Tournament: All | Round: Finals | Opponent: All | Judge: All
A. Interp– All negative advocacies must be unconditional.

B. Violation – 

C. Standards –

1 Stratskew- 

2 Clash- 

Voters: Fairness, Edu, 1AR Theory DtD, No RVIs, CI

Tournament: All | Round: 1 | Opponent: All | Judge: All
Interp: The negative must disclose broken and unbroken theory and topicality interps against affs at least 1 hour before the round if the interpretations indict the AC that has been previously disclosed on the NDCA LD wiki under their own name at least an hour before the round. I meet that plank because the aff’s already on the wiki.

Tournament: Any | Round: Finals | Opponent: Any | Judge: Any
Interp: Debaters must disclose all broken positions before the debate on their NDCA wiki page under their own name with full citations, tags, and first three/last three words.

Tournament: Harvard | Round: 1 | Opponent: Troll | Judge: Stuffs
This is my first tournament on this topic, so I will probably read an unbroken case or something off of my teammates' wiki. All broken positions that I break will be posted here. If you have any questions, or hear that I broke something that I haven't put on here yet, FB message me or email me at ntom18@mail.strakejesuit.org.

Tournament: TFA State | Round: 6 | Opponent: Kinkaid JY | Judge: Victor Fu
A. Interp: The neg may read a counterplan defending Advocacy Text as the actor if and only if they have a solvency advocate for their actor.  To clarify, the neg must have a solvency advocate that explains why it is better that the 50 States do the res than the USFG

B. Violation:

C. Standard:

Ground:

Voters: Fairness, Edu, 1AR Theory DtD, No RVIs, CI

Tournament: Harvard | Round: 5 | Opponent: Thomas Jefferson AK | Judge: OG Preetham Chippada
A. Interp: Kritik alternatives must only be specific, solvent policy actions implemented by a single actor. To clarify, the alt must not fiat that student governments will start protests 

B. Violation 

C. Vote Aff:

1. Strat Skew 

2. Reciprocity

CI, 1AR Theory DtD, No 2N RVI

Tournament: Harvard | Round: 2 | Opponent: Dulles SP | Judge: Alex Laufer
ANALYTICS
Taking up a subject position makes us violently categorize and objectify Others instead of being independent creators of value. PARRISH:
Derrida`s Economy of Violence in Hobbes` Social Contract, Richard Parrish
But this argument AND as a Face.
Three impacts: a) Analytic b) Analytic c) because we are bound by perspectival experiences, any claim of justice must be created by humans, not systems of duties. PARRISH 2:
Derrida`s Economy of Violence in Hobbes` Social Contract, Richard Parrish
Perhaps the single AND as extrinsic facts.
And, we must always be aware that there is a radical possibility of failure and violence inherent in the heart of identity and responsibility. Denying this denies the basis of morality itself. HAGGLUND:
Hagglund, Martin. 2006. “The Necessity of Discrimination: Disjoining Derrida and Levinas.” diacritics 34 (1): 40–71.
The utopian dream AND himself be guided.
Two impacts: ANALYTICS
However, individual people can’t truly define meaning because anyone solving for violence defines terms to help themself, but doesn’t allow for communal norms sharing. The responsibility to reconcile different ideologies of just and unjust falls onto the most powerful entity. This sovereign must reconcile differences and dictate the normative system. PARRISH 3:
Derrida`s Economy of Violence in Hobbes` Social Contract, Richard Parrish
All of the AND the natural condition.
Therefore, the standard is consistency with the will of the sovereign. Prefer it additionally, 2 reasons:
1) It’s impossible to escape the aff framework, because whenever a sovereign is removed, each person becomes their own sovereign and must attempt to force others under their will until someone prevails and becomes the sovereign. PARRISH 4:
Derrida`s Economy of Violence in Hobbes` Social Contract, Richard Parrish
But even more AND creator of meaning.
Three impacts: ANALYTICS
2)ANALYTICS
I advocate that the maxim of lifting restrictions on constitutionally protected speech in public colleges and universities of the United States and all relevant territories ought to be adopted generally. I defend the intent of lifting restrictions on constitutionally protected speech, so consequences are irrelevant, but I will accept neg preferences on specificity and implementation if you ask in CX or prep as long as it doesn’t abandon the maxim of the 1AC.  
Now affirm:
Public colleges and universities are owned by the sovereign. DOUGLAS:
M. Douglas, 3-6-2006, "Public and Private: What's the Difference?," , https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2006/03/06/lombardi
American colleges and AND private and public entities.
And, the Constitution represents the will of the sovereign. CORNELL:
James Madison "United States Constitution" Sep 17, 1787 Article VI https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlevi
This Constitution, and AND the contrary notwithstanding.
This affirms- First Amendment proves. CORNELL 2:
United States Congress "Bill of Rights" Sep 17, 1787 First Amendment https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/first_amendment
Congress shall make AND redress of grievances.
Implications:
ANALYTICS
2 Saying the sovereign has the obligation to keep restrictions is incoherent- the sovereign’s only obligation is to define our ethical beliefs. Due to this the sovereign is necessarily above the law and has absolute power. This means that even if they prove that the sovereign restrict speech codes, the sovereign’s keeping restrictions is merely permissible, not the result of an obligation. HOBBES:
Thomas Hobbes — philosopher, historian, ethicist, geometrician, squarer of the circle — Leviathan, selected variants from the Latin edition of 1668, ed. w/ intro by Edwin Curley, Hackett. p. 133
This is absolute AND the legislative power.

