Tournament: Harvard Westlake | Round: 5 | Opponent: Palo Alto FZ | Judge: Erik Legried

A Interpretation: Debaters may only have 1 conditional advocacies.
B Violation: They have 2.
C Net Benefits:
1 Advocacy skills 2 Depth
D Implication: Drop the debater on conditionality

Tournament: Harvard Westlake | Round: Octas | Opponent: Lynbrook NS | Judge: Tim Alderete, Arjun Tambe, Chris Castillo

A Interpretation: Debaters may only have 1 conditional PIC.

 
B Violation:
C Net Benefits:
1 Advocacy skills
2 Depth- education
D Implication: Drop the debater on conditional PICs—dropping the argument doesn’t make sense in this case because it just magnifies the abuse AND dropping the debater is the only way to ensure bad practices don’t spread through deterrence.====

Tournament: Harvard Westlake RR | Round: 1 | Opponent: Rowland Hall- St Marks KO | Judge: Adam Torson, Panny Shan

Part One- Framework

I value justice.
Structural violence is based in moral exclusion, which is fundamentally flawed because exclusion is not based on dessert but rather on arbitrarily perceived differences.

Susan Opotow 01 Susan Opotow is a social and organizational psychologist. Her work examines the intersection of conflict, justice, and identity as they give rise to moral exclusion -- seeing others as outside the scope of justice and as eligible targets of discrimination, exploitation, hate, or violence. She studies moral exclusion and moral inclusion in such everyday contexts as schooling, environmental and public policy conflict, and in more violent contexts, such as deadly wars and the post-war period. She has guest edited The Journal of Social Issues and Social Justice Research and co-edited Identity and the Natural Environment: The Psychological Significance of Nature (MIT Press, 2003). She is associate editor of Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology and Past President of the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, “Social Injustice”, Peace, Conflict, and Violence: Peace Psychology for the 21st Centuryl Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 2001, BE
Both structural and direct violence results from moral justifications and rationalizations.
AND
oneself or one’s group at the expense of others (Tajfel, 1982).

The assumption that white people will change how they act is an unrealistic ideal that hinders conceptions of actual conditions of racism

  
Curry ’13 (Dr. Tommy J., 2013. ,Ph.D., Associate Professor of Philosophy, Texas A and M University, “In the Fiat of Dreams: The Delusional Allure of Hope, the Reality of Anti-Black Violence and the Demands of the Anti-Ethical.” Academia.Edu, Working Draft, Cited with Permission from the Author)
The potentiality of whiteness—the proleptic call of white anti-racist consciousness—
AND
society and seeks like their colonial foreparents to claim them as their own. 

Thus, the standard is reducing structural violence.

Part Two: Speech Codes

Speech codes are failed policies founded on good intentions, but the naivete of speech codes is that they rest their faith in institutions that are inherently anti-black

Henry Louis Gates 94, Professor and Director of the Hutchins Center for African and African American Research at Harvard University, “War of Words: Critical Race Theory and the First Amendment”, in Speaking of Race, Speaking of Sex: Hate Speech, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties, New York University Press, 1994. RFK
One other paradox fissures the hate speech movement. Because these scholars wish to show
AND
The contemporary aim is not to resist power, but to enlist power.

The anti-black implementation of speech codes manifests itself in several ways.
A The evidence shows that minorities get persecuted, not white people–Great Britain’ censorship and the Michigan speech codes prove

Strossen ’90 (Nadine, June 1990, president of the American Civil Liberties Union from February 1991 to October 2008, John Marshall Harlan II Professor of Law at New York Law School., “Regulating Racist Speech on Campus: A Modest Proposal?”, Duke Law Journal, Vol. 1990, No. 3, Frontiers of Legal Thought II. The New First Amendment (Jun., 1990), pp. 484-573, Duke University School of Law, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1372555~-~-ghs//sk)
First, there is no persuasive psychological evidence that punishment for name- calling changes
AND
far more problems of equality and enforceability than it would solve.387 ¶ 

AND- Reverse enforcement is especially likely in the case of black youth–their activism is perceived as hostile and militant and more likely to be classified as “fighting words”–only the aff prevents white fragility from silencing black protest

 
Charles R. Calleros 95 Professor of Law at Arizona State University, “Paternalism, Counterspeech, and Campus Hate-Speech Codes: A Reply to Delgado and Yun,” 27 Ariz. St. L.J. 1249, 1995. RFK
The second "paternalistic objection," that "antiracism rules will end up
AND
to view the mural critically and test the speakers' interpretations with their own.

B Policing hate speech doesn’t scrub out racism at its roots–rather it exacerbates racial tensions, create backlash, and make racism harder to grapple with by driving it under ground—we should let the true racists speak so that we know who they are

Herron ’94 (Vince, Jan 1994, runs a law firm, University of California, Los Angeles B.A., Economics, USC Gould School of Law JD, Law, “Notes: INCREASING THE SPEECH: DIVERSITY, CAMPUS SPEECH CODES, AND THE PURSUIT OF TRUTH”, 67 S. Cal. L. Rev. 407 1993-1994, Georgetown Law Library, Hein Online--ghssk)
SPEECH CODES MAY EXACERBATE THE VERY TENSIONS THEY SEEK TO ALLEVIATE Some will argue that
AND
originally led to these injuries and hinders the continued fight against those ideologies.

C Speech codes glorify white supremacists by handing them a cross to hang themselves on by pitting them against government censorship

 
Strossen ’90 (Nadine, June 1990, president of the American Civil Liberties Union from February 1991 to October 2008, John Marshall Harlan II Professor of Law at New York Law School., “Regulating Racist Speech on Campus: A Modest Proposal?”, Duke Law Journal, Vol. 1990, No. 3, Frontiers of Legal Thought II. The New First Amendment (Jun., 1990), pp. 484-573, Duke University School of Law, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1372555~-~-ghs//sk)
A second reason why censorship of racist speech actually may sub- vert, rather
AND
it ex- presses.392 The British experience confirms this prediction.393

White nationalist Richard Spencer proves–in a speech at Texas AandM he said he knew he was going to lead a persecuted life, and his arrest in Hungary turned him into an alt-right hero and spreads the movement

Martin Gelin 14, Slate, “While Flight,” 13 November 2014, Slate.com. RFK
Spencer spent the next three days in a Budapest jail, which he didn’t seem
AND
American white supremacists connect with Europe’s far-right groups than anything else.

Part Three: Let Them Talk

My advocacy is that: Public colleges and universities in the United States ought not restrict any constitutionally protected speech. Silencing racists just drives their movement underground and makes them look like heroes. Rather, in the words of Henry Louis Gates, we should let them talk.
Several benefits:
A If we let racists talk NOW, it strengthens civil liberty protections for marginalized groups in the future–the ACLU Skokie case proves

Henry Louis Gates 94, Professor and Director of the Hutchins Center for African and African American Research at Harvard University, “War of Words: Critical Race Theory and the First Amendment”, in Speaking of Race, Speaking of Sex: Hate Speech, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties, New York University Press, 1994. RFK
The critique of neutrality would affect not simply how we draft our ordinances, but
AND
have effects far beyond the classic triad of deterrence, reform and retribution.

B Historically free speech has been far more important for racial equality movements than hate speech regulation–that’s what we must focus on protecting

Strossen ’90 (Nadine, June 1990, president of the American Civil Liberties Union from February 1991 to October 2008, John Marshall Harlan II Professor of Law at New York Law School., “Regulating Racist Speech on Campus: A Modest Proposal?”, Duke Law Journal, Vol. 1990, No. 3, Frontiers of Legal Thought II. The New First Amendment (Jun., 1990), pp. 484-573, Duke University School of Law, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1372555~-~-ghs//sk)
It is particularly important to devise anti-racism strategies consistent with the first amendment
AND
theme of more than rhetorical significance in egalitarian such as the women's movement.

C Letting the racists expose themselves allows for COUNTERSPEECH which spurs reform and activism – grassroots movements unite under counterspeech and expose moral bankruptcy – only public engagement empowers communities and constructs active solutions

Charles R. Calleros 95 Professor of Law at Arizona State University, “Paternalism, Counterspeech, and Campus Hate-Speech Codes: A Reply to Delgado and Yun,” 27 Ariz. St. L.J. 1249, 1280 (1995), ghsBZ
Delgado and Yun characterize these arguments as "paternalistic" and "seriously flawed.
AND
likely would feel pressures to maintain its status as a minimally integrated institution.

The critical race theory attack on content specificity turns into a useless paradox

 
Henry Louis Gates 94, Professor and Director of the Hutchins Center for African and African American Research at Harvard University, “War of Words: Critical Race Theory and the First Amendment”, in Speaking of Race, Speaking of Sex: Hate Speech, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties, New York University Press, 1994. RFK
At the very least, this approach would promise a quick solution to the abuse
AND
plentiful supply; the policeman's grandmother will offer poignant firsthand testimony to that.

Tournament: Harvard Westlake RR | Round: 6 | Opponent: Harvard Westlake IP | Judge: John Scoggin, James Sanger
1AC

Part One- Framework

I value justice.
Racism builds walls of exclusion and controls how bodies can interact with other bodies

     
Mendieta (Eduardo, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Stony Brook University), Philosphy and Geography, Vol. 7, No 1, February 2004, http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/depts/sese/Mendieta.pdf
It may be easily argued, without too much contrivance, that racism is a
AND
Foucault’s work we can also¶ encounter a more condemning analysis of racism.

Particularism is good—root cause claims and focus on overarching structures ignore application to material injustice.

Gregory Fernando Pappas 16 Texas AandM University “The Pragmatists’ Approach to Injustice”, The Pluralist Volume 11, Number 1, Spring 2016, BE
The pragmatists’ approach should be distinguished from nonideal theories whose starting point seems to be
AND
in making us see aspects of injustices we would not otherwise appreciate.15

Thus, the standard is reducing institutionalized racism.

Part Two: Speech Codes

Speech codes are failed policies founded on good intentions, but the naivete of speech codes is that they rest their faith in institutions that are inherently anti-black

Henry Louis Gates 94, Professor and Director of the Hutchins Center for African and African American Research at Harvard University, “War of Words: Critical Race Theory and the First Amendment”, in Speaking of Race, Speaking of Sex: Hate Speech, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties, New York University Press, 1994. RFK
One other paradox fissures the hate speech movement. Because these scholars wish to show
AND
The contemporary aim is not to resist power, but to enlist power.

The anti-black implementation of speech codes manifests itself in several ways.
A The evidence shows that minorities get persecuted, not white people–Great Britain’ censorship and the Michigan speech codes prove

 
Strossen ’90 (Nadine, June 1990, president of the American Civil Liberties Union from February 1991 to October 2008, John Marshall Harlan II Professor of Law at New York Law School., “Regulating Racist Speech on Campus: A Modest Proposal?”, Duke Law Journal, Vol. 1990, No. 3, Frontiers of Legal Thought II. The New First Amendment (Jun., 1990), pp. 484-573, Duke University School of Law, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1372555~-~-ghs//sk)
First, there is no persuasive psychological evidence that punishment for name- calling changes
AND
far more problems of equality and enforceability than it would solve.387 ¶ 

AND- Reverse enforcement is especially likely in the case of black youth–their activism is perceived as hostile and militant and more likely to be classified as “fighting words”–only the aff prevents white fragility from silencing black protest

 
Charles R. Calleros 95 Professor of Law at Arizona State University, “Paternalism, Counterspeech, and Campus Hate-Speech Codes: A Reply to Delgado and Yun,” 27 Ariz. St. L.J. 1249, 1995. RFK
The second "paternalistic objection," that "antiracism rules will end up
AND
to view the mural critically and test the speakers' interpretations with their own.

B Policing hate speech doesn’t scrub out racism at its roots–rather it exacerbates racial tensions, create backlash, and make racism harder to grapple with by driving it under ground—we should let the true racists speak so that we know who they are

Herron ’94 (Vince, Jan 1994, runs a law firm, University of California, Los Angeles B.A., Economics, USC Gould School of Law JD, Law, “Notes: INCREASING THE SPEECH: DIVERSITY, CAMPUS SPEECH CODES, AND THE PURSUIT OF TRUTH”, 67 S. Cal. L. Rev. 407 1993-1994, Georgetown Law Library, Hein Online--ghssk)
SPEECH CODES MAY EXACERBATE THE VERY TENSIONS THEY SEEK TO ALLEVIATE Some will argue that
AND
originally led to these injuries and hinders the continued fight against those ideologies.

C Speech codes glorify white supremacists by handing them a cross to hang themselves on by pitting them against government censorship

 
Strossen ’90 (Nadine, June 1990, president of the American Civil Liberties Union from February 1991 to October 2008, John Marshall Harlan II Professor of Law at New York Law School., “Regulating Racist Speech on Campus: A Modest Proposal?”, Duke Law Journal, Vol. 1990, No. 3, Frontiers of Legal Thought II. The New First Amendment (Jun., 1990), pp. 484-573, Duke University School of Law, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1372555~-~-ghs//sk)
A second reason why censorship of racist speech actually may sub- vert, rather
AND
it ex- presses.392 The British experience confirms this prediction.393

White nationalist Richard Spencer proves–in a speech at Texas AandM he said he knew he was going to lead a persecuted life, and his arrest in Hungary turned him into an alt-right hero and spreads the movement

Martin Gelin 14, Slate, “While Flight,” 13 November 2014, Slate.com. RFK
Spencer spent the next three days in a Budapest jail, which he didn’t seem
AND
American white supremacists connect with Europe’s far-right groups than anything else.

Part Three: Let Them Talk

My advocacy is that: Public colleges and universities in the United States ought not restrict any constitutionally protected speech. Silencing racists just drives their movement underground and makes them look like heroes. Rather, in the words of Henry Louis Gates, we should let them talk.
Several benefits:
A If we let racists talk NOW, it strengthens civil liberty protections for marginalized groups in the future–the ACLU Skokie case proves

 
Henry Louis Gates 94, Professor and Director of the Hutchins Center for African and African American Research at Harvard University, “War of Words: Critical Race Theory and the First Amendment”, in Speaking of Race, Speaking of Sex: Hate Speech, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties, New York University Press, 1994. RFK
The critique of neutrality would affect not simply how we draft our ordinances, but
AND
have effects far beyond the classic triad of deterrence, reform and retribution.

B Historically free speech has been far more important for racial equality movements than hate speech regulation–that’s what we must focus on protecting

Strossen ’90 (Nadine, June 1990, president of the American Civil Liberties Union from February 1991 to October 2008, John Marshall Harlan II Professor of Law at New York Law School., “Regulating Racist Speech on Campus: A Modest Proposal?”, Duke Law Journal, Vol. 1990, No. 3, Frontiers of Legal Thought II. The New First Amendment (Jun., 1990), pp. 484-573, Duke University School of Law, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1372555~-~-ghs//sk)
It is particularly important to devise anti-racism strategies consistent with the first amendment
AND
theme of more than rhetorical significance in egalitarian such as the women's movement.

C Letting the racists expose themselves allows for COUNTERSPEECH which spurs reform and activism – grassroots movements unite under counterspeech and expose moral bankruptcy – only public engagement empowers communities and constructs active solutions

Charles R. Calleros 95 Professor of Law at Arizona State University, “Paternalism, Counterspeech, and Campus Hate-Speech Codes: A Reply to Delgado and Yun,” 27 Ariz. St. L.J. 1249, 1280 (1995), ghsBZ
Delgado and Yun characterize these arguments as "paternalistic" and "seriously flawed.
AND
likely would feel pressures to maintain its status as a minimally integrated institution.

AND–the race-specific speech codes will get co-opted and turned into a useless paradox

Henry Louis Gates 94, Professor and Director of the Hutchins Center for African and African American Research at Harvard University, “War of Words: Critical Race Theory and the First Amendment”, in Speaking of Race, Speaking of Sex: Hate Speech, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties, New York University Press, 1994. RFK
At the very least, this approach would promise a quick solution to the abuse
AND
plentiful supply; the policeman's grandmother will offer poignant firsthand testimony to that.

