs among this population. The use of substances and subsequent drug addiction is well documented among homeless youth exploited through prostitution. One study found that more than 75 percent of these youth abuse alcohol or drugs, while virtually all admit to some level of use (Yates, Mackenzie, Pennbridge, and Swofford, 1991). These rates were notably higher than among homeless youth not exploited through prostitution (R. Lloyd, personal communication, May 2007). While it is important to note that a significant percentage of girls enter prostitution with no history of drug or alcohol abuse (Farley and Kelly, 2000), some studies suggest that girls who become exploited through prostitution are likely to have begun using substances at an earlier age than their at-risk peers who do not become exploited in this way (Inciardi, Pottieger, Forney, Chitwood, and McBride. 1991; Nadon, Koverola, and Schludermann, 1998). Substance abuse is also a rampant problem among the male population. For example, one study found that 77 percent of the boys exploited through prostitution were regular users of marijuana (Harlan et al., 1981). Another study found that 42 percent of the prostituted boys could be classified as heavy drinkers or alcoholics and 29 percent were regular users of hard drugs (Allen, 1980). In 1989, the County of Los Angeles found that of all the runaway youth, both boys and girls, seeking medical assistance, 75 percent of those exploited through prostitution had a substance abuse problem compared with 36 percent of those youth not being prostituted (Klain, 1999). Both girls and boys also present with medical needs. Females trafficked in the sex trade have increased risk of cervical cancer and chronic hepatitis as well as HIV (Farley et al., 2003), thus requiring immediate and potentially long-term medical care. Boys are at particularly high risk of contracting HIV due to high rates of unprotected anal sex with adult men as well as frequent intravenous drug use (Flowers, 2001). Rates of mental health problems are similar between girls and boys, though girls have been studied far more extensively (Flowers, 2001; Klain, 1999; Lankenau et al., 2005; Moxley-Goldsmith, 2005). Adolescent girls suffer severe emotional and physical consequences as a result of domestic trafficking. Survivors of prostitution demonstrate a high rate of dissociative disorders, self-destructive behaviors (including cutting), suicide attempts, and clinical depression (Farley, 2003; Farley and Kelly, 2000; Giobbe, 1993; Lloyd, 2005; Nixon et al., 2002). Additionally, as a result of the chronic trauma, prostituted girls often develop symptoms congruent with PTSD. One international study of prostituted children and adults, including male prostitutes, in five countries found that almost three-fourths met the diagnostic criteria for PTSD (Farley, Barel, Kiremire, and Sezquin, 1998; Silbert and Pines, 1981). The clinical manifestations of PTSD can limit an individuals ability to function effectively, decreasing the likelihood that he or she can take advantage of available resources and possibly minimizing any likelihood of leaving prostitution (Valera, Sawyer, and Schiraldi, 2001). As with all victims of human trafficking, adolescent girls may display symptoms of Stockholm syndrome, otherwise most frequently seen among prisoners of war and torture victims (Graham and Wish, 1994). As a means of emotional and physical survival, the captive (the girl) identifies with her captor. She expresses extreme gratitude over the smallest acts of kindness or mercy (e.g., he does not beat her today), denial over the extent of violence and injury, rooting for her pimp, hypervigilence regarding his needs, and the perception that anyone trying to persecute him or help her escape is the enemy. She may lash out at law enforcement or anyone else attempting to help her exit, and insist that she is fine and happy in her current situation. Further, the manifestations of her trauma may make her reticent to trust those outside the Life who state they are trying to help her (Friedman, 2005; Raphael, 2004). While presented here as separate needs or conditions, recognition of co-occurring disorders among adolescent victims of trafficking and the need for integrated treatment approaches, specifically for trauma, substance abuse, and mental health disorders, has gained momentum over the past 510 years (Austin, Macgowan, and Wagner, 2005; Battjes et al., 2004; Dasinger, Shane, and Martinovich, 2004; Dennis et al., 2002, 2004; Godley, Jones, Funk, Ives, and Passetti, 2004; Robbins, Bachrach, and Scapocznik, 2002). A number of studies indicate high rates of co-occurring disorders among adolescents. In one clinical study of youth in the mental health system, for example, about half had a co-occurring substance abuse disorder (Greenbaum, Foster-Johnson, and Petrilla, 1996). In the substance abuse system, estimates are even higher that as many as 7590 percent of drug abusing adolescents having a co-morbid mental health disorder (Eisen, Youngman, Grob, and Dill, 1992; Grella, Hser, Joshia, and Rounds-Bryant, 2001). Mood disorders (especially depression and anxiety), conduct disorders, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder are most often cited as co-occurring with substance abuse disorders in adolescents (Crowley and Riggs, 1995; Wise, Cuffe, and Fischer, 2001). Given the high documented rates of co-morbidity in substance abusing clinical populations, Grella et al. (2001, p. 391) concluded that adolescent drug treatment programs should assume that co-morbidity among their patients is the norm, rather than the exception.** **The needs of homeless and runaway youth parallel the needs of victims of human trafficking (international and domestic). These include the need for food, clothing, and housing; medical care; alcohol and substance abuse counseling and treatment; mental health services; education and employment assistance; and legal assistance (Robertson and Toro, 1999). In two studies, homeless youth reported wanting assistance with life skills training (Aviles and Helfrich, 2004; DeRosa et al., 1999). Other important service needs are assessment and treatment for exposure to trauma (Dalton and Pakenham, 2002; Steele and OKeefe, 2001) and risk of suicide (Martinez, 2006). 73 + 74 +====Human trafficking is dehumanizing to its victims.==== 75 +**Rocha ’12 **~~Priscila Rocha, 2012, "OUR BACKYARD SLAVE TRADE: THE RESULT OF OHIO'S FAILURE TO ENACT COMPREHENSIVE STATE-LEVEL HUMAN-SEX-TRAFFICKING LEGISLATION", Cleveland State University Journal of Law and Health, http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/ WHS//NAO~~ 76 +Human trafficking is a lucrative business in which traffickers reap substantial profits from the dehumanization of victims. It ranks as the second largest illegal enterprise in the world, following the illegal sale of drugs. n63 The figures help explain why traffickers are compelled to continue treating human beings as commodities. The International Labour Organization (ILO) estimates that global profits from ~~*391~~ forced commercial sex exploitation generate $ 33.9 billion U.S. dollars per year. n64 Profits from global commercial sex exploitation, in which victims are trafficked, generate approximately $ 27.8 billion U.S. dollars per year. n65 Industrialized nations account for forty-nine percent of annual global profits derived from human trafficking. n66 Traffickers in industrialized nations receive approximately $ 67,200 of profits per victim (or $ 5600 per month). n67 The figures indicate that human trafficking is currently a business opportunity that is simply too profitable to for traffickers to ignore. Until the law imposes penalties for human trafficking substantial enough to hurt traffickers' bottom line profits, they will continue to enslave victims, viewing penalties as a mere business cost. 77 + 78 +====Providing a safe place to stay for homeless youth would solve for sex trafficking.==== 79 +Jayne **Bigelsen ’13** ~~Director Anti-Human Trafficking Initiatives, Covenant House New York~~, 5-2013, "Homelessness, Survival Sex and Human Trafficking: As Experienced by the Youth of Covenant House New York", http://www.endhomelessness.org/page/-/files/Covenant20House20Fordham20University20Trafficking20Report.pdf WHS//NAO~~ 80 +For those who are committed to eradicating domestic trafficking, the contributing factors outlined in this report offer a roadmap to trafficking prevention. As stated above, 48 of the participants who reported engaging in commercial sex activity explained that a lack of a safe place to sleep was a main reason for their initial entry into prostitution or other commercial sex. The participants described how pimps in New York City are well aware that the youth shelters are full and use that to their advantage by alerting homeless young people to the no vacancy status and offering them a place to stay in lieu of sleeping on the streets. Therefore, every time a shelter bed for a homeless youth is lost to budget cuts, pimps are able to operate with greater success. Advocates, policy makers and the public at large must work collaboratively to make sure that pimps and other traffickers have no such advantage by working toward the goal of ensuring that every homeless youth who wants a safe place to sleep has access to shelter and services. 81 + 82 +====A combination of homelessness and sex trafficking culminates in massive substance abuse==== 83 +**Leal et al. 09** ~~Leal, Daniel, Marc Galanter, Helen Dermatis, and Laurence Westreich. "Correlates of Protracted Homelessness in a Sample of Dually Diagnosed Psychiatric Inpatients." Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 16.2 (1999): 143-47. National Coalition for the Homeless. National Coalition for the Homeless, July 2009. Web. 18 July 2016. http://www.nationalhomeless.org/factsheets/addiction.pdf WHS//NAO~~ 84 +Although obtaining an accurate, recent count is difficult, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (2003) estimates, 38 of homeless people were dependent on alcohol and 26 abused other drugs. Alcohol abuse is more common in older generations, while drug abuse is more common in homeless youth and young adults (Didenko and Pankratz, 2007). Substance abuse is much more common among homeless people than in the general population. According to the 2006 National Household Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), 15 of people above the age of 12 reported using drugs within the past year and only 8 reported using drugs within the past month. RELATIONSHIP TO HOMELESSNESS Substance abuse is often a cause of homelessness. Addictive disorders disrupt relationships with family and friends and often cause people to lose their jobs. For people who are already struggling to pay their bills, the onset or exacerbation of an addiction may cause them to lose their housing. A 2008 survey by the United States Conference of Mayors asked 25 cities for their top three causes of homelessness. Substance abuse was the single largest cause of homelessness for single adults (reported by 68 of cities). Substance abuse was also mentioned by 12 of cities as one of the top three causes of homelessness for families. According to Didenko and Pankratz (2007), two-thirds of homeless people report that drugs and/or alcohol were a major reason for their becoming homeless. In many situations, however, substance abuse is a result of homelessness rather than a cause. People who are homeless often turn to drugs and alcohol to cope with their situations. They use substances in an attempt to attain temporary relief from their problems. In reality, however, substance dependence only exacerbates their problems and decreases their ability to achieve employment stability and get off the streets. Additionally, some people may view drug and alcohol use as necessary to be accepted among the homeless community (Didenko and Pankratz, 2007). Breaking an addiction is difficult for anyone, especially for substance abusers who are homeless. To begin with, motivation to stop using substances may be poor. For many homeless people, survival is more important than personal growth and development, and finding food and shelter take a higher priority than drug counseling. Many homeless people have also become estranged from their families and friends. Without a social support network, recovering from a substance addiction is very difficult. Even if they do break their addictions, homeless people may have difficulty remaining sober while living on the str eets where substances are so widely used (Fisher and Roget, 2009). Unfortunately, many treatment programs focus on abstinence only programming, which is less effective than harm-reduction strategies and does not address the possibility of relapse (National Health Care for the Homeless Council, 2007). For many homeless people, substance abuse co-occurs with mental illness. Often, people with untreated mental illnesses use street drugs as an inappropriate form of self-medication. Homeless people with both substance disorders and mental illness experience additional obstacles to recovery, such as increased risk for violence and victimization and frequent cycling between the streets, jails, and emergency rooms (Fisher and Roget, 2009). Sadly, these people are often unable to find treatment facilities that will help them. Many programs for homeless people with mental illnesses do not accept people with substance abuse disorders, and many programs for homeless substance abusers do not treat people with mental illnesses 85 + 86 + 87 +===Plan=== 88 +====Resolved: The United States ought to guarantee the right to housing. I reserve the right to clarify in Cross ex. ==== 89 +**Fasanelli 5 is the solvency advocate** ~~Antonia Fasanelli ~~Chair Commission on Homelessness and Poverty~~ August 2013. American Bar Association Adopted by the House of Delegates. August 12-13. WHS//NAO~~ 90 +Implementing the human right to adequate housing In implementing the human right to adequate housing, the American Bar Association calls upon federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial governments to (1) Implement policies promoting the human right to adequate housing for all including veterans, people with disabilities, older persons, families, single individuals, and unaccompanied youth, which, at minimum, includes: a. Affordability, habitability, and accessibility; b. Provision of security of tenure, access to services, materials, facilities, and infrastructure; c. Location proximate to employment, health care, schools, and other social facilities; d. Provision of housing in areas that do not threaten occupants’ health; and e. Protection of cultural identity or diversity The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), which oversees implementation of the ICESCR, lists seven elements required for housing to be considered adequate including legal security of tenure; availability of services, materials, facilities, and infrastructure; affordability; habitability; accessibility; location near employment options, healthcare facilities, schools, child care centers, and other social facilities; and cultural adequacy in housing design.21 This framework recognizes that each of these elements is interdependent with each other. Adequate housing requires more than four walls and a roof; it requires adequate community resources, supportive legal and policy frameworks, effective access to justice, and a participatory and transparent democratic system to maintain all aspects of the right. It also recognizes that enjoyment of the right to housing is a standard relative to the availability of resources in a given country; here in the U.S., in what remains the wealthiest country in the world, we can and must do more.22 91 + 92 +===Solvency=== 93 +====Plan is feasible and saves more money in the long run==== 94 +**Fasanelli 6** ~~Antonia Fasanelli ~~Chair Commission on Homelessness and Poverty~~ August 2013. American Bar Association Adopted by the House of Delegates. August 12-13. WHS//NAO~~ 95 +In addition to viewing housing expenditures as obligatory, legislators must also consider the fiscal benefits of adequately meeting low-income housing needs. In a 2004 study by the Lewin Group on the costs of serving homeless individuals in nine cities across the U.S., several cities found supportive housing to be cheaper than housing homeless individuals in shelters.51 That same year, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the cost of a Section 8 Housing Certificate to be $7,028, approximately $8,000 less than the cost of an emergency shelter bed funded by HUD’s Emergency Shelter Grants program.52 A collaborative effort of service and medical providers in San Diego, Project 25, has documented a $7 million dollar savings to tax payers through reduced emergency care and jail costs by providing permanent housing to 35 homeless individuals, a 70 reduction.53 Scotland, France, and South Africa all show that the progressive implementation of the right to housing through legislation and case law is possible where the political will exists. Scotland’s Homeless Act of 2003 progressively expanded the right to be immediately housed and the right to long-term, supportive housing for as long as it is needed, starting with target populations, but available to all in need as of 2012. The law also includes a private right of action and requires jurisdictions to plan for development of adequate affordable housing supplies.54 France created similar legislation in 2007 in response to public pressure and a decision of the European Committee on Social Rights under the European Social Charter.55 South Africa’s constitutional right to housing protects even those squatting in informal settlements, requiring the provision of adequate alternative housing before families and individuals can be evicted.56 This law has been enforced in local communities to even require rebuilding housing that has been torn down.57 While not yet perfect, these countries are proving that progressively implementing the right to housing is both economically feasible and judicially manageable 96 + 97 +====Any skepticism should be discounted- it’s a question of spending money properly.==== 98 +**Hartman** ~~Chester Hartman. The Case for a Right to Housing. Housing Policy Debate. Volume 9, Issue 2. Poverty and Race Research Action Council. WHS//NAO~~ 99 +But given that government budgetary outlays must be far higher than current levels if the National Housing Goal is to become a reality, is the money there? That, I submit, is not a fiscal question but a political one. We do not have any wholly reliable estimates of what realizing a right to decent, affordable housing would cost, but a recent approach can offer an order-of-magnitude estimate. For example, the detailed 10-year program put forth by the Institute for Policy Studies’ Working Group on Housing (1989) has a first-year price tag of between $29 and $88 billion (in 1989 dollars), depending on what mixture of its differently priced elements is chosen; over its life, required outlays are reduced annually. While the figure sounds high, such expenditures represent a tiny percentage of the current federal budget. Funding B-2 bombers (‘‘that notorious lemon’’ ~~Lewis 1995~~ unrequested by the Pentagon), at $1.4 billion each, at a time when the possibility of large-scale wars is at its lowest in the century, is but one illustration of politicized budgetary choices that reveal no shortage of financial resources. The above figure appears to be in line with the amount of subsidy the government grants under the mortgage interest deduction. According to U.S. Congress (1997) Joint Committee on Taxation estimates, the mortgage interest deduction alone will amount to $232.6 billion over the period between fiscal years 1998 and 2002. For the same five-year period, the deduction of property taxes on owner-occupied residences is estimated to cost $89.9 billion, and exclusion of capital gains on the sale of principal residences is estimated at $29.6 billion. In sum, it’s not that we don’t have the money to fund a right to housing; rather, it’s how we choose to spend it. 100 + 101 +====The plan solves empirics prove==== 102 +~~Carol **Off and Jeff** Douglas, 5-14-20**15**, "Medicine Hat becomes the first city in Canada to eliminate homelessness," CBC News, http://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-thursday-edition-1.3074402/medicine-hat-becomes-the-first-city-in-canada-to-eliminate-homelessness-1.3074742 WHS//NAO~~ 103 +Medicine Hat, a city in southern Alberta, pledged in 2009 to put an end to homelessness. Now they say they've fulfilled their promise. No one in the city spends more than 10 days in an emergency shelter or on the streets. If you've got no place to go, they'll simply provide you with housing. "We're pretty much able to meet that standard today. Even quicker, actually, sometimes," Mayor Ted Clugston tells As It Happens host Carol Off. Housing is tight in Medicine Hat. Frequent flooding in the past few years didn't help matters. With money chipped in by the province, the city built many new homes. Ted Clugston is the mayor of Medicine Hat, Alberta. Clugston admits that when the project began in 2009, when he was an alderman, he was an active opponent of the plan. "I even said some dumb things like, 'Why should they have granite countertops when I don't,'" he says. "However, I've come around to realize that this makes financial sense." 104 + 105 +====Housing is widely available in the United States.==== 106 +**Loha 11** (Leader of Amnesty International "How Bad is The Homeless Problem?" 2011 WHS//NAO) 107 +Since 2007, banks have foreclosed around eight million homes. It is estimated that another eight to ten million homes will be foreclosed before the financial crisis is over. This approach to resolving one part of the financial crisis means many, many families are living without adequate and secure housing. In addition, approximately 3.5 million people in the U.S. are homeless, many of them veterans. It is worth noting that, at the same time, there are 18.5 million vacant homes in the country. 