Tournament: Lincoln Southwest | Round: 1 | Opponent: Infor | Judge: mation
Contact: jss229438@gmail.com 

Pronouns: they/her

Tournament: Lincoln Southwest | Round: 4 | Opponent: Lincoln East JW | Judge: Alex Bartlett

Value: Justice- defined by giving each their due

Criterion: Protection of Citizen’s rights

The protection of Citizen’s rights are mandatory to the achievement of Justice because the rights of citizens are that which is due to them.

Contention 1: Accountability

A Qualified immunity is excused ignorance.

Armacost 98 { Barbara, Professor of Law at University of Virginia Qualified Immunity: Ignorance Excused, http://www.law.virginia.edu/pdf/faculty/hein/armacost/51vand_l_rev583_1998.pdf, pg 2}
In this Article, Professor Armacost uses fair notice in criminal law as a paradigm for analyzing the role of not
...AND...
 attach. In such cases, qualified immunity's notice inquiry-whether the law was clear-acts as a proxy for fault. 

B) Qualified immunity has been used to protect cops in cases where constitutional rights had been clearly violated.

Chemerinsky 2014, Erwin, dean of the School of Law at the University of California, Irvine, “How the Supreme Court Protects Bad Cops,” New York Times, 26 August.
The Supreme Court has used this doctrine in recent years to deny damages to an eighth-grade girl who was strip-s
...AND...
able in court. How many more deaths and how many more riots will it take before the Supreme Court changes course?

In summation, the author is saying that crimes are evaluated based upon the wrongfulness of the actions, but public authorities are held to different standards and that qualified immunity is an excuse for their ignorance of the law.  Onto our V/C debate: since QI is an ignorant excuse for public authorities, abolition of the ground of excuses for public authorities will result in holding police people more accountable to their actions, and thereby protect citizen’s rights when police people don’t have this venue to evade the punishments.

Contention 2: QI and Marginalized Communities

A Qualified immunity was won by the police people who brutally shoot Teresa Sheenah.

Liptak 15 { ,Adam,  covers the United States Supreme Court and writes "Sidebar," a column on legal developments. A graduate of Yale Law School, he practiced law  "Supreme Court Sides With Police in a Shooting, and Against a State on Taxes," New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/19/us/supreme-courts-rules-on-a-police-shooting-state-taxes-and-prisoners-lawsuits.html?_r=1®ister=facebook }
The court sided with two San Francisco police officers who in 2008 shot Teresa Sheehan, a mentally ill woman, wh
...AND...
San Francisco’s shift in its legal position as the case proceeded had made it impossible to address the question.

B) The court has a long history of discounting the interests of minority populations–qualified immunity just exacerbates racism entrenched in the system.

Reinhardt 15 , Stephen R.  Circuit Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, “The Demise of Habeas Corpus and the Rise of Qualified Immunity: The Court’s Ever Increasing Lim- itations on the Development and Enforcement of Constitutional Rights and some Particularly Unfortunate Consequences,” Michigan Law Review, Vol. 113, 2015.
The Court has often remarked that “to perform its high function in the best way, ’justice must satisfy the app
...AND...
deral statute, rather than the more lenient state statute, were seemingly reserved for black defendants alone.171

The first contention shows how police can claim QI, when their actions were clearly wrong and the second is relevant because it shows the court's bias against PoC; if QI excludes rulings of Constitutionality and if the courts have a negative bias towards PoC then that allows for the shaping of laws that shall violate citizen’s rights.  By the abolition of this police tactic of evading responsibility, we are able to punish them according their actions and therefore hold government legitimacy, when citizens have their rights upheld.

Overview then Voter

Our first contention says that QI is an ignorant excuse for public officials  and that the ignorant excuse, in many case, been proved to be dangerous. Our second contention says that QI has been used many times against marginalised communities to marginalise them even further.

Now onto voter: The CP solves better because all their advantages (Discretion) could be flowed onto our side.The net benefit would be the better protection of marginalized bodies and better upholding of police accountability. Therefore we meet the value of justice better and urge the judge to vote negative.

Tournament: Lincoln Southwest | Round: 2 | Opponent: Lincoln East SB | Judge: Fred Robertson

My value for today’s round will be that of justice, defined simply and generally as giving each their due.