Tournament: Emory | Round: Doubles | Opponent: Lexington NB | Judge: Greg Malis, Akhil Gandra, Divyaansh Raj

Part One- Framework

I value justice.
Racism builds walls of exclusion and controls how bodies can interact with other bodies

     
Mendieta (Eduardo, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Stony Brook University), Philosphy and Geography, Vol. 7, No 1, February 2004, http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/depts/sese/Mendieta.pdf)
It may be easily argued, without too much contrivance, that racism is a
AND
Foucault’s work we can also¶ encounter a more condemning analysis of racism.

Particularism is good—root cause claims and focus on overarching structures ignore application to material injustice.

Gregory Fernando Pappas 16 Texas AandM University “The Pragmatists’ Approach to Injustice”, The Pluralist Volume 11, Number 1, Spring 2016, BE
The pragmatists’ approach should be distinguished from nonideal theories whose starting point seems to be
AND
in making us see aspects of injustices we would not otherwise appreciate.15

Thus, the standard is reducing institutionalized racism.

Part Two: Speech Codes

Speech codes are failed policies founded on good intentions, but the naivete of speech codes is that they rest their faith in institutions that are inherently anti-black

Henry Louis Gates 94, Professor and Director of the Hutchins Center for African and African American Research at Harvard University, “War of Words: Critical Race Theory and the First Amendment”, in Speaking of Race, Speaking of Sex: Hate Speech, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties, New York University Press, 1994. RFK
One other paradox fissures the hate speech movement. Because these scholars wish to show
AND
The contemporary aim is not to resist power, but to enlist power.

The anti-black implementation of speech codes manifests itself in several ways.
A The evidence shows that minorities get persecuted, not white people–Great Britain’ censorship and the Michigan speech codes prove

 
Strossen ’90 (Nadine, June 1990, president of the American Civil Liberties Union from February 1991 to October 2008, John Marshall Harlan II Professor of Law at New York Law School., “Regulating Racist Speech on Campus: A Modest Proposal?”, Duke Law Journal, Vol. 1990, No. 3, Frontiers of Legal Thought II. The New First Amendment (Jun., 1990), pp. 484-573, Duke University School of Law, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1372555~-~-ghs//sk)
First, there is no persuasive psychological evidence that punishment for name- calling changes
AND
far more problems of equality and enforceability than it would solve.387 ¶ 

AND- Reverse enforcement is especially likely in the case of black youth–their activism is perceived as hostile and militant and more likely to be classified as “fighting words”–only the aff prevents white fragility from silencing black protest

 
Charles R. Calleros 95 Professor of Law at Arizona State University, “Paternalism, Counterspeech, and Campus Hate-Speech Codes: A Reply to Delgado and Yun,” 27 Ariz. St. L.J. 1249, 1995. RFK
The second "paternalistic objection," that "antiracism rules will end up
AND
to view the mural critically and test the speakers' interpretations with their own.

B Policing hate speech doesn’t scrub out racism at its roots–rather it exacerbates racial tensions, create backlash, and make racism harder to grapple with by driving it under ground—we should let the true racists speak so that we know who they are

Herron ’94 (Vince, Jan 1994, runs a law firm, University of California, Los Angeles B.A., Economics, USC Gould School of Law JD, Law, “Notes: INCREASING THE SPEECH: DIVERSITY, CAMPUS SPEECH CODES, AND THE PURSUIT OF TRUTH”, 67 S. Cal. L. Rev. 407 1993-1994, Georgetown Law Library, Hein Online--ghssk)
SPEECH CODES MAY EXACERBATE THE VERY TENSIONS THEY SEEK TO ALLEVIATE Some will argue that
AND
originally led to these injuries and hinders the continued fight against those ideologies.

C Speech codes glorify white supremacists by handing them a cross to hang themselves on by pitting them against government censorship

 
Strossen ’90 (Nadine, June 1990, president of the American Civil Liberties Union from February 1991 to October 2008, John Marshall Harlan II Professor of Law at New York Law School., “Regulating Racist Speech on Campus: A Modest Proposal?”, Duke Law Journal, Vol. 1990, No. 3, Frontiers of Legal Thought II. The New First Amendment (Jun., 1990), pp. 484-573, Duke University School of Law, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1372555~-~-ghs//sk)
A second reason why censorship of racist speech actually may sub- vert, rather
AND
it ex- presses.392 The British experience confirms this prediction.393

White nationalist Richard Spencer proves–in a speech at Texas AandM he said he knew he was going to lead a persecuted life, and his arrest in Hungary turned him into a white supremacist hero and spreads the movement

Martin Gelin 14, Slate, “While Flight,” 13 November 2014, Slate.com. RFK
Spencer spent the next three days in a Budapest jail, which he didn’t seem
AND
American white supremacists connect with Europe’s far-right groups than anything else.

Part Three: Let Them Talk

My advocacy is that: Public colleges and universities in the United States ought not restrict any constitutionally protected speech. Silencing racists just drives their movement underground and makes them look like heroes. Rather, in the words of Henry Louis Gates, we should let them talk.
Several benefits:
A If we let racists talk NOW, it strengthens civil liberty protections for marginalized groups in the future–the ACLU Skokie case proves

 
Henry Louis Gates 94, Professor and Director of the Hutchins Center for African and African American Research at Harvard University, “War of Words: Critical Race Theory and the First Amendment”, in Speaking of Race, Speaking of Sex: Hate Speech, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties, New York University Press, 1994. RFK
The critique of neutrality would affect not simply how we draft our ordinances, but
AND
have effects far beyond the classic triad of deterrence, reform and retribution.

B Historically free speech has been far more important for racial equality movements than hate speech regulation–that’s what we must focus on protecting

Strossen ’90 (Nadine, June 1990, president of the American Civil Liberties Union from February 1991 to October 2008, John Marshall Harlan II Professor of Law at New York Law School., “Regulating Racist Speech on Campus: A Modest Proposal?”, Duke Law Journal, Vol. 1990, No. 3, Frontiers of Legal Thought II. The New First Amendment (Jun., 1990), pp. 484-573, Duke University School of Law, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1372555~-~-ghs//sk)
It is particularly important to devise anti-racism strategies consistent with the first amendment
AND
theme of more than rhetorical significance in egalitarian such as the women's movement.

C Letting the racists expose themselves allows for COUNTERSPEECH which spurs reform and activism – grassroots movements unite under counterspeech and expose moral bankruptcy – only public engagement empowers communities and constructs active solutions

Charles R. Calleros 95 Professor of Law at Arizona State University, “Paternalism, Counterspeech, and Campus Hate-Speech Codes: A Reply to Delgado and Yun,” 27 Ariz. St. L.J. 1249, 1280 (1995), ghsBZ
Delgado and Yun characterize these arguments as "paternalistic" and "seriously flawed.
AND
likely would feel pressures to maintain its status as a minimally integrated institution.

AND–the race-specific speech codes will get co-opted and turned into a useless paradox

 
Henry Louis Gates 94, Professor and Director of the Hutchins Center for African and African American Research at Harvard University, “War of Words: Critical Race Theory and the First Amendment”, in Speaking of Race, Speaking of Sex: Hate Speech, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties, New York University Press, 1994. RFK
At the very least, this approach would promise a quick solution to the abuse
AND
plentiful supply; the policeman's grandmother will offer poignant firsthand testimony to that.

While we’re at it – rich white donors hate censorship culture and the aff would make them donate more

Jeremy Willinger 16 Adminstrator of Heterdox Academy, apolitically diverse group of social scientists, natural scientists, humanists, and other scholars who want to improve our academic disciplines and universities. We share a concern about a growing problem: the loss or lack of “viewpoint diversity.” When nearly everyone in a field shares the same political orientation, certain ideas become orthodoxy, dissent is discouraged, and errors can go unchallenged., "Protests Rise and Donations Drop: Alumni reactions to campus trends," Heterodox Academy, 8-16-2016, http://heterodoxacademy.org/2016/08/16/protests-rise-and-donations-drop-alumni-reactions-to-campus-trends/, ghsBZ
Heterodox Academy was founded at a time during which issues of free speech and censorship
AND
an increasingly strong role as we enter the second year of student protests.

Hate speech increasing on campuses now – multiple incidents prove only the aff solves

Yan et al 16, Holly Yan, Kristina Sgueglia and Kylie Walker, Cnn 16 , "'Make America White Again': Hate speech and crimes post-election," CNN, 12-22-2016, http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/10/us/post-election-hate-crimes-and-fears-trnd/, ghsBZ
Fears of heightened bigotry and hate crimes have turned into reality for some Americans after
AND
waiting to walk her to her next class, according to campus police.

Tournament: Kandi King RR | Round: 2 | Opponent: Cambridge Rindge and Latin OS | Judge: Hertzig, Travis Fife

Part One- Framework

I value justice.
Racism builds walls of exclusion and controls how bodies can interact with other bodies

     
Mendieta (Eduardo, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Stony Brook University), Philosphy and Geography, Vol. 7, No 1, February 2004, http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/depts/sese/Mendieta.pdf)
It may be easily argued, without too much contrivance, that racism is a
AND
Foucault’s work we can also¶ encounter a more condemning analysis of racism.

Particularism is good—root cause claims and focus on overarching structures ignore application to material injustice.

Gregory Fernando Pappas 16 Texas AandM University “The Pragmatists’ Approach to Injustice”, The Pluralist Volume 11, Number 1, Spring 2016, BE
The pragmatists’ approach should be distinguished from nonideal theories whose starting point seems to be
AND
in making us see aspects of injustices we would not otherwise appreciate.15

Thus, the standard is reducing institutionalized racism.

Part Two: Speech Codes

Speech codes are failed policies founded on good intentions, but the naivete of speech codes is that they rest their faith in institutions that are inherently anti-black

Henry Louis Gates 94, Professor and Director of the Hutchins Center for African and African American Research at Harvard University, “War of Words: Critical Race Theory and the First Amendment”, in Speaking of Race, Speaking of Sex: Hate Speech, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties, New York University Press, 1994. RFK
One other paradox fissures the hate speech movement. Because these scholars wish to show
AND
The contemporary aim is not to resist power, but to enlist power.

The anti-black implementation of speech codes manifests itself in several ways.

A The evidence shows that minorities get persecuted, not white people–Great Britain’ censorship and the Michigan speech codes prove

 
Strossen ’90 (Nadine, June 1990, president of the American Civil Liberties Union from February 1991 to October 2008, John Marshall Harlan II Professor of Law at New York Law School., “Regulating Racist Speech on Campus: A Modest Proposal?”, Duke Law Journal, Vol. 1990, No. 3, Frontiers of Legal Thought II. The New First Amendment (Jun., 1990), pp. 484-573, Duke University School of Law, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1372555~-~-ghs//sk)
First, there is no persuasive psychological evidence that punishment for name- calling changes
AND
far more problems of equality and enforceability than it would solve.387 ¶ 

AND- Reverse enforcement is especially likely in the case of black youth–their activism is perceived as hostile and militant and more likely to be classified as “fighting words”–only the aff prevents white fragility from silencing black protest

 
Charles R. Calleros 95 Professor of Law at Arizona State University, “Paternalism, Counterspeech, and Campus Hate-Speech Codes: A Reply to Delgado and Yun,” 27 Ariz. St. L.J. 1249, 1995. RFK
The second "paternalistic objection," that "antiracism rules will end up
AND
to view the mural critically and test the speakers' interpretations with their own.

B Policing hate speech doesn’t scrub out racism at its roots–rather it exacerbates racial tensions, create backlash, and make racism harder to grapple with by driving it under ground—we should let the true racists speak so that we know who they are

Herron ’94 (Vince, Jan 1994, runs a law firm, University of California, Los Angeles B.A., Economics, USC Gould School of Law JD, Law, “Notes: INCREASING THE SPEECH: DIVERSITY, CAMPUS SPEECH CODES, AND THE PURSUIT OF TRUTH”, 67 S. Cal. L. Rev. 407 1993-1994, Georgetown Law Library, Hein Online--ghssk)
SPEECH CODES MAY EXACERBATE THE VERY TENSIONS THEY SEEK TO ALLEVIATE Some will argue that
AND
originally led to these injuries and hinders the continued fight against those ideologies.

C Speech codes glorify white supremacists by handing them a cross to hang themselves on by pitting them against government censorship

 
Strossen ’90 (Nadine, June 1990, president of the American Civil Liberties Union from February 1991 to October 2008, John Marshall Harlan II Professor of Law at New York Law School., “Regulating Racist Speech on Campus: A Modest Proposal?”, Duke Law Journal, Vol. 1990, No. 3, Frontiers of Legal Thought II. The New First Amendment (Jun., 1990), pp. 484-573, Duke University School of Law, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1372555~-~-ghs//sk)
A second reason why censorship of racist speech actually may sub- vert, rather
AND
it ex- presses.392 The British experience confirms this prediction.393

White nationalist Richard Spencer proves–in a speech at Texas AandM he said he knew he was going to lead a persecuted life, and his arrest in Hungary turned him into a white supremacist hero and spreads the movement

Martin Gelin 14, Slate, “While Flight,” 13 November 2014, Slate.com. RFK
Spencer spent the next three days in a Budapest jail, which he didn’t seem
AND
American white supremacists connect with Europe’s far-right groups than anything else.

Part Three: Let Them Talk

My advocacy is that: Public colleges and universities in the United States ought not restrict any constitutionally protected speech. Silencing racists just drives their movement underground and makes them look like heroes. Rather, in the words of Henry Louis Gates, we should let them talk.
Several benefits:
A If we let racists talk NOW, it strengthens civil liberty protections for marginalized groups in the future–the ACLU Skokie case proves

 
Henry Louis Gates 94, Professor and Director of the Hutchins Center for African and African American Research at Harvard University, “War of Words: Critical Race Theory and the First Amendment”, in Speaking of Race, Speaking of Sex: Hate Speech, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties, New York University Press, 1994. RFK
The critique of neutrality would affect not simply how we draft our ordinances, but
AND
have effects far beyond the classic triad of deterrence, reform and retribution.

B Historically free speech has been far more important for racial equality movements than hate speech regulation–that’s what we must focus on protecting

Strossen ’90 (Nadine, June 1990, president of the American Civil Liberties Union from February 1991 to October 2008, John Marshall Harlan II Professor of Law at New York Law School., “Regulating Racist Speech on Campus: A Modest Proposal?”, Duke Law Journal, Vol. 1990, No. 3, Frontiers of Legal Thought II. The New First Amendment (Jun., 1990), pp. 484-573, Duke University School of Law, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1372555~-~-ghs//sk)
It is particularly important to devise anti-racism strategies consistent with the first amendment
AND
theme of more than rhetorical significance in egalitarian such as the women's movement.

C Letting the racists expose themselves allows for COUNTERSPEECH which spurs reform and activism – grassroots movements unite under counterspeech and expose moral bankruptcy – only public engagement empowers communities and constructs active solutions

Charles R. Calleros 95 Professor of Law at Arizona State University, “Paternalism, Counterspeech, and Campus Hate-Speech Codes: A Reply to Delgado and Yun,” 27 Ariz. St. L.J. 1249, 1280 (1995), ghsBZ
Delgado and Yun characterize these arguments as "paternalistic" and "seriously flawed.
AND
likely would feel pressures to maintain its status as a minimally integrated institution.

AND–the race-specific speech codes will get co-opted and turned into a useless paradox

 
Henry Louis Gates 94, Professor and Director of the Hutchins Center for African and African American Research at Harvard University, “War of Words: Critical Race Theory and the First Amendment”, in Speaking of Race, Speaking of Sex: Hate Speech, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties, New York University Press, 1994. RFK
At the very least, this approach would promise a quick solution to the abuse
AND
plentiful supply; the policeman's grandmother will offer poignant firsthand testimony to that.

Unprecedented levels of white supremacist influence and hate is happening on campus now- it’s been at an all time high since September and got another boost after the election

 
Arriaga ’17 (Alex, March 6th, writer for Chronicle of Higher Education, citing report from ADL, “White Supremacists Target College Campuses With Unprecedented Effort”, The Chronicle of Higher Education, http://www.chronicle.com/blogs/ticker/white-supremacists-target-college-campuses-with-unprecedented-effort/117191~-~-ghs//sk)
White supremacists have held minor campaigns on college campuses in the past, but an
AND
that their president denounce the white-supremacist fliers found on their campus.

