Tournament: CPS | Round: 3 | Opponent: dont remember | Judge: dont remember
PART 1 IS THE FRAMEWORK:
The ballot goes to whoever best resists the authority of interpretation.

First, every form of authority is provisional
Martin Hagglund (2006): The Necessity of Discrimination Disjoining Derrida and Levinas. LHP RS
"if we follow... in the first place."

For this reason, no authority can be reasonably given the power of interpretation.
Mouffe:   Mouffe,  Chantal   98,  The Democratic Paradox

"As a consequence, thinking is invaluable"

Therefore, giving power to a higher authority is inherently bad
Butler 1997: (Judith American philosopher and gender theorist;   Excitable Speech. New York, NY: Routledge, 1997. Print) 

"in each of ... from protected speech."

Part 2 is the Advocacy:
Affirm as a rejection of the power of educational authorities to control the interpretation of speech

Fritsch:
"The first of... of the other."

Trifonas: Trifonas, Peter. PEDAGOGIES OF DIFFERENCE: RETHINKING EDUCATION FOR SOCIAL CHANGE. New
York, London. 2003.
"Domination and subordination... relations as equals."

Part 3 is the offense:
The neg links: Any restriction on speech requires the interpretation of authority.
Butler 2:
"Thus a statement... of the threat."

There is no clear line for what speech counts as harassing
Linzer 12, Linzer, Peter (Professor of Law, University of Houston Law Center. A.B. 1960, Cornell University; J.D. 1963, Columbia University School of Law) “White Liberal Looks at Racist Speech,” St. John’s Law Review: Vol. 65: Iss. 1, Article 8. 2012. http://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/lawreview/vol65/iss1/8

"The disapproval of... some words poisonous."

Speech codes are oppressive in themselves.
Ronald J Rychlak, Professor, University of Mississippi School of Law, “Civil Rights, Confederate Flags, and Political Correctness: Free Speech and Race Relations on Campus,” Tulane Law Review Vol. 66, 1992.

"The movement to... with little discretion."

Restriction of speech provides little distinction between speech
@ACLU. "Hate Speech on Campus." American Civil Liberties Union. American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, n.d. Web. 16 Dec. 2016.

"Free speech rights... anti-semitic speech."

Allowing interpretation by authority furthers the problem we are trying to solve:
@ACLU: 

"Historically, defamation laws... we'll be next."

Tournament: CPS | Round: 1 | Opponent: Brentwood EL | Judge: Shania Hunt
First, all obligations stem from our practical identities.
Mitchell 1 url: http://thespaceofreasons.blogspot.com/2012/03/korsgaards-kantian-moral-theory.html

"according to Christine Korsgaard... "stands behind" them."

Because we reason towards which practical identities to value, we must first value our human identity.
Mitchell 2:

but the fact... of human agency.

Analytics

Next, practical reasoning, how we deliberate whether or not to act under rationality, is the only sufficient moral obligation.
Velleman: Velleman, David. Self To Self. Cambridge University Press. 2006. Pg 18-19.

"As we have... reasons is required"

Analytics

Under universal law, Coercion and other acts that reduce the freedoms of others are morally contradictory 

Engstrom: Engstrom. Universal Law as the Form of Practical Knowledge

"Now on the... that same freedom."

Standard is Respecting Freedoms

Ontologically, a person is one who can set and pursue ends. The only political association we could agree to would start there.
Ripstein ONE: Ripstein, Arthur. Force and Freedom: Kant's Legal and Political Philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 2009. Print.

"this right to ... some other end."

Other political systems aren’t just normatively inadequate; those contracts literally can’t exist.
Ripstein TWO:
"This argument for ... to transfer rights."

I affirm
Prohibiting actions that entail harm, but do not wrong is ITSELF a wrong.
Ripstein THREE:

"each person's entitlement... my own powers."

Speech can’t restrict the freedom of others – it only changes the context in which they view the world.
Ripstein FOUR:

"the right to... they already have."