Tournament: Harvard | Round: 5 | Opponent: Thomas Jefferson AK | Judge: OG Preetham Chippada
ANALYTICS:
1 Motivation: Ideal theory cannot guide action since its starting point has diverged from the descriptive model of the real world. Non-ideal theory is key for ethical motivation. MILLS:
Charles W. Mills, “Ideal Theory” as Ideology, 2005
“A first possible AND just completely implausible?”

2 Descriptive Ideality: ideal theory ignores social realities, which in turn contradicts ideals. Normative ideals aren’t created separately from the social norms that govern us because those influence what we can count as an ideal in the first place.  MILLS 2:
Charles W. Mills, “Ideal Theory” as Ideology, 2005
 “I suggest that AND never be achieved.” (170)

Thus, the standard is resisting material inequalities. ANALYTICS 

Prefer additionally: All framing mechanisms must be theoretically legitimate. Any standard is an interpretation of the word ought-thus framework is functionally a topicality argument about how to define the terms of the resolution. Definitions should be subject to theoretical contestation in the same way other words should be. My framework interprets ought as resisting material inequalities. Prefer this definition:

A. Ground

B. Topic Lit

C. Topic Ed

Voters: Fairness, Education, FW warrant, not DtD

Advocacy
Resolved: Public colleges and universities in the United States ought not restrict any constitutionally protected speech. KURTZ clarifies:
Kurtz, Stanley. Contributor, National Review “A Plan to Restore Free Speech on Campus.” The Corner, December 2015.
First: Colleges and AND pre-existing speech codes.

Advantage- State Control

Putting restrictions on free speech creates a dangerous slippery slope and leads to co-option of movements that lead to silencing of voices. Universities should not be the arbiters of communication. FISHER:
Anthony L. Fisher, Dec 13, 2016, “Opposition to “offensive” speech on campuses will ultimately burn dissidents”, http://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2016/12/13/13931524/free-speech-pen-america-campus-censorship
In perhaps the AND in their inboxes. 

Any risk of restriction is just another instance on of the sovereign encroaching on life—the state maintains a monopoly on power and dictates who is and is not political.  SMITH:
Mick, Department of Philosophy and School of Environmental Studies , Queen's University , Kingston, Canada). “Against ecological sovereignty: Agamben, politics and globalization”. 23 Feb 2011.
Schmitt’s Political Theology AND its ethico-political possibilities

This opens up space for the worst atrocities imaginable—the state deems the human as non-human, clearing the way for genocide. EDKINS:
Department of International Politics, University of Wales). “Sovereign Power, Zones of Indistinction, and the Camp”. 2000.
The camp is AND sacred and the profane.