Tournament: NDCA | Round: 2 | Opponent: Harvard Westlake KK | Judge: Nadia Hussein

FW

WE ARE A NATION OF COWARDS – whether it be shutting down critical dialogue that make us uncomfortable or refusing to even hear and identify Richard Spencer’s racist viewpoints, the status quo fails to recognize that disagreement is inevitable – if Spencer and his followers will just take their bigotry to the nearby city, to the streets, or to the Internet, the question then is HOW and WHERE we can approach opposing viewpoints and deconstruct our echo chambers – Any restrictions on free speech allow dominant viewpoints to go unchallenged and censor the very people they try to protect
Thus, Public colleges and universities in the United States ought not restrict any constitutionally protected speech.
I value justice.
Racism builds walls of exclusion and controls how bodies can interact with other bodies

     
Mendieta (Eduardo, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Stony Brook University), Philosphy and Geography, Vol. 7, No 1, February 2004, http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/depts/sese/Mendieta.pdf)
It may be easily argued, without too much contrivance, that racism is a
AND
Foucault’s work we can also¶ encounter a more condemning analysis of racism.

Particularism is good—root cause claims and focus on overarching structures ignore application to material injustice.

Gregory Fernando Pappas 16 Texas AandM University “The Pragmatists’ Approach to Injustice”, The Pluralist Volume 11, Number 1, Spring 2016, BE
The pragmatists’ approach should be distinguished from nonideal theories whose starting point seems to be
AND
in making us see aspects of injustices we would not otherwise appreciate.15

Thus, the standard is reducing institutionalized racism.

Adv 1 – Censorship

Universities reify oppressive norms under the guise of protecting students from threats – censorship targets critical studies as “anti- American” allowing dominant empires to divide and rule – right-wing elites coopt false claims of protecting freedom to maintain oppression

 
Chatterjee and Maira ‘14 (Chatterjee, Piya, and Sunaina Maira. "The imperial university: Race, war, and the nation-state." The imperial university: Academic repression and scholarly dissent (2014): 1-50, --ghssk)
State warfare and militarism have shored up deeply powerful notions of patriotism, intertwined with
AND
academic research on communities that were supposedly “breeding grounds” for terrorism.

Speech codes are used against minorities not white people – Great Britain’ censorship and the Michigan speech codes prove

 
Strossen ’90 (Nadine, June 1990, president of the American Civil Liberties Union from February 1991 to October 2008, John Marshall Harlan II Professor of Law at New York Law School., “Regulating Racist Speech on Campus: A Modest Proposal?”, Duke Law Journal, Vol. 1990, No. 3, Frontiers of Legal Thought II. The New First Amendment (Jun., 1990), pp. 484-573, Duke University School of Law, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1372555~-~-ghs//sk)
First, there is no persuasive psychological evidence that punishment for name- calling changes
AND
far more problems of equality and enforceability than it would solve.387 ¶ 

Reverse enforcement is especially likely in the case of black youth–their activism is perceived as hostile and militant and more likely to be classified as “fighting words”–only the aff prevents white fragility from silencing black protest

Charles R. Calleros 95 Professor of Law at Arizona State University, “Paternalism, Counterspeech, and Campus Hate-Speech Codes: A Reply to Delgado and Yun,” 27 Ariz. St. L.J. 1249, 1995. RFK
The second "paternalistic objection," that "antiracism rules will end up
AND
to view the mural critically and test the speakers' interpretations with their own.

Conflict and hate is inevitable – it’s a question of whether it occurs on the street beside campus or in a safer classroom – the aff is a creative approach to recognize difference and avoid extermination of the “other”

David Nichtern 11 , "Are Conflict And War Inevitable?," Huffington Post, 5-10-2011, span class="skimlinks-unlinked"http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-nichtern/conflict-resolution_b_859372.html/span, ghsBZ
If you study history, it seems that conflict and warfare are part of the
AND
possible at the personal level and it is possible at the collective level.

Any restriction on speech creates a chilling effect and allows colleges to define what ideas are accepted according to the dominant agenda

 
Herron ’94 (Vince, Jan 1994, runs a law firm, University of California, Los Angeles
B.A., Economics, USC Gould School of Law JD, Law, “Notes: INCREASING THE SPEECH: DIVERSITY, CAMPUS SPEECH CODES, AND THE PURSUIT OF TRUTH”, 67 S. Cal. L. Rev. 407 1993-1994, Georgetown Law Library, Hein Online--ghssk)
Professor Matsuda argues that, under principles of academic freedom and free expression, "
AND
increasing the speech on university campuses. Speech codes do just the opposite. 

Restrictions lock in echo chambers that amplify polarization and suppress opposing viewpoints – engagement is key to challenge dominant narratives and recognize pluralism

Greg Lukianoff 13 , "How Colleges Create the "Expectation of Confirmation", The State of the American Mind, 10-29-2013, http://www.soamcontest.com/content/how-colleges-create-expectation-confirmation, ghsBZ
The modern disinvitation movement represents a dramatic (if gradual) shift away from the
AND
” and the “expectation of confirmation” remain a reality on campus.

Adv 2 – Let Them Talk

Letting bigots express hate provides understanding of the opposition and allows strategic points of attack – targets of hate speech have a right to say nothing and instead mobilize community support in addressing bigotry – empirically proven

Charles R. Calleros 95 Professor of Law at Arizona State University, “Paternalism, Counterspeech, and Campus Hate-Speech Codes: A Reply to Delgado and Yun,” 27 Ariz. St. L.J. 1249, 1280 (1995), ghsBZ
Delgado and Yun characterize these arguments as "paternalistic" and "seriously flawed.
AND
likely would feel pressures to maintain its status as a minimally integrated institution.

Policing hate speech doesn’t scrub out racism at its roots–it exacerbates it with backlash, and drives it underground—we should let the true racists speak so that we know who they are

Herron ’94 (Vince, Jan 1994, runs a law firm, University of California, Los Angeles B.A., Economics, USC Gould School of Law JD, Law, “Notes: INCREASING THE SPEECH: DIVERSITY, CAMPUS SPEECH CODES, AND THE PURSUIT OF TRUTH”, 67 S. Cal. L. Rev. 407 1993-1994, Georgetown Law Library, Hein Online--ghssk)
SPEECH CODES MAY EXACERBATE THE VERY TENSIONS THEY SEEK TO ALLEVIATE Some will argue that
AND
originally led to these injuries and hinders the continued fight against those ideologies.

Speech codes glorify white supremacists by handing them a cross to hang themselves on by pitting them against government censorship

Strossen ’90 (Nadine, June 1990, president of the American Civil Liberties Union from February 1991 to October 2008, John Marshall Harlan II Professor of Law at New York Law School., “Regulating Racist Speech on Campus: A Modest Proposal?”, Duke Law Journal, Vol. 1990, No. 3, Frontiers of Legal Thought II. The New First Amendment (Jun., 1990), pp. 484-573, Duke University School of Law, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1372555~-~-ghs//sk)
A second reason why censorship of racist speech actually may sub- vert, rather
AND
it ex- presses.392 The British experience confirms this prediction.393

White nationalist Richard Spencer proves–in a speech at Texas AandM he said he knew he was going to lead a persecuted life, and his arrest in Hungary turned him into a white supremacist hero and spreads the movement overseas

Martin Gelin 14, Slate, “While Flight,” 13 November 2014, Slate.com. RFK
Spencer spent the next three days in a Budapest jail, which he didn’t seem
AND
American white supremacists connect with Europe’s far-right groups than anything else.

If we let racists talk NOW, it strengthens civil liberty protections for marginalized groups in the future–the ACLU Skokie case and Terminiello decision proves

 
Henry Louis Gates 94, Professor and Director of the Hutchins Center for African and African American Research at Harvard University, “War of Words: Critical Race Theory and the First Amendment”, in Speaking of Race, Speaking of Sex: Hate Speech, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties, New York University Press, 1994. RFK
The critique of neutrality would affect not simply how we draft our ordinances, but also how we conduct our litigation. One quickly moves from asking whether our statutes can or should be neutral to asking whether the adjudication of these statutes can or should be neutral. Indeed, many legal pragmatists, mainstream scholars and critical race theorists converge in their affirmation of the balancing approach toward the First Amendment and their corresponding skepticism toward what could be called the "Skokie school" of jurisprudence. When the American Civil Liberties Union defended the right of neo-Nazis to march in Skokie, a predominantly Jewish suburb of Chicago where a number of Holocaust survivors lived, they wished to protect and to fortify the constitutional right at issue. Indeed, they may have reasoned, if a civil liberty can be tested and upheld in so odious an exercise of it, then the precedent will strengthen it for all the less obnoxious cases where it may be disputed in the future. Hard cases harden laws. The strategy of the Skokie school relies on a number of presuppositions that critical legal theorists and others regard as doubtful. Most importantly, it is premised on the neutral operation of principle in judicial decisionmaking. But what if judges really decided matters in an unprincipled and political way, and invoked principles only by way of window dressing? In cases close-run enough to require the Supreme Court to decide them, precedent and principle are elastic enough, or complex enough, that justices can often decide either way without brazenly contradicting themselves. And even if the justices want to make principled decisions, it may turn out that the facts of the case--in the real-world cases that come before them--are too various and complicated ever to be overdetermined by the rule of precedent, stare decisis. In either event, it could turn out that defending neo-Nazis was just defending neo-Nazis. Moreover, it may be that the sort of formal liberties vouchsafed by this process are not the sort of liberties that we need most. Perhaps we have been overly impressed by the frisson of defending bad people for good causes, when the good consequences are at best conjectural and the bad ones real and immediate. Perhaps, these critics conclude, it is time to give up the pursuit of abstract principles and instead defend victims against victimizers, achieving your results in the here-and-now, not in the sweet hereafter.=7F There is something to this position, but it is, like the position it is meant to rebuff, overstated. Nadine Strossen of the aclu can show, for example, that the organization's winning First Amendment defense of the racist Father Terminiello in 1949 bore Fourteenth Amendment fruit when the aclu was able to use the landmark Terminiello decision to defend the free speech rights of civil rights protesters in the '60s and '70s. Granted, this may not constitute proof, which is an elusive thing in historical argument, but such cases do provide good prima facie reason to think that the Skokie school has pragmatic justification, not just blind faith, on its side. Another problem with the abandonment of principled adjudication is what it leaves in its wake: the case-by-case balancing of interests. My point is not that "normal" First Amendment jurisprudence can completely eschew balancing, but there is a difference between employing it in background or in extremis and employing it as the first and only approach. An unfettered regime of balancing admits too much to judicial inspection. What we miss when we dwell on the rarefied workings of high court decisionmaking is the way in which laws exert their effects lower down the legal food chain. It's been pointed out that when police arrest somebody for loitering or disorderly conduct, the experience of arrest--being hauled off to the station and fingerprinted before being released--often is the punishment. And "fighting words" ordinances have lent themselves to similar abuse. Anthony D'Amato, a law professor at Northwestern, makes a crucial and often overlooked point when he argues: "In some areas of law we do not want judges to decide cases at all--not justly or any other way. In these areas, the mere possibility of judicial decisionmaking exerts a chilling effect that can undermine what we want the law to achieve." But what if that chilling effect is precisely what the law is designed for? After all, one person's chill is another person's civility. It is clear, in any event, that all manner of punitive speech regulations are meant to have effects far beyond the classic triad of deterrence, reform and retribution.

Tournament: TFA | Round: 2 | Opponent: Alief Taylor SH | Judge: Andrew Trinh

FW

I value morality because ought implies moral obligation.

Structural violence is based in moral exclusion, which is fundamentally flawed because exclusion is not based on dessert but rather on arbitrarily perceived differences.

Winter and Leighton 99 |Deborah DuNann Winter and Dana C. Leighton. Winter|~Psychologist that specializes in Social Psych, Counseling Psych, Historical and Contemporary Issues, Peace Psychology. Leighton: PhD graduate student in the Psychology Department at the University of Arkansas. Knowledgable in the fields of social psychology, peace psychology, and justice and intergroup responses to transgressions of justice~ "Peace, conflict, and violence: Peace psychology in the 21st century." Pg 4-5 ghsVA
Finally, to recognize the operation of structural violence forces us to ask questions about
AND
local cultures, will be our most surefooted path to building lasting peace.

Debate should deal with questions of real-world consequences—ideal theories ignore the concrete nature of the world and legitimize oppression.

Dr. Tommy J. Curry 14, "The Cost of a Thing: A Kingian Reformulation of a Living Wage Argument in the 21st Century", Victory Briefs, 2014, BE
Despite the pronouncement of debate as an activity and intellectual exercise pointing to the real
AND
used to currently justify the living wages in under our contemporary moral parameters.

Thus, the standard is mitigating structural violence.

Harms

Discriminatory laws force IPV survivors to choose between reporting abuse or losing their home – double-victimization creates a chilling effect that silences survivors and perpetuates violence – current policies that force the burden onto the abused cause a victim-blaming culture that frames survivors as passive and not to be trusted

LENORA M. LAPIDUS 03 ~Director, Women's Rights Project ("WRP") of the American Civil Liberties Union. B.A., summa cum laude, Cornell University,J.D., cum laude, HarvardLaw School. Ms. Lapidus litigates women's rights cases in state and federal courts throughout the United States on a range of issues, including discrimination against victims of domestic violence. Prior to becoming Director of the ACLU Women's Rights Project, she served as the Legal Director of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey, held the John J. Gibbons Fellowship in Public Interest and Constitutional Law, at Gibbons, Del Deo, Dolan, Griffinger and Vecchione, in Newark, New Jersey, was a Staff Attorney Fellow at the Center for Reproductive Law and Policy in New York City, and clerked for the Honorable Richard Owen, United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. In addition to her litigation and public policy experience, Ms. Lapidus has also taught as an adjunct professor at Seton Hall Law School, Rutgers Law School, and Rutgers University. She is a member of various boards, task forces, bar associations and community organizations.~, "DOUBLY VICTIMIZED: HOUSING DISCRIMINATION AGAINST VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE," JOURNAL OF GENDER, SOCIAL POLICY and THE LAW ~Vol. 11:2, 2003, ghsBZ
By viewing Ms. Alvera's eviction as part of a larger systemic problem of discrimination
AND
history checks and deny housing applications of women who have obtained protective orders."

Black women are uniquely targeted with eviction, which spurs unemployment, homelessness, and suicides – nuisance ordinances treat IPV response as a nuisance and embolden abusers

Desmond and Valdez 13 *bracketed for rhetoric Matthew Desmond ~Department of Sociology, Harvard~and Nicol Valdez ~Columbia University~, "Unpolicing the Urban Poor: Consequences of Third-Party Policing for Inner-City Women," American Sociological Review, American Sociological Association, Vol. 78, No. 1 (February 2013), pp. 117-141, ghsBZ
In recent years, third-party policing policies have spread throughout the United States
AND
their female counterparts from benefitting fully from its protective arm (Harris 1990). 

Housing discrimination against IPV survivors occurs at every level of the housing process – "criminal records" degrade survivors and create unstable housing

LENORA M. LAPIDUS 03 *bracketed for rhetoric  ~Director, Women's Rights Project ("WRP") of the American Civil Liberties Union. B.A., summa cum laude, Cornell University,J.D., cum laude, HarvardLaw School. Ms. Lapidus litigates women's rights cases in state and federal courts throughout the United States on a range of issues, including discrimination against victims of domestic violence. Prior to becoming Director of the ACLU Women's Rights Project, she served as the Legal Director of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey, held the John J. Gibbons Fellowship in Public Interest and Constitutional Law, at Gibbons, Del Deo, Dolan, Griffinger and Vecchione, in Newark, New Jersey, was a Staff Attorney Fellow at the Center for Reproductive Law and Policy in New York City, and clerked for the Honorable Richard Owen, United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. In addition to her litigation and public policy experience, Ms. Lapidus has also taught as an adjunct professor at Seton Hall Law School, Rutgers Law School, and Rutgers University. She is a member of various boards, task forces, bar associations and community organizations.~, "DOUBLY VICTIMIZED: HOUSING DISCRIMINATION AGAINST VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE," JOURNAL OF GENDER, SOCIAL POLICY and THE LAW ~Vol. 11:2, 2003, ghsBZ
In addition to evictions, battered women face housing discrimination in a variety of other
AND
and to develop strategies to alter current practices by housing authorities.5 '

Queer and quare people are disproportionately affected by housing discrimination and evictions

Crosby Burns and Philip Ross 11 ~~, "Gay and Transgender Discrimination Outside the Workplace – Center for American Progress," No Publication, 7-19-2011, https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/lgbt/reports/2011/07/19/9927/gay-and-transgender-discrimination-outside-the-workplace/, ghsBZ
Evidence and rates of discrimination in the housing and rental markets On January 24,
AND
transgender individuals and their families until uniform housing and rental protections are passed.