The topic frames the issue of police corruption and oversight in the wrong way; rather than approaching the issue of qualified immunity through a lens of incrementalism and reformism, one needs to approach it through the lens of underlying forces that contribute to police corruption and overreach. And thus, my criterion for achieving justice is through change decentered from reform.

Contention 1: Rejection of incrementalism

A)One needs to reject all instances of incrementalism in policy-making, these are short-term methods which ultimately fail. Cassandra Shaylor writes,

Shaylor, Cassandra. “Reform And Abolition: Points of Tension And Connection.” Defending Justice. No Date. Web. October 07, 2016. http://www.publiceye.org/defendingjustice/organizing/shaylor_reform.html
Because the existing framework for arguments for changes to the system has become so limited, in many instances
...AND...
oach, abolishing three strikes is a step toward eliminating the prison as a central feature of contemporary life.

B)A methodology of decarceration is the only solution to the problems that the prison industrial complex poses; the praxis of the affirmative doesn’t go far enough. Cassandra Shaylor writes further,

Rather than proposing reforms that are readily co-opted to grow the prison system, arguments can be made that critique prison conditions while also challenging the expansion of prisons. Activists can: argue that decarceration should be the answer to prison overcrowding; organize urban/rural coalitions to close prisons in rural locations and stop new prisons from being constructed; work against privatization while simultaneously fighting against imprisonment in any facility; argue for improvements to healthcare that actually decrease prison spending by providing alternative sentencing and/or releasing sick people in prison.

Contention 2: Cooption and Race

A)The affirmative holds no way of solving for their claims- the state coopts all instances of reformism to meet their own ends, and a limited approach to limiting qualified immunity will do just that. She writes again,

In many instances, the Right attempts to co-opt reformist language to its own ends to justify and grow the system. Efforts in California to implement a strategy of decarceration for seriously and terminally ill prisoners through compassionate release have been co-opted by that state, for example. California anti-prison activists have argued that prisons are ill-equipped to deal with the needs of seriously and terminally ill prisoners and therefore they should be released to their families or to hospices in their communities. However, in an effort to keep people in prison and increase the number of beds within the system, the rhetoric deployed by anti-prison activists to persuade politicians and the general public that people in prison who are dying deserve to die with dignity is being used by the California Department of Corrections itself. The CDC is now arguing for the creation of hospices within prisons and corrections-controlled skilled nursing facilities in the community that could house prisoners in locked wings.9 This rhetorical reappropriation has had a secondary effect on the prison population by obstructing activist efforts to prevent people, whose seriously compromised health render them particularly vulnerable to the harms of imprisonment from going to prison in the first place-mainly because the State can argue that such people's health will no longer be compromised during imprisonment, so the argument goes, because there are places within the prison to accommodate them.10 Because the rhetoric of public safety has become so entrenched, the State can make the claim that the expansion of the system into skilled nursing care is necessary because a person in prison is a threat to society merely by virtue of her status as a prisoner, regardless of her physical or mental capacity. In fact, the strength of those arguments has increased to the point of absurdity: ostensibly out of security concerns, in 2004 California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed a bill that would have saved California millions of dolllars by allowing the early release of the 13 people in California's prisons determined to be permanently unable to tend to any of their daily needs or in a vegetative state.

B) Reformism fails in the context of decarceration. State institutions normalize the racial order. The plan may win an isolated battle, but will lose the war. Michelle Alexander writes in 2012,

Alexander, Michelle. “New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration In The Age of Colorblindness.” BOOK. 2012. Web. October 07, 2016. https://www.amazon.com/New-Jim-CrowIncarceration-Colorblindness/dp/1595586431.
The list could go on, of course, but the point has been made. The central question for racial justice advocates
...AND...
tem of control and every racial caste system that has existed in the United States or anywhere else in the world.