108 + 109 +===Underview=== 110 +====Root cause explanations of international politics don’t exist – methodological pluralism is necessary to reclaim IR as emancipatory praxis and avoid endless political violence.==== 111 +**Bleiker 14** – ~~6/17, Roland, Professor of International Relations at the University of Queensland, "International Theory Between Reification and Self-Reflective Critique," International Studies Review, Volume 16, Issue 2, pages 325–327 WHS//NAO~~ 112 +This book is part of an increasing trend of scholarly works that have embraced poststructural critique but want to ground it in more positive political foundations, while retaining a reluctance to return to the positivist tendencies that implicitly underpin much of constructivist research. The path that Daniel Levine has carved out is innovative, sophisticated, and convincing. A superb scholarly achievement. For Levine, the key challenge in international relations (IR) scholarship is what he calls "unchecked reification": the widespread and dangerous process of forgetting "the distinction between theoretical concepts and the real-world things they mean to describe or to which they refer" (p. 15). The dangers are real, Levine stresses, because IR deals with some of the most difficult issues, from genocides to war. Upholding one subjective position without critical scrutiny can thus have far-reaching consequences. Following Theodor Adorno—who is the key theoretical influence on this book—Levine takes a post-positive position and assumes that the world cannot be known outside of our human perceptions and the values that are inevitably intertwined with them. His ultimate goal is to overcome reification, or, to be more precise, to recognize it as an inevitable aspect of thought so that its dangerous consequences can be mitigated. Levine proceeds in three stages: First he reviews several decades of IR theories to resurrect critical moments when scholars displayed an acute awareness of the dangers of reification. He refreshingly breaks down distinctions between conventional and progressive scholarship, for he detects self-reflective and critical moments in scholars that are usually associated with straightforward positivist positions (such as E.H. Carr, Hans Morgenthau, or Graham Allison). But Levine also shows how these moments of self-reflexivity never lasted long and were driven out by the compulsion to offer systematic and scientific knowledge. The second stage of Levine's inquiry outlines why IR scholars regularly closed down critique. Here, he points to a range of factors and phenomena, from peer review processes to the speed at which academics are meant to publish. And here too, he eschews conventional wisdom, showing that work conducted in the wake of the third debate, while explicitly post-positivist and critiquing the reifying tendencies of existing IR scholarship, often lacked critical self-awareness. As a result, Levine believes that many of the respective authors failed to appreciate sufficiently that "reification is a consequence of all thinking including itself" (p. 68). The third objective of Levine's book is also the most interesting one. Here, he outlines the path toward what he calls "sustainable critique": a form of self-reflection that can counter the dangers of reification. Critique, for him, is not just something that is directed outwards, against particular theories or theorists. It is also inward-oriented, ongoing, and sensitive to the "limitations of thought itself" (p. 12). The challenges that such a sustainable critique faces are formidable. Two stand out: First, if the natural tendency to forget the origins and values of our concepts are as strong as Levine and other Adorno-inspired theorists believe they are, then how can we actually recognize our own reifying tendencies? Are we not all inevitably and subconsciously caught in a web of meanings from which we cannot escape? Second, if one constantly questions one's own perspective, does one not fall into a relativism that loses the ability to establish the kind of stable foundations that are necessary for political action? Adorno has, of course, been critiqued as relentlessly negative, even by his second-generation Frankfurt School successors (from Jürgen Habermas to his IR interpreters, such as Andrew Linklater and Ken Booth). The response that Levine has to these two sets of legitimate criticisms are, in my view, both convincing and useful at a practical level. He starts off with depicting reification not as a flaw that is meant to be expunged, but as an a priori condition for scholarship. The challenge then is not to let it go unchecked. Methodological pluralism lies at the heart of Levine's sustainable critique. He borrows from what Adorno calls a "constellation": an attempt to juxtapose, rather than integrate, different perspectives. It is in this spirit that Levine advocates multiple methods to understand the same event or phenomena. He writes of the need to validate "multiple and mutually incompatible ways of seeing" (p. 63, see also pp. 101–102). In this model, a scholar oscillates back and forth between different methods and paradigms, trying to understand the event in question from multiple perspectives. No single method can ever adequately represent the event or should gain the upper hand. But each should, in a way, recognize and capture details or perspectives that the others cannot (p. 102). In practical terms, this means combining a range of methods even when—or, rather, precisely when—they are deemed incompatible. They can range from poststructual deconstruction to the tools pioneered and championed by positivist social sciences. The benefit of such a methodological polyphony is not just the opportunity to bring out nuances and new perspectives. Once the false hope of a smooth synthesis has been abandoned, the very incompatibility of the respective perspectives can then be used to identify the reifying tendencies in each of them. For Levine, this is how reification may be "checked at the source" and this is how a "critically reflexive moment might thus be rendered sustainable" (p. 103). It is in this sense that Levine's approach is not really post-foundational but, rather, an attempt to "balance foundationalisms against one another" (p. 14). There are strong parallels here with arguments advanced by assemblage thinking and complexity theory—links that could have been explored in more detail. - EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +2017-04-13 00:22:16.0 - Judge
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Matthew Chandler - Opponent
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Winston Churchill BR - ParentRound
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +43 - Round
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +5 - Team
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Warren Okunlola Aff - Title
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +12 - Util Affirmative - 1AC - NSDA District Round 5 - Tournament
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +NSDA District
- Caselist.CitesClass[16]
-
- Cites
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,83 @@ 1 +==1AC== 2 + 3 +===Framing=== 4 +====The standard is maximizing expected well-being. Prefer==== 5 + 6 +====1 States do and should act in a utilitarian manner.==== 7 +**Woller 97** ~~Gary, Brigham Young University, "A Forum On The Role of Environmental Ethics in Restructuring Environmental Policy and Law for the Next Century", Policy Currents, 1997, WHS//NAO~~ 8 +Moreover, virtually all public policies entail some redistribution of economic or political resources, such that one group's gains must come at another group's expense. Consequently, public policies in a democracy must be justified to the public, and especially to those who pay the costs of those policies. Such justification cannot simply be assumed by invoking some a priori higher-order moral principle. Appeals to a priori moral principles, such as environmental preservation, also often fail to acknowledge that public policies inevitably entail trade-offs among competing values. Thus since policymakers cannot justify inherent value conflicts to the public in any philosophical sense, and since public policies inherently imply winners and losers, the policymakers' duty to the public interest requires them to demonstrate that the redistributive effects and value trade-offs implied by their polices are somehow to the overall advantage of society. At the same time, deontologically based ~~other~~ ethical systems have severe practical limitations as a basis for public policy. It therefore follows that in a democracy, policymakers have an ethical duty to establish a plausible link between policy alternatives and the problems they address, and the public must be reasonably assured ~~reasonable assurance~~ that a policy will actually do something about an existing problem; this requires the means-end language and methodology of utilitarian ethics. Good intentions, lofty rhetoric, and moral piety are an insufficient, though perhaps at times a necessary, basis for public policy in a democracy. 9 + 10 +====2 You should default to util if I win defense on their standard—we naturally want to make the world better.==== 11 +**Sinnott-Armstrong 14** ~~Walter, American philosopher. He specializes in ethics, epistemology, and more recently in neuroethics, the philosophy of law, and the philosophy of cognitive science, "Consequentialism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed), WHS//NAO~~ 12 +Even if consequentialists can accommodate or explain away common moral intuitions, that might seem only to answer objections without yet giving any positive reason to accept consequentialism. However, most people begin with the presumption that we morally ought to make the world better when we can. The question then is only whether any moral constraints or moral options need to be added to the basic consequentialist factor in moral reasoning. (Kagan 1989, 1998) If no objection reveals any need for anything beyond consequences, then consequences alone seem to determine what is morally right or wrong, just as consequentialists claim. 13 + 14 +====3 The government has an obligation to guarantee everyone can exercise this right==== 15 +**NESRI ’10** ~~National Economic and Social Rights Initiative, 2010. http://www.nesri.org/programs/what-is-the-human-right-to-housing WHS//NAO~~ 16 +Everyone has a fundamental human right to housing, which ensures access to a safe, secure, habitable, and affordable home with freedom from forced eviction. It is the government’s obligation to guarantee that everyone can exercise this right to live in security, peace, and dignity. This right must be provided to all persons irrespective of income or access to economic resources. There are seven principles that are fundamental to the right to housing and are of particular relevance to the right to housing in the United States: Security of Tenure: Residents should possess a degree of security of tenure that guarantees protection against forced evictions, harassment, and other threats, including predatory redevelopment and displacement. -Availability of Services, Materials, Facilities, and Infrastructure: Housing must provide certain facilities essential for health, security, comfort, and nutrition. For instance, residents must have access to safe drinking water, heating and lighting, washing facilities, means of food storage, and sanitation. -Affordability: Housing costs should be at such a level that the attainment and satisfaction of other basic needs are not threatened or compromised. For instance, one should not have to choose between paying rent and buying food. -Habitability/Decent and Safe Home: Housing must provide residents adequate space that protects them from cold, damp, heat, rain, wind, or other threats to health; structural hazards; and disease. -Accessibility: Housing must be accessible to all, and disadvantaged and vulnerable groups must be accorded full access to housing resources.