Longitudinal, peer-reviewed, cross-sectional analysis proves unstable housing for IPV survivors causes trans-generational psychological violence, cycles of poverty, and chronic abuse and murders

Gilroy et al 16, Heidi Gilroy ~School of Nursing, Texas Woman's University~, Judith McFarlane ~School of Nursing, Texas Woman's University~,  John Maddoux ~Office of Research and Sponsored Programs, Texas Woman's University~, Cris Sullivan ~ Research Consortium on Gender-Based Violence, Michigan State University~, "Homelessness, housing instability, intimate partner violence, mental health, and functioning: A multiyear cohort study of IPV survivors and their children," Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor and Francis Group, 12 Dec 2016, ghsBZ
This 2-year analysis of 276 women with children who report intimate partner violence
AND
support both employment and housing for women who have experienced intimate partner violence. 

Solvency

Plan text: The United States ought to guarantee the right to housing for intimate partner violence survivors.

Goldberg et al 10, *bracketed for rhetoric Columbia Human Rights Clinic: Caroline Bettinger-López ~Acting Director~, Zarizana Abdul Aziz, Esha Bhandari, Alice Izumo, Kathrin Rüegg, Kate Stinson, Columbia Sexuality and Gender Law Clinic: Suzanne Goldberg ~Director~, Harriet Antczak, Caitlin Boyce, Seung Jae Lee, Sarah Morris, "HUMAN RIGHTS and DOMESTIC VIOLENCE An Advocacy Manual," Columbia Law School, February 2010, http://www.law.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/legacy/files/human_rights_institute/fordham_manual_-_final_3.8.10.pdf, ghsBZ
4. Right to housing Housing is one of the main issues with which domestic
AND
resources practitioners can use to include persuasive human rights arguments in their advocacy.

The aff prevents authorities from discriminating against IPV survivors – negative obligations are an inherent part of the right to housing

Marc UHRY 16 ~Coordinator for european affairs~, "HOUSING-RELATED BINDING OBLIGATIONS ON STATES FROM EUROPEAN AND INTERNATIONAL CASE LAW," Foundation Abbe Piere and FEANTSA, FROM EUROPEAN AND INTERNATIONAL CASE LAW, June 2016, http://www.fondation-abbe-pierre.fr/sites/default/files/content-files/files/housing-related_binding_obligations_on_states.pdf, ghsBZ
What minimum norms do public authorities have to respect when effectively implementing fundamental social rights
AND
Human Rights - Airey, C. vs Ireland, 7 October 1979). 

Guaranteeing the right to housing protects IPV survivors from forced evictions and harassment

Giulia Paglione 06 *bracketed for rhetoric, "Domestic Violence and Housing Rights: A Reinterpretation of the Right to Housing," The Johns Hopkins University Press, Human Rights Quarterly, Vol. 28, No. 1 (Feb., 2006), pp. 120-147, ghsBZ
The biased and male-oriented interpretation of the right to housing is likewise visible
AND
lacking such protection, in genuine consultation with affected persons and groups."32

Recognizing the right to housing for IPV survivors provides legal empowerment and reparations – rights-based perspective key to state enforcement and inherent protections

Giulia Paglione 2, "Domestic Violence and Housing Rights: A Reinterpretation of the Right to Housing," The Johns Hopkins University Press, Human Rights Quarterly, Vol. 28, No. 1 (Feb., 2006), pp. 120-147, ghsBZ
Recognizing that domestic violence victims are subject to forced evictions is not simply an intellectual
AND
, as the governments did not live up to their international legal obligations.

Crystallizing the rights of IPV survivors provides collective identity and empowers the abused individual – the aff provides the first step for systemic reform and challenging gender subordination

LENORA M. LAPIDUS 03 *bracketed for rhetoric ~Director, Women's Rights Project ("WRP") of the American Civil Liberties Union. B.A., summa cum laude, Cornell University,J.D., cum laude, HarvardLaw School. Ms. Lapidus litigates women's rights cases in state and federal courts throughout the United States on a range of issues, including discrimination against victims of domestic violence. Prior to becoming Director of the ACLU Women's Rights Project, she served as the Legal Director of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey, held the John J. Gibbons Fellowship in Public Interest and Constitutional Law, at Gibbons, Del Deo, Dolan, Griffinger and Vecchione, in Newark, New Jersey, was a Staff Attorney Fellow at the Center for Reproductive Law and Policy in New York City, and clerked for the Honorable Richard Owen, United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. In addition to her litigation and public policy experience, Ms. Lapidus has also taught as an adjunct professor at Seton Hall Law School, Rutgers Law School, and Rutgers University. She is a member of various boards, task forces, bar associations and community organizations.~, "DOUBLY VICTIMIZED: HOUSING DISCRIMINATION AGAINST VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE," JOURNAL OF GENDER, SOCIAL POLICY and THE LAW ~Vol. 11:2, 2003, ghsBZ
These responses to housing discrimination against victims of domestic violence all derive from a deep
AND
victimization and to protect battered women from discrimination in housing and other contexts.

Rights-based approaches recognize inherent dignity and create counter-hierarchies that removes stigmatization

Fitzpatrick and Suzanne 08, Fitzpatrick ~School of the Built Environment, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK;~ and Beth Watts ~Centre for Housing Policy, University of York, England, UK~, "'The Right to Housing' for Homeless People," Homelessness Research in Europe, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.456.1897andrep=rep1andtype=pdf, ghsBZ
There are some obvious reasons why enforceable legal rights to housing may be viewed as
AND
in poverty and using welfare services such as housing (Lister, 2004).

Generic discussions of the right to housing focuses exclusively on the male perspective, ignoring and legitimizing incidences of intimate partner violence – gender-sensitive focus key to deconstruct androcentric policies

Giulia Paglione 3, "Domestic Violence and Housing Rights: A Reinterpretation of the Right to Housing," The Johns Hopkins University Press, Human Rights Quarterly, Vol. 28, No. 1 (Feb., 2006), pp. 120-147, ghsBZ bracketed for ableist language
The right to housing is considered a component of the broader human right to an
AND
interpretation of the right to housing needs to be brought to the surface.

The aff is a form of institutional ethnography that deconstructs seemingly gender-neutral laws and disrupts power relations

Arnold and Slusser 15*bracketed for rhetoric, Gretchen Arnold and Megan Slusser, "Silencing Women's Voices: Nuisance Property Laws and Battered Women," Law and Social Inquiry Volume 00, Issue 00, 00–00, Summer 2015, http://www.nhlp.org/files/001.20Silencing20Women's20Voices-20Nuisance20Property20Laws20and20Battered20Women20-20G20Arnold20and20M20Slusser.pdf, ghsBZ
Theoretical Implications This study has implications for understanding not only how professionals can reach such
AND
more sophisticated understanding of how institutional and social processes reproduce relations of domination.

Tournament: Apple Valley | Round: 2 | Opponent: Scarsdale AC | Judge: Victor Rivas Umana

Framework

I value justice.
Structural violence and oppression is based in moral exclusion, which is fundamentally flawed because exclusion is not based on dessert but rather on arbitrarily perceived differences.

Susan Opotow 01 Susan Opotow is a social and organizational psychologist. Her work examines the intersection of conflict, justice, and identity as they give rise to moral exclusion -- seeing others as outside the scope of justice and as eligible targets of discrimination, exploitation, hate, or violence. She studies moral exclusion and moral inclusion in such everyday contexts as schooling, environmental and public policy conflict, and in more violent contexts, such as deadly wars and the post-war period. She has guest edited The Journal of Social Issues and Social Justice Research and co-edited Identity and the Natural Environment: The Psychological Significance of Nature (MIT Press, 2003). She is associate editor of Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology and Past President of the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, “Social Injustice”, Peace, Conflict, and Violence: Peace Psychology for the 21st Centuryl Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 2001, BE
Both structural and direct violence results from moral justifications and rationalizations.
AND
oneself or one’s group at the expense of others (Tajfel, 1982).

Particularism is good—root cause claims and focus on overarching structures ignore application to material injustice.

Gregory Fernando Pappas 16 Texas AandM University “The Pragmatists’ Approach to Injustice”, The Pluralist Volume 11, Number 1, Spring 2016, BE
The pragmatists’ approach should be distinguished from nonideal theories whose starting point seems to be
AND
in making us see aspects of injustices we would not otherwise appreciate.15

Thus, the standard is reducing structural violence.

Harms

Blue on black violence is structural and legally justified–police routinely violate the Fourth Amendment to use excessive force against black bodies

 
Drew Carbado 16, Honorable Harry Pregerson Professor of Law, UCLA, “Blue-on-Black Violence: A Provisional Model of Some of the Causes,” Georgetown Law Journal Vo. 104, 2016. RFK
No single model can fully explain African-American vulnerability to police violence. At
AND
"a pattern of excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment. 2

The law is currently a means by which police brutality becomes justified–qualified immunity lets officers escape accountability
Two warrants:
First, the “clearly established” clause and the merits-sequencing precedent set by Pearson v Callahan means courts can avoid the question of whether the officer’s conduct violated the Constitution if the right isn’t already CLEARLY ESTABLISHED–creates a vicious cycle where the greater the uncertainty about the law, the easier it is to argue that the right was not “clearly established”–leaves black bodies in a state of legal flux

Drew Carbado 16, Honorable Harry Pregerson Professor of Law, UCLA, “Blue-on-Black Violence: A Provisional Model of Some of the Causes,” Georgetown Law Journal Vo. 104, 2016. RFK
A similar dynamic is at play in the civil process as well. Here,
AND
, courts will likely grant qualified immunity in cases involving such arrests.20 

2- the “clearly established” standard as presently interpreted virtually guarantees qualified immunity so officers are almost never indicted

Drew Carbado 16, Honorable Harry Pregerson Professor of Law, UCLA, “Blue-on-Black Violence: A Provisional Model of Some of the Causes,” Georgetown Law Journal Vo. 104, 2016. RFK
4 A second problem with the "clearly established" doctrine pertains to how courts
AND
a significant doctrinal hurdle to holding police officers accountable for acts of violence.

Qualified immunity doesn’t just mean that victims go without compensation–the “clearly established” right clause means courts can continue to avoid clarifying the scope of the law which prevents the law from ever becoming clearly established

Alan K. Chen 15, professor of law at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law, “Qualified Immunity Limiting Access to Justice and Impeding Development of the Law,” Human Rights Magazine Vol. 41, 2015.
Critics of qualified immunity point out that the breadth of the doctrine’s protection means that
AND
F. App’x 852, 852–53 (4th Cir. 2009).

Qualified immunity’s focus on technicalities DISGUISES institutional racism and makes civil rights litigation about INDIVIDUAL CASES instead of structural problems and encourages acceptance of the status quo—we have to break down the illusion that our CJS allows for redress

Diana Hassel 99, Associate Professor, Roger Williams University School of Law, “Living a Lie: The Cost of Qualified Immunity,” Missouri Law Review Vol. 64, 1999.
The problem with qualified immunity is not so much that the outcomes are sometimes unfair
AND
of an open debate concerning which civil rights should be protected and how.

Thus the plan: The United States Supreme Court ought to limit qualified immunity for police officers by changing the “clearly established right” clause to asking whether the defendant’s conduct was “clearly unconstitutional”, and also implementing a four-part inquiry for cases in which the defendant’s actions were not obviously unconstitutional.

 
Michael S. Catlett 05, JD, University of Arizona College of Law,  “Clearly Not Established: Decisional Law and the Qualified Immunity Doctrine,” Arizona Law Review Vol. 47, 2005. RFK
In trying to decide whether a constitutional right is "clearly established," courts should
AND
case?; 197 (4) How recently was the constitutional right pronounced?

Solvency

Asking whether the defendant’s actions were “clearly unconstitutional” as opposed to violating “clearly established rights” avoids legal technicalities that excuse egregious behavior and shifts the focus to common social duty

 
John C. Jeffries 10, Professor, University of Virginia School of Law, Jr. “What’s Wrong with Qualified Immunity,” Florida Law Review, Vol. 62, September 2010. RFK
A second suggestion would be to change the doctrinal formula for qualified immunity. Rather
AND
would not be irrelevant in determining whether conduct is "clearly unconstitutional." 84

The four-part inquiry establishes a uniform standard for settling constitutional merits–resolves the legal quagmire that unfairly protects the police

 
Michael S. Catlett 05, JD, University of Arizona College of Law,  “Clearly Not Established: Decisional Law and the Qualified Immunity Doctrine,” Arizona Law Review Vol. 47, 2005. RFK
The obvious benefits of the proposed standard are that it would provide uniformity, help
AND
and the common-sensical or difficult nature of the legal issues involved."

AND—civil lawsuits good because they spur systemic reform through investigations and public outcry–also, even if there’s indemnity that doesn’t answer our offense because victims still get REPARATIONS and RECOMPENSE

Mary M. Cheh 96,Professor of Law, George Washington University “Are Lawsuits an Answer to Police Brutality?” in William A. Geller and Hans Toch, “Police Violence: Understanding and Controlling Police Abuse of Force,” Yale University Press, 1996. RFK
By contrast, the civil law, because of its greater flexibility and scope,
AND
but to reform so that the harm is not likely to be repeated.

We don’t claim legal reform solves everything, just that it’s a good idea–even if institutions are racist oppressed groups have to carve out anti-racist pockets in the Constitution and write themselves into the law as a pragmatic political strategy to break down the incoherence of the dominant ideology

 
Kimberle Williams Crenshaw 88, Acting Professor of Law, UCLA; JD, Harvard Law School, “Race, Reform and Retrenchment: Transformation and Legitimation in Antidiscrimination Law,” Harvard Law Review Vol. 101, May 1988. RFK
Rights have been important. They may have legitimated racial inequality, but they have
AND
meaningful change depends on skillful use of the liberating potential of dominant ideology.

Tournament: Apple Valley | Round: Semis | Opponent: Mission San Jose LS | Judge: Devane Murphy, Isis Davis- Marks, Demarcus Powell

Framework

I value justice.
Structural violence and oppression is based in moral exclusion, which is fundamentally flawed because exclusion is not based on dessert but rather on arbitrarily perceived differences.

Susan Opotow 01 Susan Opotow is a social and organizational psychologist. Her work examines the intersection of conflict, justice, and identity as they give rise to moral exclusion -- seeing others as outside the scope of justice and as eligible targets of discrimination, exploitation, hate, or violence. She studies moral exclusion and moral inclusion in such everyday contexts as schooling, environmental and public policy conflict, and in more violent contexts, such as deadly wars and the post-war period. She has guest edited The Journal of Social Issues and Social Justice Research and co-edited Identity and the Natural Environment: The Psychological Significance of Nature (MIT Press, 2003). She is associate editor of Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology and Past President of the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, “Social Injustice”, Peace, Conflict, and Violence: Peace Psychology for the 21st Centuryl Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 2001, BE
Both structural and direct violence results from moral justifications and rationalizations.
AND
oneself or one’s group at the expense of others (Tajfel, 1982).

Particularism is good—root cause claims and focus on overarching structures ignore application to material injustice.

Gregory Fernando Pappas 16 Texas AandM University “The Pragmatists’ Approach to Injustice”, The Pluralist Volume 11, Number 1, Spring 2016, BE
The pragmatists’ approach should be distinguished from nonideal theories whose starting point seems to be
AND
in making us see aspects of injustices we would not otherwise appreciate.15

Thus, the standard is reducing structural violence.