Contention three: What can we do

Change only exists when we fully close prisons, an affirmation of complete decarceration. Maya Schenwar writes in 2014,

Schenwar, Maya. “Locked Down, Locked Out: Why Prison Doesn’t Work and How We Can Do Better.” Berrett-Koehler. 2014. Web. October 07, 2016. http://www.alternet.org/books/what-if-we-abolished-prisons.
Historian and activist Dan Berger points to the importance of such concrete change-making— closing buildings, re
...AND...
ard un-canceling people—not just by fighting for their release, but by recognizing and supporting their humanity.

Underview

Our first contention speaks to how reformism QI isn’t tackling the root of the problem and it shall be further reciprocate the corruption.
Our second contention speaks to how reforming QI will only enable co-option by the right; further using the reforms to the advantage of the prison-industrial complex.

Tournament: Elkhorn | Round: 5 | Opponent: Southwest RG | Judge: Woodford
Value: Anti-oppression, as defined by protecting the rights of all humans.

Criterion: Minimizing Structural Violence.

Minimizing structural violence is essential to reaching anti-oppression; our institutions are key perpetrators of violence upon marginalised groups.
We negate that the The United States ought to limit qualified immunity for police officers. To clarify, we don’t want any reforms to qualified immunity, we don’t even want to touch anything that deals with the Political. Berlant and Warren will give you reasons why. 

Therefore, Cruel Optimism is the attachment to something that continually hurts us; It’s the want of x but x is what is keeping us from flourishing. We do this because it’s what is normal, because it is familiar.

(lauren berlant, 2006, professor of literature at the university of chicago, “cruel optimism” in differences pg 24)
In the introduction ... throughout this book.

And Cruel Optimism definitely applies to our relation with the Political. Dr. Warren says that The Political brainwashes us  into a “Hopeful” cycle that repeatedly sustain anti-blackness. Dr. warren explains how the Political tells us to stay for that emancipation is soon to come but black bodies only then find recurring violence in their wake. We need to recognise this structural violence and fixing Qualified Immunity just further propagates the cycle.

Warren 2015 {Calvin, Assistant Professor of American Studies at George Washington University, “Black Nihilism and the Politics of Hope” p 30-31, We don´t advocate ablist lang}
Throughout this essay ... political hope perpetuates.

The aff’s adherence to reforming Qualified Immunity further reinforces the cruel optimism towards the exclusive Political, therefore reifies the structural violence that the Political inflicts.

Berlant 2006 (lauren, professor of literature at the university of chicago, “cruel optimism” in differences pg 227)
This is why ... of political depression.

Onto our harms:

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, one in three black men can expect to go to prison in their lifetime.

Why is this shit still happening in 2016? The underpinnings of black oppression that happened 1800s are still here. When Slavery was abolished the black oppression just materialised with a different face; Jim crow. After Jim crow, it took up in other forms; such as housing discrimination and mass incarceration, which is the dominant one now. Mass incarceration still allows for the same underpinnings of black oppression that existed during slavery. When people leave jail, they are denied job opportunities, they are denied healthcare, they are even denied the right to vote. Even more so, the 13th amendment says that we can subject “criminals” to slavery as a punishment. So basically the underpinnings of black oppression during the slavery era still exists to this day, in the form of mass incarceration, where black bodies are overcriminalized and through that venue they are basically ostracised from society and denied basic human rights. Is this really a just government, much less a just political system.

Tournament: Lincoln Southwest | Round: 4 | Opponent: Lincoln East JW | Judge: Alex Bartlett

Spreading is bad because it upholds an ableist mindset.

1. Visual processing (dis)order: VPD is a (dis)ability wherein the person with VPD aren’t able to interpret and translate the data they are getting from their eyes to concepts. Therefore forcing a huge chunk of info on someone with VPD and, additionally, reading extremely quickly causes an unfair burden on them. Moreso people with VPD aren’t able spread. Conclusively, spreading results in an information-skew, enabling the debaters with no VPD to gain a unfair leverage.

2. Audio processing (dis)order: People with APD have a harder time translating spoken words to concepts. Speaking at a very quick rate excludes people with APD to grasp concepts and to engage within debate. This is exclusionary to people with APD because they can’t pick up the volumes of spoken info as quick.

3. Ultimately, people who have  Audio-Visual Processing (Dis)orders, are totally excluded from Debate, all due to the ablist mindset that everyone has the abilities in regard to speaking, hearing and writing. 