-Location: Housing should not be built on polluted sites, or in immediate proximity to pollution sources that threaten the right to health of residents. The physical safety of residents must be guaranteed, as well. Additionally, housing must be in a location which allows access to employment options, health-care services, schools, child-care centers, and other social facilities.-Cultural Adequacy: Housing and housing policies must guarantee the expression of cultural identity and diversity, including the preservation of cultural landmarks and institutions. Redevelopment or modernization programs must ensure that the cultural significance of housing and communities is not sacrificed. 17 + 18 +===Contention 1 is International Law=== 19 +====US commitment to international law requires a right to housing- multiple contracts. ==== 20 +**Fasanelli 1** ~~Antonia Fasanelli ~~Chair Commission on Homelessness and Poverty~~ August 2013. American Bar Association Adopted by the House of Delegates. August 12-13. WHS//NAO~~ 21 +The U.S. commitment to the human right to housing was reaffirmed in its signature to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) in 1977. The ICESCR was submitted to the Senate for ratification in late 1978, with an ABA resolution endorsing ratification in early 1979.10 The ICESCR codifies the right to housing in Article 11, which states, "~~t~~he States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing... The States Parties will take appropriate steps to ensure the realization of this right."11 Although the Senate has yet to ratify the treaty, law professor David Weissbrodt notes signing a covenant indicates that "the United States accepts the responsibility to refrain from acts calculated to frustrate the objects of the treaty."12 The U.S. has also already ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (both with endorsement from the ABA), both of which recognize the right to be free from discrimination, including in housing.13 22 + 23 +====This is the make of break issue- the international community sees US commitment as necessarily key. ==== 24 +**Fasanelli 1** ~~Antonia Fasanelli ~~Chair Commission on Homelessness and Poverty~~ August 2013. American Bar Association Adopted by the House of Delegates. August 12-13. WHS//NAO~~ 25 +Moreover, the international community has increasingly taken note of America’s failure to uphold the right to housing. In 2006, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concern about the disparate racial impact of homelessness in the U.S. and called for "adequate and adequately implemented policies, to ensure the cessation of this form of racial discrimination."17 In 2008, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination again recognized racial disparities in housing and ongoing segregation in the U.S.18 Since then, numerous U.N. experts, on official missions to the U.S., have addressed U.S. violations of the human right to housing and related rights.19 26 + 27 +====Domestic intervention key to shaping international norms- not affirming relinquishes power to other nations and makes America influence less important. ==== 28 +**Fasanelli 1** ~~Antonia Fasanelli ~~Chair Commission on Homelessness and Poverty~~ August 2013. American Bar Association Adopted by the House of Delegates. August 12-13. WHS//NAO~~ 29 +The U.S. has a strong tradition of promoting affordable, accessible housing, but programs have been under-funded and under-implemented. Moreover, while the human rights framework demands progressive implementation of the right to housing, and prohibits retrogressive policies, over the past 30 years there has been a significant disinvestment in public and subsidized housing at the federal level.32 Recent years have seen innovations such as the Rental Assistance Demonstration and Choice Neighborhoods Initiative, which attempt to "do more with less" while preserving important rights and protections for lowincome residents, but these programs still fail to meet the need in communities.33 Furthermore, many long-term contracts for affordable housing built under the Section 8 program during the 1960’s are now coming to term, threatening a further loss of affordable units.34 The contours of the human right to adequate housing continue to be developed at the international level by the CESCR and other U.N. experts, and at the regional level by regional human rights bodies, in response to ever-changing conditions. The U.S. should always seek to be a leader in applying these developing standards to its policies. 30 + 31 +====Independently- following ilaw is key to international consensus and deliberation. ==== 32 +**Thiele** ~~Bret Thiele. JD. May 2002. The Human Right to Adequate Housing: A Tool for Promoting and Protecting Individual and community Health. 92(5): 712-715. American Journal of Public Health. WHS//NAO~~ 33 +There are other reasons to use international human rights law as a model for national legislation. For example, reliance on international law to inform domestic law will result in greater consistency across domestic legal systems with respect to universally recognized human rights. Furthermore, states that turn to international law for guidance benefit from the process by which international law is derived. This process often takes a "best practices" approach. International law is influenced by a variety of ideas stemming from diverse legal, political, economic, and cultural traditions. The process of codifying norms into international law reflects the acceptance of those ideas that have been deemed by the international community to be not only "best practices" but also universally applicable. It is therefore important for states to turn to international human rights law to inform their domestic legislation and policy, including legislation and policy designed to protect and improve the health of their respective populations. The international human right to adequate housing should thus be implemented through domestic law. 34 + 35 + 36 +====Effective international law solves every impact—US commitment uniquely key. ==== 37 +**IEER 2:** ~~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 WHS//NAO~~ 38 +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 practical27 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~~s~~ 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. 39 + 40 +**Johansen ‘6 elaborates** Johansen, Robert C. 2006. ~~Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame and Senior Fellow at the Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies~~. The Impact of US Policy toward the International Criminal Court on the Prevention of Genocide, War Crimes, and Crimes Against Humanity. Human Rights Quarterly. ProjectMuse. 41 +Double standards undermine law enforcement and peoples’ willing compliance with the law, especially in a decentralized international legal system. A legal fabric torn by exemptions for a major actor is a weakened fabric, less able to deter future infractions and more likely to instill hatred and outrage against the inequities imposed by the United States. US denial of reciprocal rights for others also interferes with building a strong worldwide coalition to increase compliance with international norms against terrorism and to stop terrorist acts that are crimes against humanity 42 + 43 +====The only alternative to international law is genocide and nuclear war==== 44 +**Shaw ‘1:** Shaw, Martin ~~Professor of International Relations and Politics at the University of Sussex~~. "The unfinished global revolution: intellectuals and the new politics of international relations." October 3, 2001. http://www.martinshaw.org/unfinished.pdf WHS/NAO 45 +The new politics of international relations require us, therefore, to go beyond the anti-imperialism of the intellectual left as well as of the semi-anarchist traditions of the academic discipline. We need to recognize three fundamental truths. First, in the twenty-first century people struggling for democratic liberties across the non- Western world are likely to make constant demands on our solidarity. Courageous academics, students and other intellectuals will be in the forefront of these movements. They deserve the unstinting support of intellectuals in the West. Second, the old international thinking in which democratic movements are seen as purely internal to states no longer carries conviction—despite the lingering nostalgia for it on both the American right and the anti-American left. The idea that global principles can and should be enforced worldwide is firmly established in the minds of hundreds of millions of people. This consciousness will become a powerful force in the coming decades. Third, global state-formation is a fact. International institutions are being extended, and (like it or not) they have a symbiotic relation with the major centre of state power, the increasingly internationalized Western conglomerate. The success of the global-democratic revolutionary wave depends first on how well it is consolidated in each national context—but second, on how thoroughly it is embedded in international networks of power, at the centre of which, inescapably, is the West. From these political fundamentals, strategic propositions can be derived. First, democratic movements cannot regard non-governmental organizations and civil society as ends in themselves. They must aim to civilize local states, rendering them open, accountable and pluralistic, and curtail the arbitrary and violent exercise of power. Second, democratizing local states is not a separate task from integrating them into global and often Western-centred networks. Reproducing isolated local centres of power carries with it classic dangers of states as centres of war. Embedding global norms and integrating new state centres with global institutional frameworks are essential to the control of violence. (To put this another way: the proliferation of purely national democracies is not a recipe for peace.) Third, while the global revolution cannot do without the West and the UN, neither can it rely on them unconditionally. We need these power networks, but we need to tame them too, to make their messy bureaucracies enormously more accountable and sensitive to the needs of society worldwide. This will involve the kind of ‘cosmopolitan