Harms

Blue on black violence is structural and legally justified–police routinely violate the Fourth Amendment to use excessive force against black bodies

 
Drew Carbado 16, Honorable Harry Pregerson Professor of Law, UCLA, “Blue-on-Black Violence: A Provisional Model of Some of the Causes,” Georgetown Law Journal Vo. 104, 2016. RFK
No single model can fully explain African-American vulnerability to police violence. At
AND
"a pattern of excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment. 2

The law is currently a means by which police brutality becomes justified–qualified immunity lets officers escape accountability
Two warrants:
First, the “clearly established” clause and the merits-sequencing precedent set by Pearson v Callahan means courts can avoid the question of whether the officer’s conduct violated the Constitution if the right isn’t already CLEARLY ESTABLISHED–creates a vicious cycle where the greater the uncertainty about the law, the easier it is to argue that the right was not “clearly established”–leaves black bodies in a state of legal flux

 
Drew Carbado 16, Honorable Harry Pregerson Professor of Law, UCLA, “Blue-on-Black Violence: A Provisional Model of Some of the Causes,” Georgetown Law Journal Vo. 104, 2016. RFK
A similar dynamic is at play in the civil process as well. Here,
AND
, courts will likely grant qualified immunity in cases involving such arrests.20 

2- the “clearly established” standard as presently interpreted virtually guarantees qualified immunity so officers are almost never indicted

Drew Carbado 16, Honorable Harry Pregerson Professor of Law, UCLA, “Blue-on-Black Violence: A Provisional Model of Some of the Causes,” Georgetown Law Journal Vo. 104, 2016. RFK
4 A second problem with the "clearly established" doctrine pertains to how courts
AND
a significant doctrinal hurdle to holding police officers accountable for acts of violence.

Qualified immunity doesn’t just mean that victims go without compensation–the “clearly established” right clause means courts can continue to avoid clarifying the scope of the law which prevents the law from ever becoming clearly established

Alan K. Chen 15, professor of law at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law, “Qualified Immunity Limiting Access to Justice and Impeding Development of the Law,” Human Rights Magazine Vol. 41, 2015.
Critics of qualified immunity point out that the breadth of the doctrine’s protection means that
AND
F. App’x 852, 852–53 (4th Cir. 2009).

Qualified immunity’s focus on technicalities DISGUISES institutional racism and makes civil rights litigation about INDIVIDUAL CASES instead of structural problems and encourages acceptance of the status quo—we have to break down the illusion that our CJS allows for redress

 
Diana Hassel 99, Associate Professor, Roger Williams University School of Law, “Living a Lie: The Cost of Qualified Immunity,” Missouri Law Review Vol. 64, 1999.
The problem with qualified immunity is not so much that the outcomes are sometimes unfair
AND
of an open debate concerning which civil rights should be protected and how.

Thus the plan: The United States federal government ought to limit qualified immunity for police officers by changing the “clearly established right” clause to “clearly unconstitutional” and implementing a three-part inquiry for cases in which the defendant’s actions were not clearly unconstitutional.

  
Michael S. Catlett 05, JD, University of Arizona College of Law,  “Clearly Not Established: Decisional Law and the Qualified Immunity Doctrine,” Arizona Law Review Vol. 47, 2005. RFK
In trying to decide whether a constitutional right is "clearly established," courts should
AND
case?; 197 (4) How recently was the constitutional right pronounced?

Solvency

Asking whether the defendant’s actions were “clearly unconstitutional” as opposed to violating “clearly established rights” avoids legal technicalities that excuse egregious behavior and shifts the focus to common social duty

 
John C. Jeffries 10, Professor, University of Virginia School of Law, Jr. “What’s Wrong with Qualified Immunity,” Florida Law Review, Vol. 62, September 2010. RFK
A second suggestion would be to change the doctrinal formula for qualified immunity. Rather
AND
would not be irrelevant in determining whether conduct is "clearly unconstitutional." 84

The four-part inquiry establishes a uniform standard for settling constitutional merits–resolves the legal quagmire that unfairly protects the police

 
Michael S. Catlett 05, JD, University of Arizona College of Law,  “Clearly Not Established: Decisional Law and the Qualified Immunity Doctrine,” Arizona Law Review Vol. 47, 2005. RFK
The obvious benefits of the proposed standard are that it would provide uniformity, help
AND
and the common-sensical or difficult nature of the legal issues involved."

AND—civil lawsuits good because they spur systemic reform through investigations and public outcry–also, even if there’s indemnity that doesn’t answer our offense because victims still get REPARATIONS and RECOMPENSE

Mary M. Cheh 96,Professor of Law, George Washington University “Are Lawsuits an Answer to Police Brutality?” in William A. Geller and Hans Toch, “Police Violence: Understanding and Controlling Police Abuse of Force,” Yale University Press, 1996. RFK
By contrast, the civil law, because of its greater flexibility and scope,
AND
but to reform so that the harm is not likely to be repeated.

We don’t claim legal reform solves everything, just that it’s a good idea–even if institutions are racist oppressed groups have to carve out anti-racist pockets in the Constitution and write themselves into the law as a pragmatic political strategy to break down the incoherence of the dominant ideology

 
Kimberle Williams Crenshaw 88, Acting Professor of Law, UCLA; JD, Harvard Law School, “Race, Reform and Retrenchment: Transformation and Legitimation in Antidiscrimination Law,” Harvard Law Review Vol. 101, May 1988. RFK
Rights have been important. They may have legitimated racial inequality, but they have
AND
meaningful change depends on skillful use of the liberating potential of dominant ideology.

AND–only struggles within the legal system solve–pessimism is a solipsistic retreat that moots smaller points of attack on white supremacy

Vincent W. Lloyd 16, Associate Professor of Theology and Religious Studies, Villanova University, “Conclusion: Against Pessimism” in Black Natural Law, Oxford University Press, 2016. RFK
This apparent impasse between the scope of the problem and the deliberateness of the strategy
AND
hold more than a million of our black brothers and sisters in cages.

Tournament: Glenbrooks | Round: Doubles | Opponent: Phoenix Country Day PW | Judge: Hertzig, Kim Hsun, Akhil Gandra

Framework

I value justice.
Structural violence and oppression is based in moral exclusion, which is fundamentally flawed because exclusion is not based on dessert but rather on arbitrarily perceived differences.

Susan Opotow 01 Susan Opotow is a social and organizational psychologist. Her work examines the intersection of conflict, justice, and identity as they give rise to moral exclusion -- seeing others as outside the scope of justice and as eligible targets of discrimination, exploitation, hate, or violence. She studies moral exclusion and moral inclusion in such everyday contexts as schooling, environmental and public policy conflict, and in more violent contexts, such as deadly wars and the post-war period. She has guest edited The Journal of Social Issues and Social Justice Research and co-edited Identity and the Natural Environment: The Psychological Significance of Nature (MIT Press, 2003). She is associate editor of Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology and Past President of the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, “Social Injustice”, Peace, Conflict, and Violence: Peace Psychology for the 21st Centuryl Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 2001, BE
Both structural and direct violence results from moral justifications and rationalizations.
AND
oneself or one’s group at the expense of others (Tajfel, 1982).

Particularism is good—root cause claims and focus on overarching structures ignore application to material injustice.

Gregory Fernando Pappas 16 Texas AandM University “The Pragmatists’ Approach to Injustice”, The Pluralist Volume 11, Number 1, Spring 2016, BE
The pragmatists’ approach should be distinguished from nonideal theories whose starting point seems to be
AND
in making us see aspects of injustices we would not otherwise appreciate.15

Thus, the standard is reducing structural violence.

Harms

Blue on black violence is structural and legally justified–police routinely violate the Fourth Amendment to use excessive force against black bodies

 
Drew Carbado 16, Honorable Harry Pregerson Professor of Law, UCLA, “Blue-on-Black Violence: A Provisional Model of Some of the Causes,” Georgetown Law Journal Vo. 104, 2016. RFK
No single model can fully explain African-American vulnerability to police violence. At
AND
"a pattern of excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment. 2

The law is currently a means by which police brutality becomes justified–qualified immunity lets officers escape accountability
Two warrants:
First, the “clearly established” clause and the merits-sequencing precedent set by Pearson v Callahan means courts can avoid the question of whether the officer’s conduct violated the Constitution if the right isn’t already CLEARLY ESTABLISHED–creates a vicious cycle where the greater the uncertainty about the law, the easier it is to argue that the right was not “clearly established”–leaves black bodies in a state of legal flux

Drew Carbado 16, Honorable Harry Pregerson Professor of Law, UCLA, “Blue-on-Black Violence: A Provisional Model of Some of the Causes,” Georgetown Law Journal Vo. 104, 2016. RFK
A similar dynamic is at play in the civil process as well. Here,
AND
, courts will likely grant qualified immunity in cases involving such arrests.20 

2- the “clearly established” standard as presently interpreted virtually guarantees qualified immunity so officers are almost never indicted

Drew Carbado 16, Honorable Harry Pregerson Professor of Law, UCLA, “Blue-on-Black Violence: A Provisional Model of Some of the Causes,” Georgetown Law Journal Vo. 104, 2016. RFK
4 A second problem with the "clearly established" doctrine pertains to how courts
AND
a significant doctrinal hurdle to holding police officers accountable for acts of violence.

Qualified immunity doesn’t just mean that victims go without compensation–the “clearly established” right clause means courts can continue to avoid clarifying the scope of the law which prevents the law from ever becoming clearly established

Alan K. Chen 15, professor of law at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law, “Qualified Immunity Limiting Access to Justice and Impeding Development of the Law,” Human Rights Magazine Vol. 41, 2015. RFK
Critics of qualified immunity point out that the breadth of the doctrine’s protection means that
AND
F. App’x 852, 852–53 (4th Cir. 2009).

Qualified immunity’s focus on technicalities DISGUISES institutional racism and makes civil rights litigation about INDIVIDUAL TECHNICALITIES instead of structural problems and encourages acceptance of the status quo—we have to break down the illusion that our CJS allows for redress

Diana Hassel 99, Associate Professor, Roger Williams University School of Law, “Living a Lie: The Cost of Qualified Immunity,” Missouri Law Review Vol. 64, 1999. RFK
The problem with qualified immunity is not so much that the outcomes are sometimes unfair
AND
of an open debate concerning which civil rights should be protected and how.

Thus the plan: The United States federal government ought to limit qualified immunity for police officers by requiring the “clearly established right” clause to first determine whether the official’s actions were “clearly unconstitutional” and implementing a three-part inquiry for cases in which the defendant’s actions were not clearly unconstitutional.

Michael S. Catlett 05, JD, University of Arizona College of Law,  “Clearly Not Established: Decisional Law and the Qualified Immunity Doctrine,” Arizona Law Review Vol. 47, 2005. RFK
In trying to decide whether a constitutional right is "clearly established," courts should
AND
case?; 197 (4) How recently was the constitutional right pronounced?

Solvency

Asking whether the defendant’s actions were “clearly unconstitutional” as opposed to violating “clearly established rights” avoids legal technicalities that excuse egregious behavior and shifts the focus to common social duty

John C. Jeffries 10, Professor, University of Virginia School of Law, Jr. “What’s Wrong with Qualified Immunity,” Florida Law Review, Vol. 62, September 2010. RFK
A second suggestion would be to change the doctrinal formula for qualified immunity. Rather
AND
would not be irrelevant in determining whether conduct is "clearly unconstitutional." 84

AND—civil lawsuits good because they spur systemic reform through investigations and public outcry–also, even if there’s indemnity that doesn’t answer our offense because victims still get REPARATIONS and RECOMPENSE

Mary M. Cheh 96,Professor of Law, George Washington University “Are Lawsuits an Answer to Police Brutality?” in William A. Geller and Hans Toch, “Police Violence: Understanding and Controlling Police Abuse of Force,” Yale University Press, 1996. RFK
By contrast, the civil law, because of its greater flexibility and scope,
AND
but to reform so that the harm is not likely to be repeated.

Increasing accountability would revitalize the entire legal system by promoting constitutional rights

Lindsey De Stefan 16 J.D. Candidate 2017, Seton Hall University School of Law; B.A., Ramapo College of New Jersey, "'No Man is Above the Law and No Man is Below it:' How Qualified Immunity Reform Could Create Accountability and Curb Widespread Police Misconduct," Law School Student Scholarship, Seton Hall Law, draft version, will be fully published in 2017, GUMM
Altering the qualified immunity doctrine is an excellent way to begin the path to restoring
AND
be a¶ long path to rebuilding the trust that is so crucial.

We don’t claim legal reform solves everything, just that it’s a good idea–even if institutions are racist oppressed groups have to carve out anti-racist pockets in the Constitution and write themselves into the law as a pragmatic political strategy to break down the incoherence of the dominant ideology

 
Kimberle Williams Crenshaw 88, Acting Professor of Law, UCLA; JD, Harvard Law School, “Race, Reform and Retrenchment: Transformation and Legitimation in Antidiscrimination Law,” Harvard Law Review Vol. 101, May 1988. RFK
Rights have been important. They may have legitimated racial inequality, but they have
AND
meaningful change depends on skillful use of the liberating potential of dominant ideology.

AND–only struggles within the legal system solve–pessimism is a solipsistic retreat that moots smaller points of attack on white supremacy

Vincent W. Lloyd 16, Associate Professor of Theology and Religious Studies, Villanova University, “Conclusion: Against Pessimism” in Black Natural Law, Oxford University Press, 2016. RFK
This apparent impasse between the scope of the problem and the deliberateness of the strategy
AND
hold more than a million of our black brothers and sisters in cages.

Tournament: Glenbrooks | Round: Octas | Opponent: Harvard Westlake EE | Judge: Alderete, Alston, Akhil Gandra

Part 1: Framework

I value justice.
Racism builds walls of exclusion and controls how bodies can interact with other bodies

    
Mendieta (Eduardo, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Stony Brook University), Philosphy and Geography, Vol. 7, No 1, February 2004, http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/depts/sese/Mendieta.pdf
It may be easily argued, without too much contrivance, that racism is a
AND
Foucault’s work we can also¶ encounter a more condemning analysis of racism.

Particularism is good—root cause claims and focus on overarching structures ignore application to material injustice.

Gregory Fernando Pappas 16 Texas AandM University “The Pragmatists’ Approach to Injustice”, The Pluralist Volume 11, Number 1, Spring 2016, BE
The pragmatists’ approach should be distinguished from nonideal theories whose starting point seems to be
AND
in making us see aspects of injustices we would not otherwise appreciate.15

Thus, the standard is reducing institutionalized racism.

Part 2: The War Against Free Expression

In 1988 the legendary group NWA created an anthem for change for many communities with their song “F THE POLICE”. Sadly, in 2016, almost 3 decades later, the wake of violence against marginalized populations is increasing. Police have even criminalized the form of nonviolent expression of free speech of “flipping the bird”, “shooting the middle finger”, “making police read between the lines”, instead of the legitimate expression of free speech that it is.  Today, we take a stand against this obvious violation of expression.
That said, court is now in session. Judges Alston, Alderete and Gandra presiding.
You know how sometimes you’re doing 80 in a 40 zone and you get pulled over and you just give the cop the bird? Well, turns out if they beat you up for that, they can get qualified immunity! Because that is bad, I affirm.
Flipping the police off is vital expression of government criticism–police retaliation is unconstitutional

 
Samantha Orovitz 12, JD, Emory School of Law, “Free Bird: No Right to Qualified Immunity for Police Who Retaliate Against the Middle Finger Gesture,” Journal of Law and Social Deviance, Vol. 3, 2012. RFK
The evocativeness of the middle finger gesture is evident in the story of Robert Ekas
AND
against citizens exercising this right should not be entitled to qualified immunity. 20

BUT–police officers routinely get qualified immunity for retaliating against individuals who shoot them the bird by invoking the disorderly conduct and breach of peace ordinances–those are vague and disingenuous which creates a massive abuse on power

 
Samantha Orovitz 12, JD, Emory School of Law, “Free Bird: No Right to Qualified Immunity for Police Who Retaliate Against the Middle Finger Gesture,” Journal of Law and Social Deviance, Vol. 3, 2012. RFK
Application of Qualified Immunity Doctrine to the Middle Finger and Its Effect on Police Retaliation
AND
.237 In this context, qualified immunity induces abuse of power.23

The middle finger is worth fighting for–protecting First Amendment rights key to checking back a police state by reminding officers they are not above the law

 
Samantha Orovitz 12, JD, Emory School of Law, “Free Bird: No Right to Qualified Immunity for Police Who Retaliate Against the Middle Finger Gesture,” Journal of Law and Social Deviance, Vol. 3, 2012. RFK
Just because you can legally give a police officer the middle finger does not mean
AND
form, because it is a manifestation of the public's feelings and attitudes.