Impact: Spreading causes a time skew. I don’t have any of these specifc (dis)abilities but spreading spills over into other rounds and could affect other people with these. Nonetheless this is a kritik of their able-noramtivity and that people don’t have these (dis)abilities. 

Standards

1- Education: This destroys their education claims because we come to debate to learn how to better the world and hear from different oppressed voices, but education that is open to a limited few and enables to privileging of “abled-bodies” over bodies with (dis)abilities is inherently bad.  

2- Fairness: First off, debate with spreading as the medium of information sharing excludes people with processing (dis)orders. And secondly, this buys into a bigger mindset of able-normativity which inflicts harms on people with (dis)abilities everyday, especially in the academic field.

Tournament: Millard West | Round: 3 | Opponent: Southwest | Judge: Millard West Judge
Value: Anti-oppression, as defined by protecting the rights of all humans.
Criterion: Minimizing Violence.
Minimizing violence is essential to anti-oppression because violence is the tool that is used to suppress marginalised groups and damage us severely. Our Neg will meet this because we drastically change how we view violence and give the best method for deconstructing it. 

We negate the resolution

The Aff explains police violence in terms of structural circumstances, or more specifically Qualified immunity- that only reifies violence because the harm is seen as forming from a structural deficient. The Aff doesn’t see that violence happens from an individual to individual basis- we can say so due to their focus on reforming QI and believing that that will solve for police violence. This saps any agency to change violence, to change the world.
Kappeler 1
{Susanne Kappeler, Freelance Writer, The Will To Violence, 1995, pg 4-5, 1995}
If we nevertheless continue ... not to use violence.

Not seeing and solving for violence on a personal level will allow for violence to continue. This not only means that we should see police violence as occurring from each individual’s own volition, but also includes our own self investigation as to how we further propagate violence, ourselves. Rhetoric about how Violence isn't at our disposal on a day to day basis is bound to let the violence continue.  
Kappeler 2
Susanne Kappeler, Freelance Writer, The Will To Violence _{1995, pg 8-9}

Violence — what we usually recognize as such... them to happen.

YOU MUST REJECT THE AFF -  the structures that cause us to ignore our will to violence are so embedded in our thinking that we have to take a complete step away from them on every conceivable level.
Kappeler 3
Susanne Kappeler, Freelance Writer, A History of Violence, 1995, pg 7
A decision to violate is ... if not our dearest.

Thus the alternative is to start any engagement against violence by personal examination- not only does this mean that the police officers should do so, but we as debaters need to do so also. We need to move away from discourses about a bigger structure, such as reforming Qualified immunity and see that the bigger structures are firstly made up of individuals, us and that violence occurs at this level.
Kappeler 4
Susanne Kappeler, Freelance Writer, The Will To Violence, 1995, pg 5-6
A politics aiming at ... context of the relation.

Tournament: Fremont | Round: 3 | Opponent: LSW Danny | Judge: John Holen
Costumes are treated as free speech under the First Amendment. Universities can’t constitutionally punish students based on their attire, this includes black/red facing
Friedersdorf  2015. (“The Anti-Free Speech Movement at UCLA.” Staff writer at The Atlantic. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/10/the-anti-free-speech-movement-at-ucla/410638/. Accessed 12/27/16.)
UCLA law professor ... choose their speech.

EMU students had thrown a party where they red faced, this is what they did
David 15 {4/19, College Students Dress In 'Red Face, Berate Native Elder: 'Go Back To Reservation, You F*cking Indian'
, http://crooksandliars.com/2015/04/college-student-dress-red-face-berate}
A group of college ... sort of behavior."

Even the teachers are using our skin for their own amusement.
Wootson 2016, {Cleve, "People are outraged that a school official wore blackface — and they can’t make him, resign,https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/11/17/people-in-this-town-are-outraged-a-school-official-wore-blackface-and-cant-make-him-resign/ }
The white Arkansas ... by faculty and students.

In a world of absolute free speech, college students are able to repeatedly dehumanize people of color for their own amusement. Affirming and allowing for students to propagate racial stereotypes further silences People of color and infringes upon our access to the Universities. There is no learning happening when the spaces for learning have the potential for traumatic experiences, on a day to day basis. 