democracy’ argued for by David Held. It will also require us to advance a global social-democratic agenda, to address the literally catastrophic scale of world social inequalities. This is not a separate problem: social and economic reform is an essential ingredient of alternatives to warlike and genocidal power; these feed off and reinforce corrupt and criminal political economies. Fourth, if we need the global-Western state, if we want to democratize it and make its institutions friendlier to global peace and justice, we cannot be indifferent to its strategic debates. It matters to develop international political interventions, legal institutions and robust peacekeeping as strategic alternatives to bombing our way through zones of crisis. It matters that international intervention supports pluralist structures, rather than ratifying Bosnia-style apartheid. As political intellectuals in the West, we need to have our eyes on the ball at our feet, but we also need to raise them to the horizon. We need to grasp the historic drama that is transforming worldwide relationships between people and state, as well as between state and state. We need to think about how the turbulence of the global revolution can be consolidated in democratic, pluralist, international networks of both social relations and state authority. We cannot be simply optimistic about this prospect. Sadly, it will require repeated violent political crises to push Western and other governments towards the required restructuring of world institutions. What I have outlined is a huge challenge; but the alternative is to see the global revolution splutter into partial defeat, or degenerate into new genocidal wars—perhaps even nuclear conflicts. The practical challenge for all concerned citizens, and the theoretical and analytical challenges 46 + 47 +===Contention 2 is Crime=== 48 +====Cities often have policies that criminalize the homeless; ==== 49 +**Bauman et. al 15** ~~Bauman, Tristia, Jeremy Rosen, Eric Tars, Janelle Fernandez, Christian Robin, Eugene Sowa, Michael Maskin, Cheryl Cortemeglia, and Hannah Nicholes. "No Safe Place: The Criminalization of Homelessness in U.S. Cities." National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty. National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, 2015. Web. 18 July 2016. https://www.nlchp.org/documents/No'Safe'Place WHS//NAO~~ 50 +Homelessness is caused by a severe shortage of affordable housing. Over 12.8 of the nation’s supply of low income housing has been permanently lost since 2001, resulting in large part, from a decrease in funding for federally subsidized housing since the 1970s. The shortage of affordable housing is particularly difficult for extremely low-income renters who, in the wake of the foreclosure crisis, are competing for fewer and fewer affordable units. In many American cities there are fewer emergency shelter beds than homeless people. There are fewer available shelter beds than homeless people in major cities across the nation. In some places, the gap between available space and human need is significant, leaving hundreds or, in some cases, thousands of people with no choice but to struggle for survival in outdoor, public places. Despite a lack of affordable housing and shelter space, many cities have chosen to criminally punish people living on the street for doing what any human being must do to survive. The Law Center surveyed 187 cities and assessed the number and type of municipal codes that criminalize the life-sustaining behaviors of homeless people. The results of our research show that the criminalization of necessary human activities is all too common in cities across the country. Prevalence of laws that criminalize homelessness: • Laws prohibiting "camping"1 in public o 34 of cities impose city-wide bans on camping in public. o 57 of cities prohibit camping in particular public places. • Laws prohibiting sleeping in public o 18 of cities impose city-wide bans on sleeping in public. o 27 of cities prohibit sleeping in particular public places, such as in public parks. 1 Laws that criminalize camping in public are written broadly to include an array of living arrangements, including simply sleeping outdoors. • Laws prohibiting begging in public o 24 of cities impose city-wide bans on begging in public. o 76 of cities prohibit begging in particular public places. • Laws prohibiting loitering, loafing, and vagrancy o 33 of cities make it illegal to loiter in public throughout an entire city. o 65 of cities prohibit the activity in particular public places. • Laws prohibiting sitting or lying down in public o 53 of cities prohibit sitting or lying down in particular public places. • Laws prohibiting sleeping in vehicles o 43 of cities prohibit sleeping in vehicles. • Laws prohibiting food sharing o 9 of cities prohibit sharing food with homeless people 51 + 52 +====Homelessness is directly correlated to increasing crime.==== 53 +**Roberts 13** (CEO of PATH Partners "Could Housing the Homeless Solve Crime", August 13, 2013 WHS//NAO) 54 +In Britain, experts believe 20 of their "rough sleepers" (people who are homeless) have committed a crime. The conclusion, however, is that these crimes are usually acts of survival or ways for people to get off the streets. Prostitution, shoplifting, or theft are certainly illegal, but they are acts that some people on the streets perform to try and improve their situations. But there are certainly hardcore, violent criminals on the streets, too. The problem is that our communities have become so numb to homelessness that we allow homeless encampments to be scattered in the hills, beaches, rivers, and parks, so that these havens of homelessness become places where violent criminals can blend in and hide. Most of the time, homelessness is not the source of crime in an area, but the places where people experiencing homelessness gather could become havens of crime. Both crime against innocent people living on the streets and crime against innocent people who are already housed. The real solution is to eliminate these encampments of homelessness by helping people get housed. So, could ending homelessness reduce crime in our neighborhoods? Yes. When there is no more homelessness, there will be no more crimes against people who are homeless. When there is no more homelessness, people living on the streets will no longer have to break laws to try and get off the streets. 55 + 56 +====This creates a new ending cycle of incarceration ==== 57 +**Roman 16 ** ~~Courtney S. Hardingcharding roman, Ph.D. in sociology and justice, law, and society from the American University. 11-29-2016, "Identifying Discrete Subgroups of Chronically Homeless Frequent Utilizers of Jail and Public Mental Health Services," No Publication, http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0093854816680838~~ 58 +Finally, although it is often individuals with mental illness who are most in need of housing when released from incarceration, these individuals have been labeled "hard to house" or "hard to serve" as the complexity of their problems (e.g., health, mental health, substance abuse, victimization) requires the resources of multiple agencies and comprehensive (expensive) solutions (Burt and Anderson, 2005; McNiel, Binder, and Robinson, 2005). Furthermore, there is little accountability across domains for providing housing to individuals recently released from jail (Roman and Travis, 2006). This leaves many vulnerable individuals homeless and in need of treatment during the time of reentry. Being homeless soon after release from jail has been shown to increase one’s chances of reincarceration, especially for those with a serious mental illness (Metraux and Culhane, 2004). The link between homelessness and incarceration is mediated by factors related to mental health and substance abuse, as well as socioeconomic disadvantage (Greenberg and Rosenheck, 2008). Preventing homelessness among individuals with complex health and mental issues at the time of release from jail is therefore a means of reducing repeat justice system involvement, poor health outcomes, and long-term housing instability. These findings highlight the importance of incorporating systems that address homelessness into the discussion of cross-system integration. They also implicate homelessness as a potentially important factor to incorporate into any comprehensive picture of complex patients in the criminal justice system. 59 + 60 +====Prison is the worst impact. It is dehumanizing and strips citizens of their subjectivity==== 61 +**Rodriguez 7 bracketed for clarity** ~~Dylan Rodriguez, University of California, Riverside .AMERICAN GLOBALITY AND THE U. S. PRISON REGIME: STATE VIOLENCE AND WHITE SUPREMACY FROM ABU GHRAIB TO STOCKTON TO BAGONG DIWA. Kritika Kultura, Issue 9, November 2007 49 WHS//NAO~~ 62 +We might imagine the U.S. prison, not as a discrete institution or reified place, but rather as ~~is~~ an abstracted site—a prototype—of organized punishment and (social, civil, and biological) death. I begin this section with two points of departure, in an attempt to initially provoke a conceptualization of the American prison regime that focuses on the intertwining of two structural logics: 1) white supremacy as a historical modality of social (dis)organization, and 2) the capacity of allegedly "local" or "domestic" U.S. social formations to circulate, militarize, and mobilize across global geographies. The emergence of the American prison industrial complex since the 1970s is generally addressed as a problem of the "American nation," and until recently has largely been situated by academic scholars, progressive activists, and imprisoned intellectuals within the domains of the domestic social formation. Yet, even the concise definition of the prison industrial complex penned in 2001 by U.S. political prisoner Linda Evans (released in 2001) and activist Eve Goldberg facilitates an inquiry that pushes past parochial geographies of the U.S. national form: "Like the military/industrial complex, the prison industrial complex is an interweaving of private business and government interests. Its twofold purpose is ~~for~~ profit and social control. Its public rationale is the fight against crime" (Evans and Goldberg). Beyond the strictures of conventional criminological approaches to the U.S. prison apparatus, Evans and Goldberg are suggesting ~~There is~~ an organic connection between the architecture of the prison industrial complex and the structuring forces of neoliberalism and globalization: the socioeconomic transformations of U.S. capital, alongside contemporary elaborations of the U.S. racist state in the post-Civil Rights moment, simultaneously a.) fabricate~~s~~ populations vulnerable to criminalization (black, brown, ~~and~~ poor, and generically redundant to the contemporary economic organization of the U.S.); b.) withdraw state social services for people most in need of resources for social and biological reproduction; c.) militarize and juridically empower the policing and criminal justice apparatuses in unprecedented ways while amplifying their