Provocative speech forces government to remain responsive to the will of the people–the squo gives police unfettered power to punish people who irritate them but we should be able to flip the police off without consequence

 
Samantha Orovitz 12, JD, Emory School of Law, “Free Bird: No Right to Qualified Immunity for Police Who Retaliate Against the Middle Finger Gesture,” Journal of Law and Social Deviance, Vol. 3, 2012. RFK
Transforming the Bird into a Dove: First Amendment Speech Expresses the Will of the
AND
being granted qualified immunity for unlawfully arresting an individual who exercises this right.

And–giving the middle finger is a symbol of black masculinity that becomes criminalized by paranoid White America–photo coverage of Trayvon Martin proves – the aff checks back violent police aggression against racialized criminality

Lisa Lebduska 14 Wheaton College, “Racist Visual Rhetoric and Images of Trayvon Martin,” Present Tense, Vol 3, 2014. RFK
Other People photos, which were also circulated on the Internet, featured a smiling
AND
to associate images of blacks with violence and those of whites with peace. 

Part 3: Solvency

Thus the plan: The United States federal government ought to limit qualified immunity for police officers who arrest an individual who directs the middle finger gesture at the officers.

Samantha Orovitz 12, JD, Emory School of Law, “Free Bird: No Right to Qualified Immunity for Police Who Retaliate Against the Middle Finger Gesture,” Journal of Law and Social Deviance, Vol. 3, 2012. RFK
To ensure police officers are not omnipotent in quashing free speech, courts should not
AND
the court will not tolerate an officer's infringement on individuals' free speech rights.

The aff is more consistent with EXISTING SUPREME COURT RULINGS ON FLIPPING THE BIRD–it just prevents police from exploiting ordinances

 
Samantha Orovitz 12, JD, Emory School of Law, “Free Bird: No Right to Qualified Immunity for Police Who Retaliate Against the Middle Finger Gesture,” Journal of Law and Social Deviance, Vol. 3, 2012. RFK
FIRST AMENDMENT STATUS OF "THE BIRD": WHY THE MIDDLE FINGER GESTURE IS NOT
AND
qualified immunity in an effort to protect themselves from liability for acting unconstitutionally.

And–aff spills over–resolves court clog by reducing appeal on First Amendment grounds and prevents chilling effect on free speech

Samantha Orovitz 12, JD, Emory School of Law, “Free Bird: No Right to Qualified Immunity for Police Who Retaliate Against the Middle Finger Gesture,” Journal of Law and Social Deviance, Vol. 3, 2012. RFK
This issue's resolution is crucial for three reasons. First, the underlying cases drain
AND
, even if the individuals know this speech is within their constitutional rights.

Even if civilians don't win compensation- lawsuits create reform and police know their behavior will be watched

Schwartz ‘11 (Joanna, "What Police Learn from Lawsuits." Cardozo L. Rev. 33 (2011): 841. Joanna Schwartz is a Professor of Law at UCLA School of Law. She teaches Civil Procedure, the Civil Rights Litigation Clinic)
Lawsuits are widely recognized to compensate and deter; this Article shows suits can also
AND
to create multiple, new, and even redundant sources of information.”253

And- if officers know they’re now liable they’ll worry about relations—our aff also compensates plaintiffs who flipped off the police which is the BIGGEST f you to the law

 
Schwartz ‘14 Schwartz, Joanna C. “Police Indemnification” Assistant Professor of Law, University of California, Los Angeles, School of Law. New York University Law Review. 2014
Others will argue that, despite indemnification, police officers are still in danger of
AND
pays settle- ments and judgments against officers out of a general fund.

Tournament: Meadows | Round: Octas | Opponent: Harvard Westlake VC | Judge: Erik Legried, Liz Letak, Adam Torson

Part 1: Framework

I value justice.
Structural violence and oppression is based in moral exclusion, which is fundamentally flawed because exclusion is not based on dessert but rather on arbitrarily perceived differences.

Susan Opotow 01 Susan Opotow is a social and organizational psychologist. Her work examines the intersection of conflict, justice, and identity as they give rise to moral exclusion -- seeing others as outside the scope of justice and as eligible targets of discrimination, exploitation, hate, or violence. She studies moral exclusion and moral inclusion in such everyday contexts as schooling, environmental and public policy conflict, and in more violent contexts, such as deadly wars and the post-war period. She has guest edited The Journal of Social Issues and Social Justice Research and co-edited Identity and the Natural Environment: The Psychological Significance of Nature (MIT Press, 2003). She is associate editor of Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology and Past President of the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, “Social Injustice”, Peace, Conflict, and Violence: Peace Psychology for the 21st Centuryl Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 2001, BE
Both structural and direct violence results from moral justifications and rationalizations.
AND
oneself or one’s group at the expense of others (Tajfel, 1982).

Recognizing moral exclusion and the structural inequality it causes is a prior question to institutional reform

 
Laxer ’14 (Michael, Nov 10th, lives in Toronto where he runs a bookstore with his partner Natalie. Michael has a Degree in History from Glendon College of York University. He is a political activist, a two-time former candidate and former election organizer for the NDP, is a socialist candidate for Toronto City Council in 2014, and is on the executive of the Socialist Party of Ontario., “Part of the problem: Talking about systemic oppression”, Feminist Current, http://www.feministcurrent.com/2014/11/10/part-of-the-problem-talking-about-systemic-oppression/~-~-ghs//sk)
Systemic oppressions result in very real violence and human degradation. Systemic misogyny, patriarchy
AND
see how our society and civilization can ever begin to move past it.

Particularism is good—root cause claims and focus on overarching structures ignore application to material injustice.

Gregory Fernando Pappas 16 Texas AandM University “The Pragmatists’ Approach to Injustice”, The Pluralist Volume 11, Number 1, Spring 2016, BE
The pragmatists’ approach should be distinguished from nonideal theories whose starting point seems to be
AND
in making us see aspects of injustices we would not otherwise appreciate.15

Thus, the standard is reducing structural violence.

Part 2: Imposing Nuclear Apartheid

Though South Africa is the only African country with nuclear power, the whole continent is trying to develop it.

Luke ‘15: Luke, Ronke. Contributor, Oil Price “Africa Banking On Nuclear Power.” Oil Price, October 2015. RP
It’s no secret that Africa’s economic development has been stifled by the shortage of electricity
AND
strategic partnerships. China has started training South Africans in nuclear plant operations.

Russia is pressuring South Africa to increase NP production, encouraging corruption.

Winkler ‘15: Winkler, Hartmut Professor of Physics, University of Johannesburg “Why South Africa should not build eight new nuclear power stations.” The Conversation, November 2015. RP
But in late 2014 the government took an about-turn in its approach to
AND
the preferred site for a 4000 MW nuclear plant dubbed “Nuclear 1”. 

The goal of nuclear expansion in Africa is rooted in colonialism: Western elites initially pressured South Africa to “join the nuclear club.”

  
Adam ‘11: Adam, Ferrial. Contributor, Greenpeace “The True Cost of Nuclear Power in South Africa.” Greenpeace, August 2011. RP
South Africa might be on the tip of Africa, but its mineral wealth has
AND
programme, six months after the apartheid National Party government came to power. 

And colonialism continues: the West perpetuates false needs, convincing other countries they need to participate in global capitalism.

Marcuse ‘64: Marcuse, Herbert. German philosopher, Frankfurt School One-Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society. Beacon, 1964. RP
I should like to add a few remarks on the often-heard opinion that
AND
colonialism, or to a more or less terroristic system of primary accumulation. 

The result is a system of modern-day apartheid and environmental racism.

Chen ‘11: Chen, Michelle. Contributor, Colorlines “The Radioactive Racism Behind Nuclear Energy.” Colorlines, March 2011. RP
One would think that the South African government would pause for a moment, in
AND
smokescreen, in a way, for arming apartheid during the Cold War. 

She adds:

When the apocalyptic cloud erupted over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the world woke up to
AND
"effectively an 'up yours' response to the citizens of our country". 

Thus, the Plan:

The countries of the African continent ought to prohibit the production of nuclear power.

WISE ’12 explains Greenpeace’s advocacy: WISE Amsterdam. “Stop Nuclear Power in Africa.” Wiseinternational.org, June 15, 2012. CH
Article On May 29, Greenpeace Africa activists dressed in nuclear emergency suits dumped marked
AND
as a nuclear nightmare and should stop now before it is too late.”

Part 3: Renewable Freedom

Banning nuclear power is key to South Africa and other states to access sovereignty. A shift to renewables is the likely outcome.

 
Winkler ‘15: Winkler, Hartmut. Professor of Physics, University of Johannesburg “Why South Africa Should Not Build Eight New Nuclear Power Stations.” The Conversation, November 2015. RP
The expansion of South Africa’s power generating capacity is a necessary condition for economic growth
AND
a er 2025 (and for lower demand not until at earliest 2035). 

In fact, banning nuclear is a necessary first step to growing renewables. Money spent on nuclear power is money wasted.

Adam ‘11 Adam, Ferrial. Contributor, Greenpeace “The True Cost of Nuclear Power in South Africa.” Greenpeace, August 2011. RP
South Africa spent 13 years pursuing the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor, wasting billions of
AND
expensive and unreliable, blighted by power cuts and the infamous ‘load shedding’

Yet banning NP leads African states to use the renewables already available.

Adam ‘11 Adam, Ferrial. Contributor, Greenpeace “The True Cost of Nuclear Power in South Africa.” Greenpeace, August 2011. RP
South Africa has massive renewable energy sources, from wind and biomass to some of
AND
risk future, through a just transition towards a renewableenergy-based society. 

Nothing short of a ban solves – regulations won’t work and are empirically circumvented.

 
Adam ’11 Adam, Ferrial. Contributor, Greenpeace “The True Cost of Nuclear Power in South Africa.” Greenpeace, August 2011. RP
Every country with a nuclear energy programme should have an independent regulatory body ensuring that
AND
other departments and state bodies like the Department of Water and Environment.115 

South Africa will switch to wind – more profitable than coal now.

Barbee ‘15: Barbee, Jeffrey Contributor, The Guardian “How renewable energy in South Africa is quietly stealing a march on coal.” The Guardian, June 2015. RP
The howling wind drives the turbines, their blades bent back from the force as
AND
in time. This will happen sooner than people think,” he said.

Tournament: Grapevine | Round: 1 | Opponent: Colleyville Heritage AS | Judge: Hank Stolte

Part 1: Framework

I value morality.
Policymakers use util

Robert Goodin 90, professor of philosophy at the Australian National University college of arts and social sciences, “The Utilitarian Response,” pgs 141-142—ghssk)
My larger argument turns on the proposition that there is something special about the situation
AND
want to use it at all – to choose general rules or conduct.

Utilitarianism is the only way to access morality. Sacrifice in the name of preserving rights destroys any hope of future generations attaining other values.

                                                                                                                              
Nye ‘86  (Joseph S. 1986; Phd Political Science Harvard. University; Served as Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs; “Nuclear Ethics” pg. 45-47)
Is there any end that could justify a nuclear war that threatens the survival of
AND
of that risk is a justifiable topic of both prudential and moral reasoning. 

Utilitarianism inevitable even in deontological frameworks

Green ’02 (Assistant Professor Department of Psychology Harvard University, Joshua, November 2002 "The Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Truth About Morality And What To Do About It", 314—)
Some people who talk of balancing rights may think there is an algorithm for deciding
AND
represents is either dogmatic in an esoteric sort of way or covertly consequentialist.

AND–no act omission distinction for state actors–if governments refuse to protect people by not enforcing regulations then that’s an active choice¬

Sunstein and Vermuele ’05 (Cass and Adrian, March, Sunstein: American legal scholar, particularly in the fields of constitutional law, administrative law, environmental law, and law and behavioral economics, who was the Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the Obama administration from 2009 to 2012.2 For 27 years, Sunstein taught at the University of Chicago Law School.3 Sunstein is the Robert Walmsley University Professor4 at Harvard Law School, Vermuele: American legal scholar , Graduate of Harvard College  and Law school, professor of law at Harvard Law School in 2006, was named John H. Watson Professor of Law in 2008, and was named Ralph S. Tyler Professor of Constitutional Law in 2016. He was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, “Is Capital Punishment Morally Required? The Relevance of Life‐Life Tradeoffs”, THE LAW SCHOOL, THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO, JOHN M. OLIN LAW and ECONOMICS WORKING PAPER NO. 239, http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/files/239.crs-av.capital-punishment.pdf~-~-ghs//sk)
In our view, both the argument from causation and the argument from intention go
AND

it is the allocation to factory A of property right to pollute.

–and even if there is an act omission distinction, continuing to support nuclear weapons programs is a state action so you should can still evaluate all aff impacts as rights violations
Thus the standard is maximizing wellbeing.

Part 2: The Myth of Nukes

The nuclear energy industry survives thanks to an aggressive campaign of misinformation created by governments with entrenched economic and military interests

Stoett ’03 (Peter, February 2003, main areas of expertise include international relations and law, global environmental politics, and human rights.  Prior to joining Concordia University in 1998 taught at the University of British Columbia, Simon Fraser University, the University of Guelph, and the University of Waterloo, written, co-written, and co-edited over ten books and over 50 peer reviewed articles, chapters in edited books, and occasional papers. He has conducted research in Europe (including the Balkans), eastern, southern and western Africa, central America, and Asia. From April to July 2013 he was an Erasmus Fellow and taught at the International Institute for Social Studies at the Hague, Netherlands. From January-June, 2012 he was the Fulbright Visiting Research Chair in Canadian-American Relations at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars’ Canada Institute, in Washington, D.C., He is also a Senior Research Fellow with the Europe-based Earth Systems Governance Project of the International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change, PhD from Queen’s University, “Toward Renewed Legitimacy? Nuclear Power, Global Warming, and Security”, Global Environmental Politics, Volume 3, Number 1, February 2003, pp. 99-116 (Article), Published by The MIT Press, Project Muse ghssk)
Despite the neoliberal agenda’s commitment to “free market” enterprise, we see that
AND
and the survival of a troubled, and highly subsidised, nuclear industry.

AND–despite its problems nuclear power continues to enjoy heavy state subsidies because governments view nuclear power as critical to security legitimacy

Stoett ’03 (Peter, February 2003, main areas of expertise include international relations and law, global environmental politics, and human rights.  Prior to joining Concordia University in 1998 taught at the University of British Columbia, Simon Fraser University, the University of Guelph, and the University of Waterloo, written, co-written, and co-edited over ten books and over 50 peer reviewed articles, chapters in edited books, and occasional papers. He has conducted research in Europe (including the Balkans), eastern, southern and western Africa, central America, and Asia. From April to July 2013 he was an Erasmus Fellow and taught at the International Institute for Social Studies at the Hague, Netherlands. From January-June, 2012 he was the Fulbright Visiting Research Chair in Canadian-American Relations at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars’ Canada Institute, in Washington, D.C., He is also a Senior Research Fellow with the Europe-based Earth Systems Governance Project of the International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change, PhD from Queen’s University, “Toward Renewed Legitimacy? Nuclear Power, Global Warming, and Security”, Global Environmental Politics, Volume 3, Number 1, February 2003, pp. 99-116 (Article), Published by The MIT Press, Project Muse ghssk)
In the United States and elsewhere, periodic renewals in the hopes for nu-
AND
is intended largely to provide the necessary background for such a research project.

AND– the state is obsessed with nuclear power because of the military industrial complex– means that renewables always get overlooked for more costly nuclear alternative

Shrader- Frechette ’08 (Kristin, June 23rd, O'Neill Family Professor, Department of Biological Sciences and Department of Philosophy, at the University of Notre Dame. She has previously held senior professorships at the University of California and the University of Florida. Most of Shrader-Frechette's research work analyzes the ethical problems in risk assessment, public health, or environmental justice - especially those related to radiological, ecological, and energy-related risks.1 Shrader-Frechette has received the Global Citizenship Award, and the Catholic Digest named her one of 12 "Heroes for the US and the World", published more than 380 articles and 16 books/monographs, “Five Myths About Nuclear Energy”, America Magazine, http://americamagazine.org/issue/660/article/five-myths-about-nuclear-energy~-~-ghs//sk)
If atomic energy is really so risky and expensive, why did the United States
AND
virtually all of its support to a riskier, more costly nuclear alternative?