Thus the counterplan: Public colleges and Universities  should enact a ban on racebending  by giving the diversity board of students the decision power.  As defined below:
Racebending encompasses acts of changing one’s race by using cosmetics with the intent of propagating racial stereotypes. And the student board will have an equal amount of each demographic to ensure equality. 

Counterspeech fails – Marginalised groups don’t get access to it and therefore futher excludes them from the marketplace of ideas
Richards and Calvert 2k (Robert and Clay, Profs @ Penn State U., "Counterspeech 2000: A New Look at the Old Remedy for "Bad" Speech", http://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1993andcontext=lawreview)**
The idea that ... persuasive or effective.”16

The "truth wins out" assumption of marketplace of ideas is entirely false
Hilden 2 (Julie, staff attorney @ FindLaw, "THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND THE INTERNET: Why Traditional Legal Doctrines Apply Differently In Cyberspace", http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hilden/20020416.html)**
Traditional First Amendment ... been empirically disproven.

A vote towards negation is a vote towards upholding spaces that are safe.

Tournament: Lincoln East | Round: 3 | Opponent: Millard North- BL | Judge: Genhrich
Value: Anti-oppression, as defined by protecting marginalised groups.
Criterion: Minimizing Violence.
Minimizing violence is essential to anti-oppression because violence is the tool that is used to suppress marginalised groups and damage us severely. 

I negate and begin with a narrative:
¬Narrative¬

Pt 1:
Thus Let me introduce to you, Milo Yiannopoulos; an infamous alt-righter who champions Trump and does so using notorious hate speech. Recently he spoke at Milwaukee University and during that speech publically attacked Adelaide Kramer.

Duffy December 15 2016 { Nick, University ignored warnings about far-right speaker, leaving him free to bully trans student on stage,
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2016/12/15/university-ignored-warnings-about-far-right-speaker-leaving-him-free-to-bully-trans-student-on-stage/ }
Yiannopoulos proceeded to ... reapply my lipstick.

(Continued) But the story gets worse
Speaking to student ...quitting the university.

(Cont) Turns out the University chancellor had long knew this was going to happen and this was what he did
University chancellor Mark ... or other status.” 

Affirming a world of absolute free speech allows for extreme dehumanization of trans people and other marginalised groups, allowing for traumatic instances outlined above and other everyday harassment that we endure. 

The Counterplan Text: Public colleges in the United States should enact restrictions on hate speech; which encompasses misgendering, slurs that are considered historically oppressive to minorities, and slurs that are considered historically oppressive towards sexual minorities and gender variant peoples.
A vote towards negation is a vote towards upholding spaces that are safe, where every other space for marginalised groups holds violence.

Tournament: Westside | Round: 1 | Opponent: Millard North- Tori | Judge: FredKevin Robertson
Value: Anti-oppression, as defined by protecting marginalised groups.
Criterion: Minimizing Violence.
Minimizing violence is essential to anti-oppression because violence is the tool that is used to suppress marginalised groups and damage us severely. 

I negate and begin with a narrative: ~

Thus Let me introduce to you, Milo Yiannopoulos; an infamous alt-righter who champions Trump and does so using notorious hate speech. Recently he spoke at Milwaukee University and during that speech publically attacked Adelaide Kramer.

Duffy December 15 2016 { Nick, University ignored warnings about far-right speaker, leaving him free to bully trans student on stage,
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2016/12/15/university-ignored-warnings-about-far-right-speaker-leaving-him-free-to-bully-trans-student-on-stage/ }
Yiannopoulos proceeded to ... reapply my lipstick.

(Continued) But the story gets worse
Speaking to student ... quitting the university.

(Cont) Turns out the University chancellor had long knew this was going to happen and this was what he did
University chancellor Mark ... or other status.” 

Protecting freedom of speech for the sake of supporting “the exchange of ideas” results in extreme dehumanization of trans people and many more marginalised groups- who don’t get access to this in the first place. We are seen as pawns to sacrifice for the greater good and this rhetoric has been used so long to silence us. 

A vote towards negation is a vote towards upholding spaces that are safe, where every other space for marginalised groups holds violence.