fundamentally punitive institutional demeanours; and d.) generate a dynamic statecraft, public discourse, and popular culture of policing and imprisonment that organize a grammar of social necessity and ideological consent around the emergence and expansion of the prison industrial complex. Here we must remember that among the millions of people held captive by the U.S. state in prisons, jails, youth prisons, and immigration detention, people of African descent are imprisoned at rates astronomically high relative to their proportion of the national population (exceeding 400 of their national demographic proportion), and at rates dwarfing those of white Americans (see Gershowitz). Native Americans repeat this pattern, although their smaller demographic numbers often obscure their heightened criminalization by the U.S. state. Latinos, Latinas, and other racialized brown people are increasingly targeted in ways that directly derive from, and expand, the historical structures of white supremacist policing and imprisonment that target Black and indigenous people, in part through the specificities of migrant/immigrant policing and criminalization. Despite composing the national majority of the U.S. population, white Americans compose less than half of the incarcerated U.S. population. Black, Brown, and indigenous peoples constitute upwards of 60 held captive. For the unfamiliar, a few other facts assist in laying bare the accelerated nature of this massive state-sanctioned project: 1 Between 1972 and 2003, the imprisoned (jail and prison) population in the U.S. increased more than 600; for the five decades prior to the 1970s, the incarcerated population had remained relatively stable, hovering between 100,000-200,000. 2 The U.S. boasts of the highest rate of incarceration in the world, at 702 per 100,000 in the general population; this rate is between 500 and 800 that of comparable industrialized nations. 3 African Americans are incarcerated at nearly six times the rate of whites (2,290 per 100,000 versus 412 per 100,000), while Hispanics are incarcerated at nearly double the rate of whites (742 per 100,000). 4 According to one of the most rigorous criminological studies to date (examining the period 1980-1996), the imprisonment increase does not derive from objective changes in the commission of crimes, but rather is almost entirely owed to politically formed changes in sentencing and criminal justice policy (see Gershowitz). Thus, as the U.S. prison, jail, INS/Homeland Security detainee and incarcerated youth population approaches and surpasses the 2.5 million mark (as of this writing), the quantitative evidence refracts the prison’s qualitative transformation into a fundamental organ of state reproduction and civic ordering. Variable, overlapping, and mutually constituting white supremacist regimes have in fact been fundamental to the formation and movements of the United States, from racial chattel slavery and frontier genocide to recent and current modes of neoliberal land displacement and (domestic-to-global) warfare. Without exception, these regimes have been differently entangled with the state’s changing paradigms, strategies, and technologies of human incarceration and punishment (to follow the prior examples: the plantation, the reservation, the neoliberal sweatshop, and the domestic-to-global prison). The historical nature of these entanglements is widely acknowledged, although explanations of the structuring relations of force tend to either isolate or historically compartmentalize the complexities of historical white supremacy. For the theoretical purposes of this essay, white supremacy may be understood as a logic of social organization that produces regimented, institutionalized, and militarized conceptions of hierarchized "human" difference, enforced through coercions and violences that are structured by genocidal possibility (including physical extermination and curtailment of people’s collective capacities to socially, culturally, or biologically reproduce). As a historical vernacular and philosophical apparatus of domination, white supremacy is simultaneously premised on and consistently innovating universalized conceptions of the white (European and euroamerican) "human" vis-à-vis the rigorous production, penal discipline, and frequent social, political, and biological neutralization or extermination of the (non-white) sub- or non-human. To consider white supremacy as essential to American social formation (rather than a freakish or extremist deviation from it) facilitates a discussion of the modalities through which this material logic of violence overdetermines the social, political, economic, and cultural structures that compose American globality and constitute the common sense that is organic to its ordering. 63 + 64 +===Contention 3 is Sex Trafficking=== 65 +====Homeless youth are at risk for sex trafficking.==== 66 +**Clawson et al ’09** ~~Heather J. Clawson, Nicole Dutch, Amy Solomon, and Lisa Goldblatt Grace, 8-30-2009, "Human Trafficking Into and Within the United States: A Review of the Literature," ASPE, https://aspe.hhs.gov/basic-report/human-trafficking-and-within-united-states-review-literature~~#Other WHS//NAO~~ 67 +According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Uniform Crime Reports (2006), across the United States 36,402 boys and 47,472 girls younger than age 18 were picked up by law enforcement and identified as runaways. Girls who run from their homes, group homes, foster homes, or treatment centers, are at great risk of being targeted by a pimp (or trafficker) and becoming exploited. Research consistently confirms the correlation between running away and becoming exploited through prostitution. Researchers have found that the majority of prostituted women had been runaways; for example, 96 percent in San Francisco (Silbert and Pines, 1982), 72 percent in Boston (Norton-Hawk, 2002) and 56 percent in Chicago (Raphael and Shapiro, 2002). Among prostituted youth (both boys and girls), up to 77 percent report having run away at least once (Seng, 1989). Experts have reported that within 48 hours of running away, an adolescent is likely to be approached to participate in prostitution or another form of commercial sexual exploitation (Spangenberg, 2001); however, no definitive published research substantiates this claim. Like girls, boys exploited through prostitution are most often runaways or throwaways (Flowers, 2001; Lankenau et al., 2005; Moxley-Goldsmith, 2005). For example, one study found that two-thirds of males exploited through prostitution had run away from home prior to becoming involved (Allen, 1980). While many of the factors leading to a young person leaving home are similar for boys and girls, it is estimated that between 40 and 50 percent of boys exploited through prostitution had been thrown out of their homes because of sexual identity issues (Earls and David, 1989; Seattle Commission on Children and Youth, 1986). Approximately 2535 percent of prostituted boys self-identify as gay, bisexual, or transgender/transsexual (Estes and Weiner, 2001). Further, regardless of the boys self-identification, at least 95 percent of all prostitution engaged in by boys is provided to adult men (Estes and Weiner, 2001). Regardless of their sex, when minors leave their homes, it is to protect themselves, often because they view living on the streets as either less dangerous or no more dangerous than staying at home (Hyde, 2005; Martinez, 2006). Once on the street, homeless youth are at risk for being victimized because they lack the funds, interpersonal and job skills, and support systems necessary to survive on their own (Martinez, 2006). Having often come from chaotic families, runaways tend to lack strategies for problem solving, conflict resolution, and meeting basic needs such as food, clothing, and shelter (Martinez, 2006; Robertson and Toro, 1999; Whitbeck, Hoyt, and Yoder, 1999). Some minors turn to substance abuse, crime, and survival sex to meet their basic needs (Greene, Ennett, and Ringwald, 1999; Riley, Greif, Caplan, and MacAulay, 2004; Robertson and Toro, 1999). Furthermore, exposure to the dangers of the street makes them more visible and vulnerable to traffickers, and their risky lifestyles and routines put them at greater risk of being victimized (Kipke, Simon, Montgomery, Unger, and Iversen, 1997; MacLean, Embry, and Cauce, 1999; Tyler, Cauce, and Whitbeck, 2004). Most runaway/throwaway youth are likely to run to and congregate in urban areas, so it is not surprising that there is general consensus that a greater percentage of minors are exploited in the U.S. sex industry in urban areas, though they may be brought from suburban and rural areas (Flowers, 2001). However, an increase in minor arrests in suburban counties/areas and rural areas has experts speculating that the increase is indicative of an expansion of prostitution beyond city limits (Flowers, 2001). While these data are somewhat outdated, anecdotal evidence from service providers indicates that this trend continues (A. Adams, personal communication, March 2006; N. Hotaling, personal communication, June 2006). However, further research is needed to determine whether the increase in suburban arrests is due to better identification or an actual increase in incidence. WHAT ARE THE NEEDS OF VICTIMS OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING? NEEDS OF INTERNATIONAL VICTIMS An examination of the services provided to international victims of human trafficking (adults and children) reveals emergency, short-term, and long-term needs (Caliber Associates, 2007; Clawson, Small, Go, and Myles, 2004). Some victims initially may present to a service provider with basic needs for safety, housing, food, and clothing. In fact, the need for safe and secure housing and overall support and advocacy are primary needs for virtually all victims of trafficking. Needs of International Victims Emergency Safety, housing, food/clothing Short-term/Long-term Legal assistance Advocacy (emotional/moral support) Housing Medical care (including dental) Mental health services/trauma recovery Transportation Education Job training/employment Reunification/repatriation These basic needs often are accompanied by an immediate need for legal assistance/representation to handle issues related to immigration status, provide legal representation that may be required in an ongoing investigation and prosecution of the trafficking case, or provide counsel in a civil lawsuit against the trafficker or in a potential custody case (Caliber Associates, 2007; Florida University Center for Advancement of Human Rights, 2003). Interviews with service providers and NGOs reveal that beyond these common immediate needs, the needs of victims are as diverse as the countries from which the victims originate. Additionally, during the course of working with victims, their needs are likely to change (Caliber Associates, 2007). A needs assessment conducted with service providers working with victims of human trafficking identified a broad range of victims needs, including emergency, transitional, and permanent