A couple of impacts:
A) the nuclear industry profits from and re-entrenches environmental racism- need to shift to renewables now

Chen ’11 (Michelle, March 23rd, Colorlines' Global Justice columnist. She is a regular contributor on labor issues at In These Times, as well as a member of the magazine's Board of Editors. Michelle's reporting has appeared in Ms. Magazine, AirAmerica, Alternet, Newsday, the Progressive Media Project, and her old zine, cain. Prior to joining Colorlines, she wrote for the independent news collective The NewStandard, “The Radioactive Racism Behind Nuclear Energy”, Colorlines, http://www.colorlines.com/articles/radioactive-racism-behind-nuclear-energy~-~-ghs//sk)
When the apocalyptic cloud erupted over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the world woke up to
AND
temptations of nuclear power may continue to eclipse fears of its global consequences.

B) Nuclear accidents are likely

David Lochbaum 16 Nuclear Safety Engineer; Staff on the Union of Concerned Scientists; Directs the Union of Concerned Scientists' Nuclear Safety Project; Monitors safety issues at US nuclear power plants; has worked in nuclear power plants for 17 years, "Nuclear Power in the Future: Risks of a Lifetime," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, February 24, 2016, GUMM
The chance of one reactor experiencing a meltdown among a fleet of 100 reactors operating
AND
over time, but also because refurbishment and replacement sometimes have unanticipated consequences.

C) ====Renewable energy is better and will fill in, nuke power grows too slowly and distracts from this development====
Parenti ’12 (Christian, April 4th, Christian Parenti is the author of "The Freedom: Shadows and Hallucinations in Occupied Iraq" (New Press) and a visiting fellow at CUNY's Center for Place, Culture and Politics., “Why Nuclear Power Is Not the Answer to Global Warming”, AlterNet, http://www.alternet.org/story/154854/why_nuclear_power_is_not_the_answer_to_global_warming?page=2~-~-ghs//sk)
An authoritative study by the investment bank Lazard Ltd. found that wind beat nuclear
AND
Atomic power is the fuel of the future”—and always will be.

AND–err on the side of aff evidence on warming–the nuclear industry and by extension the government fabricate studies to bury the disads of nuclear power

Shrader- Frechette ’13 (*brackets in original text, Kristin, Spring 2013 , O'Neill Family Professor, Department of Biological Sciences and Department of Philosophy, at the University of Notre Dame. She has previously held senior professorships at the University of California and the University of Florida. Most of Shrader-Frechette's research work analyzes the ethical problems in risk assessment, public health, or environmental justice - especially those related to radiological, ecological, and energy-related risks.1 Shrader-Frechette has received the Global Citizenship Award, and the Catholic Digest named her one of 12 "Heroes for the US and the World", published more than 380 articles and 16 books/monographs, “Answering Scientific Attacks on Ethical Imperatives”, Ethics and the Environment, Volume 18, Number 1, Spring 2013, pg 1-17, Published by Indiana University Press, Project Muse ghssk)
Why have so many nations begun and used fission if it is such an expensive
AND
like the United States, continue to subsidize nuclear power more than renewables?

Warming is a global catastrophe- causes extreme damage to ecosystems, world hunger, water shortages, and disease

Shrader- Frechette ’11 (Kristin, Jun 1st, O'Neill Family Professor, Department of Biological Sciences and Department of Philosophy, at the University of Notre Dame. She has previously held senior professorships at the University of California and the University of Florida. Most of Shrader-Frechette's research work analyzes the ethical problems in risk assessment, public health, or environmental justice - especially those related to radiological, ecological, and energy-related risks.1 Shrader-Frechette has received the Global Citizenship Award, and the Catholic Digest named her one of 12 "Heroes for the US and the World", published more than 380 articles and 16 books/monographs, “What Will Work: Fighting Climate Change with Renewable Energy, Not Nuclear Power”, Oxford University Press, https://books.google.com/books?id=bbZoAgAAQBAJanddq=shrader-frechette+nuclearandlr=andsource=gbs_navlinks_s~-~-ghs//sk)
Energy problem (4), CC, presents a possible global catastrophe because GHG emissions
AND
that are consistent with the 2009 US National Academy of Sciences’ report. 31

Thus the plan: The United States federal government ought to prohibit the production of nuclear power.

Part 3: Solvency

Shutdown of nuclear power creates a shift to renewables–they’re cheaper EVEN GIVEN SUBSIDES, more efficient, and don’t have intermittency problems

Shrader- Frechette ’13 (*brackets in original text, Kristin, Spring 2013 , O'Neill Family Professor, Department of Biological Sciences and Department of Philosophy, at the University of Notre Dame. She has previously held senior professorships at the University of California and the University of Florida. Most of Shrader-Frechette's research work analyzes the ethical problems in risk assessment, public health, or environmental justice - especially those related to radiological, ecological, and energy-related risks.1 Shrader-Frechette has received the Global Citizenship Award, and the Catholic Digest named her one of 12 "Heroes for the US and the World", published more than 380 articles and 16 books/monographs, “Answering Scientific Attacks on Ethical Imperatives”, Ethics and the Environment, Volume 18, Number 1, Spring 2013, pg 1-17, Published by Indiana University Press, Project Muse ghssk)
Nuclear proponents like Forsberg (2011), however, disagree. They say that because
AND
intermittency is not a roadblock to the ethical imperative to use renewable energy.

AND–renewables comparatively solve warming better–my evidence is golden–independent, objective university and NGO studies that are peer-reviewed and NOT FUNDED BY NUCLEAR INDUSTRY conclude nuke power produces more emissions than renewables

AND PREFER MY EVIDENCE–MAJOR NUCLEAR EMISSIONS ASSESSMENTS TRIM THE DATA TO ONLY COUNT CARBON EMISSIONS FROM ONE STAGE OF FOURTEEN STAGES
Shrader- Frechette ’13 (Kristin, Spring 2013 , O'Neill Family Professor, Department of Biological Sciences and Department of Philosophy, at the University of Notre Dame. She has previously held senior professorships at the University of California and the University of Florida. Most of Shrader-Frechette's research work analyzes the ethical problems in risk assessment, public health, or environmental justice - especially those related to radiological, ecological, and energy-related risks.1 Shrader-Frechette has received the Global Citizenship Award, and the Catholic Digest named her one of 12 "Heroes for the US and the World", published more than 380 articles and 16 books/monographs, “Answering Scientific Attacks on Ethical Imperatives”, Ethics and the Environment, Volume 18, Number 1, Spring 2013, pg 1-17, Published by Indiana University Press, Project Muse ghssk)
Why do many people mistakenly believe fission is a low-carbon technology? Of
AND
in favor of atomic energy over renewables like wind and solar-PV.

Tournament: Grapevine | Round: 5 | Opponent: LC Anderson JT | Judge: Chris Vincent

Part 1: Framework

I value justice.
Structural violence and oppression is based in moral exclusion, which is fundamentally flawed because exclusion is not based on dessert but rather on arbitrarily perceived differences.

Susan Opotow 01 Susan Opotow is a social and organizational psychologist. Her work examines the intersection of conflict, justice, and identity as they give rise to moral exclusion -- seeing others as outside the scope of justice and as eligible targets of discrimination, exploitation, hate, or violence. She studies moral exclusion and moral inclusion in such everyday contexts as schooling, environmental and public policy conflict, and in more violent contexts, such as deadly wars and the post-war period. She has guest edited The Journal of Social Issues and Social Justice Research and co-edited Identity and the Natural Environment: The Psychological Significance of Nature (MIT Press, 2003). She is associate editor of Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology and Past President of the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, “Social Injustice”, Peace, Conflict, and Violence: Peace Psychology for the 21st Centuryl Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 2001, BE
Both structural and direct violence results from moral justifications and rationalizations.
AND
oneself or one’s group at the expense of others (Tajfel, 1982).

Recognizing moral exclusion and the structural inequality it causes is a prior question to institutional reform

 
Laxer ’14 (Michael, Nov 10th, lives in Toronto where he runs a bookstore with his partner Natalie. Michael has a Degree in History from Glendon College of York University. He is a political activist, a two-time former candidate and former election organizer for the NDP, is a socialist candidate for Toronto City Council in 2014, and is on the executive of the Socialist Party of Ontario., “Part of the problem: Talking about systemic oppression”, Feminist Current, http://www.feministcurrent.com/2014/11/10/part-of-the-problem-talking-about-systemic-oppression/~-~-ghs//sk)
Systemic oppressions result in very real violence and human degradation. Systemic misogyny, patriarchy
AND
see how our society and civilization can ever begin to move past it.

Ideal theory is unattainable and evades issues of reality, failing to solve actual injustice

Mills ‘09 (Mills, Charles. W, May 22nd 2009, department of philosophy and Northwestern, ”Rawls on Race/Race in Rawls.” The Southern Journal of Philosophy, http://havenscenter.wisc.edu/files/Mills-Rawls20on20Race.pdf~-~-ghs//sk)
Now how can this ideal ideal—a society not merely without a past history
AND
to have been of much help when and if it ever did arrive.

Thus, the standard is reducing structural violence.

Part 2: The Myth of Nukes

The nuclear energy industry survives thanks to an aggressive campaign of misinformation created by governments with entrenched economic and military interests

Stoett ’03 (Peter, February 2003, main areas of expertise include international relations and law, global environmental politics, and human rights.  Prior to joining Concordia University in 1998 taught at the University of British Columbia, Simon Fraser University, the University of Guelph, and the University of Waterloo, written, co-written, and co-edited over ten books and over 50 peer reviewed articles, chapters in edited books, and occasional papers. He has conducted research in Europe (including the Balkans), eastern, southern and western Africa, central America, and Asia. From April to July 2013 he was an Erasmus Fellow and taught at the International Institute for Social Studies at the Hague, Netherlands. From January-June, 2012 he was the Fulbright Visiting Research Chair in Canadian-American Relations at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars’ Canada Institute, in Washington, D.C., He is also a Senior Research Fellow with the Europe-based Earth Systems Governance Project of the International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change, PhD from Queen’s University, “Toward Renewed Legitimacy? Nuclear Power, Global Warming, and Security”, Global Environmental Politics, Volume 3, Number 1, February 2003, pp. 99-116 (Article), Published by The MIT Press, Project Muse ghssk)
Despite the neoliberal agenda’s commitment to “free market” enterprise, we see that
AND
and the survival of a troubled, and highly subsidised, nuclear industry.

AND–despite its problems nuclear power continues to enjoy heavy state subsidies because governments view nuclear power as critical to security legitimacy

Stoett ’03 (Peter, February 2003, main areas of expertise include international relations and law, global environmental politics, and human rights.  Prior to joining Concordia University in 1998 taught at the University of British Columbia, Simon Fraser University, the University of Guelph, and the University of Waterloo, written, co-written, and co-edited over ten books and over 50 peer reviewed articles, chapters in edited books, and occasional papers. He has conducted research in Europe (including the Balkans), eastern, southern and western Africa, central America, and Asia. From April to July 2013 he was an Erasmus Fellow and taught at the International Institute for Social Studies at the Hague, Netherlands. From January-June, 2012 he was the Fulbright Visiting Research Chair in Canadian-American Relations at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars’ Canada Institute, in Washington, D.C., He is also a Senior Research Fellow with the Europe-based Earth Systems Governance Project of the International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change, PhD from Queen’s University, “Toward Renewed Legitimacy? Nuclear Power, Global Warming, and Security”, Global Environmental Politics, Volume 3, Number 1, February 2003, pp. 99-116 (Article), Published by The MIT Press, Project Muse ghssk)
In the United States and elsewhere, periodic renewals in the hopes for nu-
AND
is intended largely to provide the necessary background for such a research project.

AND– the state is obsessed with nuclear power because of the military industrial complex– means that renewables always get overlooked for more costly nuclear alternative

Shrader- Frechette ’08 (Kristin, June 23rd, O'Neill Family Professor, Department of Biological Sciences and Department of Philosophy, at the University of Notre Dame. She has previously held senior professorships at the University of California and the University of Florida. Most of Shrader-Frechette's research work analyzes the ethical problems in risk assessment, public health, or environmental justice - especially those related to radiological, ecological, and energy-related risks.1 Shrader-Frechette has received the Global Citizenship Award, and the Catholic Digest named her one of 12 "Heroes for the US and the World", published more than 380 articles and 16 books/monographs, “Five Myths About Nuclear Energy”, America Magazine, http://americamagazine.org/issue/660/article/five-myths-about-nuclear-energy~-~-ghs//sk)
If atomic energy is really so risky and expensive, why did the United States
AND
virtually all of its support to a riskier, more costly nuclear alternative?

A couple of impacts:
The nuclear industry profits from and re-entrenches environmental racism- need to shift to renewables now

Chen ’11 (Michelle, March 23rd, Colorlines' Global Justice columnist. She is a regular contributor on labor issues at In These Times, as well as a member of the magazine's Board of Editors. Michelle's reporting has appeared in Ms. Magazine, AirAmerica, Alternet, Newsday, the Progressive Media Project, and her old zine, cain. Prior to joining Colorlines, she wrote for the independent news collective The NewStandard, “The Radioactive Racism Behind Nuclear Energy”, Colorlines, http://www.colorlines.com/articles/radioactive-racism-behind-nuclear-energy~-~-ghs//sk)
When the apocalyptic cloud erupted over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the world woke up to
AND
temptations of nuclear power may continue to eclipse fears of its global consequences.

Nuclear plants exploit poor migrant labor and deem workers expendable – colonialism manifests itself through governments taking land from local farmers and maintaining closed contracts that doom vulnerable populations

Biswas 14, Shampa Biswas Paul Garrett Professor of Political Science at Whitman College, Ph.D., Political Science, University of Minnesota, 1999, M.A., International Relations, Maxwell School of Citizenship, Syracuse University, 1990, M.A., Economics, Dehli School of Economics, University of Dehli, 1988, “Nuclear Desire: Power and the Postcolonial Nuclear Order,” Chapter: Costly Weapons: The Political Economy of Nuclear Power, University of Minnesota Press, 2014, ghsBZ
It should not surprise us, then, as we are learning with the nuclear
AND
conditions of their making lays bare the severe e ects of nuclear nonuse. 

Renewable energy is better and will fill in, nuke power grows too slowly and distracts from this development

Parenti ’12 (Christian, April 4th, Christian Parenti is the author of "The Freedom: Shadows and Hallucinations in Occupied Iraq" (New Press) and a visiting fellow at CUNY's Center for Place, Culture and Politics., “Why Nuclear Power Is Not the Answer to Global Warming”, AlterNet, http://www.alternet.org/story/154854/why_nuclear_power_is_not_the_answer_to_global_warming?page=2~-~-ghs//sk)
An authoritative study by the investment bank Lazard Ltd. found that wind beat nuclear
AND
Atomic power is the fuel of the future”—and always will be.

AND- err on the side of aff evidence on warming–the nuclear industry and by extension the government fabricate studies to bury the disads of nuclear power

 
Shrader- Frechette ’13 (*brackets in original text, Kristin, Spring 2013 , O'Neill Family Professor, Department of Biological Sciences and Department of Philosophy, at the University of Notre Dame. She has previously held senior professorships at the University of California and the University of Florida. Most of Shrader-Frechette's research work analyzes the ethical problems in risk assessment, public health, or environmental justice - especially those related to radiological, ecological, and energy-related risks.1 Shrader-Frechette has received the Global Citizenship Award, and the Catholic Digest named her one of 12 "Heroes for the US and the World", published more than 380 articles and 16 books/monographs, “Answering Scientific Attacks on Ethical Imperatives”, Ethics and the Environment, Volume 18, Number 1, Spring 2013, pg 1-17, Published by Indiana University Press, Project Muse ghssk)
Why have so many nations begun and used fission if it is such an expensive
AND
like the United States, continue to subsidize nuclear power more than renewables?

Warming causes racism, sexism, and oppression.

David Naguib Pellow 12, Ph.D. Professor, Don Martindale Endowed Chair – University of Minnesota, “Climate Disruption in the Global South and in African American Communities: Key Issues, Frameworks, and Possibilities for Climate Justice,” February 2012, http://www.jointcenter.org/sites/default/files/upload/research/files/White_Paper_Climate_Disruption_final.pdf
It is now known unequivocally that significant warming of the  atmosphere is occurring, coinciding
AND
must reduce our emissions  and consumption here at home in the global North.