housing; food/clothing; medical services (including dental care); advocacy (moral/emotional support), legal services; transportation; and information/referral services (e.g., rights as a victim of human trafficking, available services) (Clawson et al., 2004). For international victims, more often than not, there is a need for language assistance, often requiring an interpreter/translator to help the victim communicate with first responders and those trying to provide assistance. Only after these immediate needs have been met can a victim benefit from treatment for depression, trauma, re-traumatization, and other issues (Misra, Connolly, Klynman, and Majeed, 2006). Addressing the symptoms exhibited by victims of human trafficking is critical to their long-term recovery. Victims of human trafficking have been described as exhibiting symptoms and needs for service similar to torture victims, victims of domestic violence/sexual assault, battered immigrant women, migrant workers, refugees, and asylum seekers (Clawson et al., 2004). Like torture victims, victims of human trafficking (both sex and labor trafficking) often experience post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depressive disorder, other anxiety disorders, and substance abuse (De Jong, et al, 2001; Shrestha, Sharma, Van Ommeren, Regmi, Makaju, et al., 1998). Specific symptoms exhibited by victims can include nightmares, difficulty concentrating, becoming easily upset, and having difficulty relaxing. Victims can frequently feel sad or angry, have difficulty thinking, experience feelings of hopelessness, and demonstrate sleep disorders. The trauma itself also may manifest as physical symptoms, such as headaches, chest pain, shaking, sweating, and dizziness (Center for Victims of Torture). Beyond trauma-recovery services, long-term service needs include permanent housing, legal assistance, job training, job placement, education, family reunification (within the United States), and repatriation (in some cases). For some victims, in particular victims of labor trafficking, the victim may have a need for long-term medical care to address physical disabilities resulting from the abuse and/or harsh labor conditions under which the person was forced to work (Bales, 2004; Caliber Associates, 2007). Based on research on the needs of unaccompanied refugee minors, minor international trafficking victims may experience depression and feelings of isolation, but given their culture, they may not know how to express or describe what they are feeling. They may display psychosomatic symptoms; experience high levels of anxiety (especially if language obstacles and cultural differences exist between the minor and the caregiver); experience survivor guilt (victims feel they do not deserve to be alive and in a safe place when friends, siblings, or other family members are suffering); exhibit behavioral problems, including aggression; and question their ethnic identity (Ryan, 1997). Intensive case management and medical, mental health, and social services are important for responding to the needs of these children. Additionally, educating and training foster care families about the dynamics of human trafficking, the needs of victims, and the symptoms of trauma are also needed to ensure appropriate placement for children in need of homes. Given the complex needs of international victims of human trafficking, it is not surprising that providers report working with clients for more than a year and often for several years, frequently on an intermittent basis. This makes sustained progress challenging (Caliber Associates, 2007; Clawson et al., 2004). NEEDS OF DOMESTIC VICTIMS Information specifically documenting the needs of victims of human trafficking is limited and has focused primarily on international victims. However, research on prostitution and on homeless and runaway youth can provide some insights about the needs of domestic trafficking victims and can help increase understanding about the similarities and differences across the victim types. Needs of Minor Domestic Victims Emergency Safety, housing, food/clothing Short-term/Long-term Legal assistance Intensive case management Medical care Alcohol and substance abuse counseling/treatment Mental health counseling Life skills training Education Job training/employment Family reunification Girls and women escaping prostitution report housing (both transitional and long-term) as an urgent need (Commercial Sexual Exploitation Resource Institute, 1998). Substance abuse treatment and mental health counseling are also common needs among this population. The use of substances and subsequent drug addiction is well documented among homeless youth exploited through prostitution. One study found that more than 75 percent of these youth abuse alcohol or drugs, while virtually all admit to some level of use (Yates, Mackenzie, Pennbridge, and Swofford, 1991). These rates were notably higher than among homeless youth not exploited through prostitution (R. Lloyd, personal communication, May 2007). While it is important to note that a significant percentage of girls enter prostitution with no history of drug or alcohol abuse (Farley and Kelly, 2000), some studies suggest that girls who become exploited through prostitution are likely to have begun using substances at an earlier age than their at-risk peers who do not become exploited in this way (Inciardi, Pottieger, Forney, Chitwood, and McBride. 1991; Nadon, Koverola, and Schludermann, 1998). Substance abuse is also a rampant problem among the male population. For example, one study found that 77 percent of the boys exploited through prostitution were regular users of marijuana (Harlan et al., 1981). Another study found that 42 percent of the prostituted boys could be classified as heavy drinkers or alcoholics and 29 percent were regular users of hard drugs (Allen, 1980). In 1989, the County of Los Angeles found that of all the runaway youth, both boys and girls, seeking medical assistance, 75 percent of those exploited through prostitution had a substance abuse problem compared with 36 percent of those youth not being prostituted (Klain, 1999). Both girls and boys also present with medical needs. Females trafficked in the sex trade have increased risk of cervical cancer and chronic hepatitis as well as HIV (Farley et al., 2003), thus requiring immediate and potentially long-term medical care. Boys are at particularly high risk of contracting HIV due to high rates of unprotected anal sex with adult men as well as frequent intravenous drug use (Flowers, 2001). Rates of mental health problems are similar between girls and boys, though girls have been studied far more extensively (Flowers, 2001; Klain, 1999; Lankenau et al., 2005; Moxley-Goldsmith, 2005). Adolescent girls suffer severe emotional and physical consequences as a result of domestic trafficking. Survivors of prostitution demonstrate a high rate of dissociative disorders, self-destructive behaviors (including cutting), suicide attempts, and clinical depression (Farley, 2003; Farley and Kelly, 2000; Giobbe, 1993; Lloyd, 2005; Nixon et al., 2002). Additionally, as a result of the chronic trauma, prostituted girls often develop symptoms congruent with PTSD. One international study of prostituted children and adults, including male prostitutes, in five countries found that almost three-fourths met the diagnostic criteria for PTSD (Farley, Barel, Kiremire, and Sezquin, 1998; Silbert and Pines, 1981). The clinical manifestations of PTSD can limit an individuals ability to function effectively, decreasing the likelihood that he or she can take advantage of available resources and possibly minimizing any likelihood of leaving prostitution (Valera, Sawyer, and Schiraldi, 2001). As with all victims of human trafficking, adolescent girls may display symptoms of Stockholm syndrome, otherwise most frequently seen among prisoners of war and torture victims (Graham and Wish, 1994). As a means of emotional and physical survival, the captive (the girl) identifies with her captor. She expresses extreme gratitude over the smallest acts of kindness or mercy (e.g., he does not beat her today), denial over the extent of violence and injury, rooting for her pimp, hypervigilence regarding his needs, and the perception that anyone trying to persecute him or help her escape is the enemy. She may lash out at law enforcement or anyone else attempting to help her exit, and insist that she is fine and happy in her current situation. Further, the manifestations of her trauma may make her reticent to trust those outside the Life who state they are trying to help her (Friedman, 2005; Raphael, 2004). While presented here as separate needs or conditions, recognition of co-occurring disorders among adolescent victims of trafficking and the need for integrated treatment approaches, specifically for trauma, substance abuse, and mental health disorders, has gained momentum over the past 510 years (Austin, Macgowan, and Wagner, 2005; Battjes et al., 2004; Dasinger, Shane, and Martinovich, 2004; Dennis et al., 2002, 2004; Godley, Jones, Funk, Ives, and Passetti, 2004; Robbins, Bachrach, and Scapocznik, 2002). A number of studies indicate high rates of co-occurring disorders among adolescents. In one clinical study of youth in the mental health system, for example, about half had a co-occurring substance abuse disorder (Greenbaum, Foster-Johnson, and Petrilla, 1996). In the substance abuse system, estimates are even higher that as many as 7590 percent of drug abusing adolescents having a co-morbid mental health disorder (Eisen, Youngman, Grob, and Dill, 1992; Grella, Hser, Joshia, and Rounds-Bryant, 2001). Mood disorders (especially depression and anxiety), conduct disorders, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder are most often cited as co-occurring with substance abuse disorders in adolescents (Crowley and Riggs, 1995; Wise, Cuffe, and Fischer, 2001). Given the high documented rates of co-morbidity in substance abusing clinical populations, Grella et al. (2001, p. 391) concluded that adolescent drug treatment programs should assume that co-morbidity among their patients is the norm, rather than the exception.** **The needs of homeless and runaway youth parallel the needs of victims of human trafficking (international and domestic). These include the need for food, clothing, and housing; medical care; alcohol and substance abuse counseling and treatment; mental health services; education and employment assistance; and legal assistance (Robertson and Toro, 1999). In two studies, homeless youth reported wanting assistance with life skills training (Aviles and Helfrich, 2004; DeRosa et al., 1999). Other important service needs are assessment and treatment for exposure to trauma (Dalton and Pakenham, 2002; Steele and OKeefe, 2001) and risk of suicide (Martinez, 2006). 68 + 69 +====Human trafficking is dehumanizing to its victims.