Thus the plan: The United States federal government ought to prohibit the production of nuclear power.

Part 3: Solvency

Shutdown of nuclear power creates a shift to renewables–they’re cheaper EVEN GIVEN SUBSIDES, more efficient, and don’t have intermittency problems
Shrader- Frechette ’13 (*brackets in original text, Kristin, Spring 2013 , O'Neill Family Professor, Department of Biological Sciences and Department of Philosophy, at the University of Notre Dame. She has previously held senior professorships at the University of California and the University of Florida. Most of Shrader-Frechette's research work analyzes the ethical problems in risk assessment, public health, or environmental justice - especially those related to radiological, ecological, and energy-related risks.1 Shrader-Frechette has received the Global Citizenship Award, and the Catholic Digest named her one of 12 "Heroes for the US and the World", published more than 380 articles and 16 books/monographs, “Answering Scientific Attacks on Ethical Imperatives”, Ethics and the Environment, Volume 18, Number 1, Spring 2013, pg 1-17, Published by Indiana University Press, Project Muse ghssk)
Nuclear proponents like Forsberg (2011), however, disagree. They say that because
AND
intermittency is not a roadblock to the ethical imperative to use renewable energy.

AND–renewables comparatively solve warming better–my evidence is golden–independent, objective university and NGO studies that are peer-reviewed and NOT FUNDED BY NUCLEAR INDUSTRY conclude nuke power produces more emissions than renewables

AND PREFER MY EVIDENCE–MAJOR NUCLEAR EMISSIONS ASSESSMENTS TRIM THE DATA TO ONLY COUNT CARBON EMISSIONS FROM ONE STAGE OF FOURTEEN STAGES
Shrader- Frechette ’13 (Kristin, Spring 2013 , O'Neill Family Professor, Department of Biological Sciences and Department of Philosophy, at the University of Notre Dame. She has previously held senior professorships at the University of California and the University of Florida. Most of Shrader-Frechette's research work analyzes the ethical problems in risk assessment, public health, or environmental justice - especially those related to radiological, ecological, and energy-related risks.1 Shrader-Frechette has received the Global Citizenship Award, and the Catholic Digest named her one of 12 "Heroes for the US and the World", published more than 380 articles and 16 books/monographs, “Answering Scientific Attacks on Ethical Imperatives”, Ethics and the Environment, Volume 18, Number 1, Spring 2013, pg 1-17, Published by Indiana University Press, Project Muse ghssk)
Why do many people mistakenly believe fission is a low-carbon technology? Of
AND
in favor of atomic energy over renewables like wind and solar-PV.

Tournament: St Marks | Round: Octas | Opponent: Winston Churchill BW | Judge: Lawrence Zhou, Scott Phillips, Demarcus Powell

Part 1: Framework

I value morality.
Structural violence and oppression is based in moral exclusion, which is fundamentally flawed because exclusion is not based on dessert but rather on arbitrarily perceived differences.

Susan Opotow 01 Susan Opotow is a social and organizational psychologist. Her work examines the intersection of conflict, justice, and identity as they give rise to moral exclusion -- seeing others as outside the scope of justice and as eligible targets of discrimination, exploitation, hate, or violence. She studies moral exclusion and moral inclusion in such everyday contexts as schooling, environmental and public policy conflict, and in more violent contexts, such as deadly wars and the post-war period. She has guest edited The Journal of Social Issues and Social Justice Research and co-edited Identity and the Natural Environment: The Psychological Significance of Nature (MIT Press, 2003). She is associate editor of Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology and Past President of the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, “Social Injustice”, Peace, Conflict, and Violence: Peace Psychology for the 21st Centuryl Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 2001, BE
Both structural and direct violence results from moral justifications and rationalizations.
AND
oneself or one’s group at the expense of others (Tajfel, 1982).

Recognizing moral exclusion and the structural inequality it causes is a prior question to institutional reform

Laxer ’14 (Michael, Nov 10th, lives in Toronto where he runs a bookstore with his partner Natalie. Michael has a Degree in History from Glendon College of York University. He is a political activist, a two-time former candidate and former election organizer for the NDP, is a socialist candidate for Toronto City Council in 2014, and is on the executive of the Socialist Party of Ontario., “Part of the problem: Talking about systemic oppression”, Feminist Current, http://www.feministcurrent.com/2014/11/10/part-of-the-problem-talking-about-systemic-oppression/~-~-ghs//sk)
Systemic oppressions result in very real violence and human degradation. Systemic misogyny, patriarchy
AND
see how our society and civilization can ever begin to move past it.

Ideal theory is unattainable and evades issues of reality, failing to solve actual injustice

Mills ‘09 (Mills, Charles. W, May 22nd 2009, department of philosophy and Northwestern, ”Rawls on Race/Race in Rawls.” The Southern Journal of Philosophy, http://havenscenter.wisc.edu/files/Mills-Rawls20on20Race.pdf~-~-ghs//sk)
Now how can this ideal ideal—a society not merely without a past history
AND
to have been of much help when and if it ever did arrive.

Thus, the standard is reducing structural violence.

Part 2: The Myth of Nukes

The nuclear energy industry survives thanks to an aggressive campaign of misinformation created by governments with entrenched economic and military interests

Stoett ’03 (Peter, February 2003, main areas of expertise include international relations and law, global environmental politics, and human rights.  Prior to joining Concordia University in 1998 taught at the University of British Columbia, Simon Fraser University, the University of Guelph, and the University of Waterloo, written, co-written, and co-edited over ten books and over 50 peer reviewed articles, chapters in edited books, and occasional papers. He has conducted research in Europe (including the Balkans), eastern, southern and western Africa, central America, and Asia. From April to July 2013 he was an Erasmus Fellow and taught at the International Institute for Social Studies at the Hague, Netherlands. From January-June, 2012 he was the Fulbright Visiting Research Chair in Canadian-American Relations at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars’ Canada Institute, in Washington, D.C., He is also a Senior Research Fellow with the Europe-based Earth Systems Governance Project of the International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change, PhD from Queen’s University, “Toward Renewed Legitimacy? Nuclear Power, Global Warming, and Security”, Global Environmental Politics, Volume 3, Number 1, February 2003, pp. 99-116 (Article), Published by The MIT Press, Project Muse ghssk)
Despite the neoliberal agenda’s commitment to “free market” enterprise, we see that
AND
and the survival of a troubled, and highly subsidised, nuclear industry.

AND–despite its problems nuclear power continues to enjoy heavy state subsidies because governments view nuclear power as critical to security legitimacy

 
Stoett ’03 (Peter, February 2003, main areas of expertise include international relations and law, global environmental politics, and human rights.  Prior to joining Concordia University in 1998 taught at the University of British Columbia, Simon Fraser University, the University of Guelph, and the University of Waterloo, written, co-written, and co-edited over ten books and over 50 peer reviewed articles, chapters in edited books, and occasional papers. He has conducted research in Europe (including the Balkans), eastern, southern and western Africa, central America, and Asia. From April to July 2013 he was an Erasmus Fellow and taught at the International Institute for Social Studies at the Hague, Netherlands. From January-June, 2012 he was the Fulbright Visiting Research Chair in Canadian-American Relations at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars’ Canada Institute, in Washington, D.C., He is also a Senior Research Fellow with the Europe-based Earth Systems Governance Project of the International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change, PhD from Queen’s University, “Toward Renewed Legitimacy? Nuclear Power, Global Warming, and Security”, Global Environmental Politics, Volume 3, Number 1, February 2003, pp. 99-116 (Article), Published by The MIT Press, Project Muse ghssk)
In the United States and elsewhere, periodic renewals in the hopes for nu-
AND
is intended largely to provide the necessary background for such a research project.

AND– the state is obsessed with nuclear power because of the military industrial complex– means that renewables always get overlooked for more costly nuclear alternative

Shrader- Frechette ’08 (Kristin, June 23rd, O'Neill Family Professor, Department of Biological Sciences and Department of Philosophy, at the University of Notre Dame. She has previously held senior professorships at the University of California and the University of Florida. Most of Shrader-Frechette's research work analyzes the ethical problems in risk assessment, public health, or environmental justice - especially those related to radiological, ecological, and energy-related risks.1 Shrader-Frechette has received the Global Citizenship Award, and the Catholic Digest named her one of 12 "Heroes for the US and the World", published more than 380 articles and 16 books/monographs, “Five Myths About Nuclear Energy”, America Magazine, http://americamagazine.org/issue/660/article/five-myths-about-nuclear-energy~-~-ghs//sk)
If atomic energy is really so risky and expensive, why did the United States
AND
virtually all of its support to a riskier, more costly nuclear alternative?

A couple of impacts:
The nuclear industry profits from and re-entrenches environmental racism- need to shift to renewables now

 
Chen ’11 (Michelle, March 23rd, Colorlines' Global Justice columnist. She is a regular contributor on labor issues at In These Times, as well as a member of the magazine's Board of Editors. Michelle's reporting has appeared in Ms. Magazine, AirAmerica, Alternet, Newsday, the Progressive Media Project, and her old zine, cain. Prior to joining Colorlines, she wrote for the independent news collective The NewStandard, “The Radioactive Racism Behind Nuclear Energy”, Colorlines, http://www.colorlines.com/articles/radioactive-racism-behind-nuclear-energy~-~-ghs//sk)
When the apocalyptic cloud erupted over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the world woke up to
AND
temptations of nuclear power may continue to eclipse fears of its global consequences.

Nuclear plants exploit poor migrant labor and deem workers expendable – colonialism manifests itself through governments taking land from local farmers and maintaining closed contracts that doom vulnerable populations

Biswas 14, Shampa Biswas Paul Garrett Professor of Political Science at Whitman College, Ph.D., Political Science, University of Minnesota, 1999, M.A., International Relations, Maxwell School of Citizenship, Syracuse University, 1990, M.A., Economics, Dehli School of Economics, University of Dehli, 1988, “Nuclear Desire: Power and the Postcolonial Nuclear Order,” Chapter: Costly Weapons: The Political Economy of Nuclear Power, University of Minnesota Press, 2014, ghsBZ
It should not surprise us, then, as we are learning with the nuclear
AND
conditions of their making lays bare the severe e ects of nuclear nonuse. 

Renewable energy is better and will fill in, nuke power grows too slowly and distracts from this development

 
Parenti ’12 (Christian, April 4th, Christian Parenti is the author of "The Freedom: Shadows and Hallucinations in Occupied Iraq" (New Press) and a visiting fellow at CUNY's Center for Place, Culture and Politics., “Why Nuclear Power Is Not the Answer to Global Warming”, AlterNet, http://www.alternet.org/story/154854/why_nuclear_power_is_not_the_answer_to_global_warming?page=2~-~-ghs//sk)
An authoritative study by the investment bank Lazard Ltd. found that wind beat nuclear
AND
Atomic power is the fuel of the future”—and always will be.

AND- err on the side of aff evidence on warming–the nuclear industry and by extension the government fabricate studies to bury the disads of nuclear power

Shrader- Frechette ’13 (*brackets in original text, Kristin, Spring 2013 , O'Neill Family Professor, Department of Biological Sciences and Department of Philosophy, at the University of Notre Dame. She has previously held senior professorships at the University of California and the University of Florida. Most of Shrader-Frechette's research work analyzes the ethical problems in risk assessment, public health, or environmental justice - especially those related to radiological, ecological, and energy-related risks.1 Shrader-Frechette has received the Global Citizenship Award, and the Catholic Digest named her one of 12 "Heroes for the US and the World", published more than 380 articles and 16 books/monographs, “Answering Scientific Attacks on Ethical Imperatives”, Ethics and the Environment, Volume 18, Number 1, Spring 2013, pg 1-17, Published by Indiana University Press, Project Muse ghssk)
Why have so many nations begun and used fission if it is such an expensive
AND
like the United States, continue to subsidize nuclear power more than renewables?

Warming causes racism, sexism, and oppression.

 
David Naguib Pellow 12, Ph.D. Professor, Don Martindale Endowed Chair – University of Minnesota, “Climate Disruption in the Global South and in African American Communities: Key Issues, Frameworks, and Possibilities for Climate Justice,” February 2012, http://www.jointcenter.org/sites/default/files/upload/research/files/White_Paper_Climate_Disruption_final.pdf
It is now known unequivocally that significant warming of the  atmosphere is occurring, coinciding
AND
must reduce our emissions  and consumption here at home in the global North.

Nuclear power production in Puerto Rico bad

ANS16: American Nuclear Society a not-for-profit, international, scientific and educational organization. It was established by a group of individuals who recognized the need to unify the professional activities within the various fields of nuclear science and technology., "Nuclear Energy for Puerto Rico," All Things Nuclear Cafe, April 14, 2016, GUMM
Puerto Rico, as an island nation, was interested in nuclear energy because of
AND
Energy (as successor to the AEC for plant ownership) continues regularly.

Thus the plan: The United States federal government and the Government of Puerto Rico ought to prohibit the production of nuclear power.

Part 3: Solvency

Shutdown of nuclear power creates a shift to renewables –they’re cheaper EVEN GIVEN SUBSIDES, more efficient, and don’t have intermittency problems

 
Shrader- Frechette ’13 (*brackets in original text, Kristin, Spring 2013 , O'Neill Family Professor, Department of Biological Sciences and Department of Philosophy, at the University of Notre Dame. She has previously held senior professorships at the University of California and the University of Florida. Most of Shrader-Frechette's research work analyzes the ethical problems in risk assessment, public health, or environmental justice - especially those related to radiological, ecological, and energy-related risks.1 Shrader-Frechette has received the Global Citizenship Award, and the Catholic Digest named her one of 12 "Heroes for the US and the World", published more than 380 articles and 16 books/monographs, “Answering Scientific Attacks on Ethical Imperatives”, Ethics and the Environment, Volume 18, Number 1, Spring 2013, pg 1-17, Published by Indiana University Press, Project Muse ghssk)
Nuclear proponents like Forsberg (2011), however, disagree. They say that because
AND
intermittency is not a roadblock to the ethical imperative to use renewable energy.

AND–renewables comparatively solve warming better–my evidence is golden–independent, objective university and NGO studies that are peer-reviewed and NOT FUNDED BY NUCLEAR INDUSTRY conclude nuke power produces more emissions than renewables

 
AND PREFER MY EVIDENCE–MAJOR NUCLEAR EMISSIONS ASSESSMENTS TRIM THE DATA TO ONLY COUNT CARBON EMISSIONS FROM ONE STAGE OF FOURTEEN STAGES
Shrader- Frechette ’13 (Kristin, Spring 2013 , O'Neill Family Professor, Department of Biological Sciences and Department of Philosophy, at the University of Notre Dame. She has previously held senior professorships at the University of California and the University of Florida. Most of Shrader-Frechette's research work analyzes the ethical problems in risk assessment, public health, or environmental justice - especially those related to radiological, ecological, and energy-related risks.1 Shrader-Frechette has received the Global Citizenship Award, and the Catholic Digest named her one of 12 "Heroes for the US and the World", published more than 380 articles and 16 books/monographs, “Answering Scientific Attacks on Ethical Imperatives”, Ethics and the Environment, Volume 18, Number 1, Spring 2013, pg 1-17, Published by Indiana University Press, Project Muse ghssk)
Why do many people mistakenly believe fission is a low-carbon technology? Of
AND
in favor of atomic energy over renewables like wind and solar-PV.

AND–renewables are ready–Germany Spain and India prove

 
Shrader- Frechette ’13 (Kristin, Spring 2013 , O'Neill Family Professor, Department of Biological Sciences and Department of Philosophy, at the University of Notre Dame. She has previously held senior professorships at the University of California and the University of Florida. Most of Shrader-Frechette's research work analyzes the ethical problems in risk assessment, public health, or environmental justice - especially those related to radiological, ecological, and energy-related risks.1 Shrader-Frechette has received the Global Citizenship Award, and the Catholic Digest named her one of 12 "Heroes for the US and the World", published more than 380 articles and 16 books/monographs, “Answering Scientific Attacks on Ethical Imperatives”, Ethics and the Environment, Volume 18, Number 1, Spring 2013, pg 1-17, Published by Indiana University Press, Project Muse ghssk)
However, nuclear proponents often say renewable-energy technology is not yet ready,
AND
of renewables should hinder implementation of the ethical imperative to use renewable energy.