==== 70 +**Rocha ’12 **~~Priscila Rocha, 2012, "OUR BACKYARD SLAVE TRADE: THE RESULT OF OHIO'S FAILURE TO ENACT COMPREHENSIVE STATE-LEVEL HUMAN-SEX-TRAFFICKING LEGISLATION", Cleveland State University Journal of Law and Health, http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/ WHS//NAO~~ 71 +Human trafficking is a lucrative business in which traffickers reap substantial profits from the dehumanization of victims. It ranks as the second largest illegal enterprise in the world, following the illegal sale of drugs. n63 The figures help explain why traffickers are compelled to continue treating human beings as commodities. The International Labour Organization (ILO) estimates that global profits from ~~*391~~ forced commercial sex exploitation generate $ 33.9 billion U.S. dollars per year. n64 Profits from global commercial sex exploitation, in which victims are trafficked, generate approximately $ 27.8 billion U.S. dollars per year. n65 Industrialized nations account for forty-nine percent of annual global profits derived from human trafficking. n66 Traffickers in industrialized nations receive approximately $ 67,200 of profits per victim (or $ 5600 per month). n67 The figures indicate that human trafficking is currently a business opportunity that is simply too profitable to for traffickers to ignore. Until the law imposes penalties for human trafficking substantial enough to hurt traffickers' bottom line profits, they will continue to enslave victims, viewing penalties as a mere business cost. 72 + 73 +====Providing a safe place to stay for homeless youth would solve for sex trafficking.==== 74 +Jayne **Bigelsen ’13** ~~Director Anti-Human Trafficking Initiatives, Covenant House New York~~, 5-2013, "Homelessness, Survival Sex and Human Trafficking: As Experienced by the Youth of Covenant House New York", http://www.endhomelessness.org/page/-/files/Covenant20House20Fordham20University20Trafficking20Report.pdf WHS//NAO~~ 75 +For those who are committed to eradicating domestic trafficking, the contributing factors outlined in this report offer a roadmap to trafficking prevention. As stated above, 48 of the participants who reported engaging in commercial sex activity explained that a lack of a safe place to sleep was a main reason for their initial entry into prostitution or other commercial sex. The participants described how pimps in New York City are well aware that the youth shelters are full and use that to their advantage by alerting homeless young people to the no vacancy status and offering them a place to stay in lieu of sleeping on the streets. Therefore, every time a shelter bed for a homeless youth is lost to budget cuts, pimps are able to operate with greater success. Advocates, policy makers and the public at large must work collaboratively to make sure that pimps and other traffickers have no such advantage by working toward the goal of ensuring that every homeless youth who wants a safe place to sleep has access to shelter and services. 76 + 77 +====A combination of homelessness and sex trafficking culminates in massive substance abuse==== 78 +**Leal et al. 09** ~~Leal, Daniel, Marc Galanter, Helen Dermatis, and Laurence Westreich. "Correlates of Protracted Homelessness in a Sample of Dually Diagnosed Psychiatric Inpatients." Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 16.2 (1999): 143-47. National Coalition for the Homeless. National Coalition for the Homeless, July 2009. Web. 18 July 2016. http://www.nationalhomeless.org/factsheets/addiction.pdf WHS//NAO~~ 79 +Although obtaining an accurate, recent count is difficult, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (2003) estimates, 38 of homeless people were dependent on alcohol and 26 abused other drugs. Alcohol abuse is more common in older generations, while drug abuse is more common in homeless youth and young adults (Didenko and Pankratz, 2007). Substance abuse is much more common among homeless people than in the general population. According to the 2006 National Household Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), 15 of people above the age of 12 reported using drugs within the past year and only 8 reported using drugs within the past month. RELATIONSHIP TO HOMELESSNESS Substance abuse is often a cause of homelessness. Addictive disorders disrupt relationships with family and friends and often cause people to lose their jobs. For people who are already struggling to pay their bills, the onset or exacerbation of an addiction may cause them to lose their housing. A 2008 survey by the United States Conference of Mayors asked 25 cities for their top three causes of homelessness. Substance abuse was the single largest cause of homelessness for single adults (reported by 68 of cities). Substance abuse was also mentioned by 12 of cities as one of the top three causes of homelessness for families. According to Didenko and Pankratz (2007), two-thirds of homeless people report that drugs and/or alcohol were a major reason for their becoming homeless. In many situations, however, substance abuse is a result of homelessness rather than a cause. People who are homeless often turn to drugs and alcohol to cope with their situations. They use substances in an attempt to attain temporary relief from their problems. In reality, however, substance dependence only exacerbates their problems and decreases their ability to achieve employment stability and get off the streets. Additionally, some people may view drug and alcohol use as necessary to be accepted among the homeless community (Didenko and Pankratz, 2007). Breaking an addiction is difficult for anyone, especially for substance abusers who are homeless. To begin with, motivation to stop using substances may be poor. For many homeless people, survival is more important than personal growth and development, and finding food and shelter take a higher priority than drug counseling. Many homeless people have also become estranged from their families and friends. Without a social support network, recovering from a substance addiction is very difficult. Even if they do break their addictions, homeless people may have difficulty remaining sober while living on the str eets where substances are so widely used (Fisher and Roget, 2009). Unfortunately, many treatment programs focus on abstinence only programming, which is less effective than harm-reduction strategies and does not address the possibility of relapse (National Health Care for the Homeless Council, 2007). For many homeless people, substance abuse co-occurs with mental illness. Often, people with untreated mental illnesses use street drugs as an inappropriate form of self-medication. Homeless people with both substance disorders and mental illness experience additional obstacles to recovery, such as increased risk for violence and victimization and frequent cycling between the streets, jails, and emergency rooms (Fisher and Roget, 2009). Sadly, these people are often unable to find treatment facilities that will help them. Many programs for homeless people with mental illnesses do not accept people with substance abuse disorders, and many programs for homeless substance abusers do not treat people with mental illnesses 80 + 81 +====The aff is feasible and saves more money in the long run==== 82 +**Fasanelli 6** ~~Antonia Fasanelli ~~Chair Commission on Homelessness and Poverty~~ August 2013. American Bar Association Adopted by the House of Delegates. August 12-13. WHS//NAO~~ 83 +In addition to viewing housing expenditures as obligatory, legislators must also consider the fiscal benefits of adequately meeting low-income housing needs. In a 2004 study by the Lewin Group on the costs of serving homeless individuals in nine cities across the U.S., several cities found supportive housing to be cheaper than housing homeless individuals in shelters.51 That same year, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the cost of a Section 8 Housing Certificate to be $7,028, approximately $8,000 less than the cost of an emergency shelter bed funded by HUD’s Emergency Shelter Grants program.52 A collaborative effort of service and medical providers in San Diego, Project 25, has documented a $7 million dollar savings to tax payers through reduced emergency care and jail costs by providing permanent housing to 35 homeless individuals, a 70 reduction.53 Scotland, France, and South Africa all show that the progressive implementation of the right to housing through legislation and case law is possible where the political will exists. Scotland’s Homeless Act of 2003 progressively expanded the right to be immediately housed and the right to long-term, supportive housing for as long as it is needed, starting with target populations, but available to all in need as of 2012. The law also includes a private right of action and requires jurisdictions to plan for development of adequate affordable housing supplies.54 France created similar legislation in 2007 in response to public pressure and a decision of the European Committee on Social Rights under the European Social Charter.55 South Africa’s constitutional right to housing protects even those squatting in informal settlements, requiring the provision of adequate alternative housing before families and individuals can be evicted.56 This law has been enforced in local communities to even require rebuilding housing that has been torn down.57 While not yet perfect, these countries are proving that progressively implementing the right to housing is both economically feasible and judicially manageable - EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +2017-04-13 00:27:07.0 - Judge
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Yesenia Robles - Opponent
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +James Madison JM - ParentRound
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +44 - Round
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +1 - Team
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Warren Okunlola Aff - Title
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +10 - Util Affirmative - 1AC - NSDA District Round 1 - Tournament
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +NSDA District
- Caselist.RoundClass[43]
-
- Cites
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +15 - EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +2017-04-13 00:22:14.0 - Judge
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Matthew Chandler - OpenSource
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +https://hsld.debatecoaches.org/download/Warren/Okunlola+Aff/Warren-Okunlola-Aff-NSDA%20District-Round5.docx - Opponent
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Winston Churchill BR - Round
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +5 - Tournament
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +NSDA District
- Caselist.RoundClass[44]
-
- Cites
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +16 - EntryDate
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +2017-04-13 00:27:04.0 - Judge
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +Yesenia Robles - Opponent
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +James Madison JM - Round
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +1 - Tournament
-
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@ 1 +NSDA District