Student protests oppose neoliberalism in higher education, translating theory into praxis. DELGADO AND ROSS:
Sandra Delgado (doctoral student in curriculum studies at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada) and E. Wayne Ross (Professor in the Faculty of Education at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada), "Students in Revolt: The Pedagogical Potential of Student Collective Action in the Age of the Corporate University" 2016 (published on Academia.edu)
As students’ collective AND programs or pleas.

Free speech is key to preventing mass government violence endless warfare- this is a gateway to securing any rights. D’SOUZA:
Frances, Prof. Anthropology Oxford, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/hearings/19960425/droi/freedom_en.htm?textMode=on
There are undoubted AND need for change.

Tournament: TFA State | Round: 2 | Opponent: Lake Travis MM | Judge: Jennifer Melin
Inherency
The housing agency currently uses a 1-strike policy in which any arrest is sufficient for denial of housing. CAMMETT:
Cammett, Ann (Professor of Law, Director, Family Law Practice Clinic, City University of New York School of Law). "Confronting Race and Collateral Consequences in Public Housing." Seattle UL Rev. 39 (Summer 2016): 1123.
One Strike remained AND recommendations of HUD.

Thus the Plan: Resolved: The United States Federal Government should implement the right to housing by rejecting automatic exclusion and 1-strike laws. CAREY:
Corinne Carey (researcher with the U.S. Program at Human Rights Watch) "No second chance: People with criminal records denied access to public housing." U. Tol. L. Rev. 36 (2005): 545.
The United States AND of entire communities.

Independent of solvency, the 1AC leads to a spillover effect- rights based approach to housing is key to spurring more positive policy reform. ADAMS:
Kristen David Adams (Professor of Law, Stetson University College of Law). "Do we need a right to housing." Nev. LJ 9 (2008): 275.
Rights are more ARE of affordable housing.

Moreover, a right to housing would be key to solving for housing segregation, which divides and excludes people from the city. BRYSON:
David Bryson (Attorney for the National Housing Law Project) A Right to Housing, edited by Rachel Bratt, et al., Temple University Press, 2006.
From a constitutional AND the litigation theories.

Advantage 1 is Accessibility

One strike laws lead to people coming out of prison struggling with housing access. MORAFF:
Cristopher Moraff “Housing first Helps Keep Ex-Inmates off the streets (and Out of Prison)” July 23, 2014 https://nextcity.org/daily/entry/housing-first-former-prisoners-homelessness
Many of the AND parole increases considerably.

And, the impact is massive- broad definitions lead to many people being denied access to resources they desperately need. CAREY 2:
Corinne Carey (researcher with the U.S. Program at Human Rights Watch) "No second chance: People with criminal records denied access to public housing." U. Tol. L. Rev. 36 (2005): 545.
Using the authority AND from public housing.

One strike laws massively over-expand state power, leading to enhanced militarization over life and racially biased tensions. CAMMETT 2:
Ann Cammett (Professor of Law, Director, Family Law Practice Clinic, City University of New York School of Law). "Confronting Race and Collateral Consequences in Public Housing." Seattle UL Rev. 39 (Summer 2016): 1123.
Stated differently, the AND and many policymakers.

Advantage 2 is Crime

Stable Housing decreases recidivism rates. MORAFF 2:
Cristopher Moraff “Housing first Helps Keep Ex-Inmates off the streets (and Out of Prison)” July 23, 2014 https://nextcity.org/daily/entry/housing-first-former-prisoners-homelessness
Lutze says stable AND regularly exceeds supply.

That’s key to stability of families- millions of families are disproportionately affected when their loved ones are denied housing. CAMMETT 3:
Cammett, Ann (Professor of Law, Director, Family Law Practice Clinic, City University of New York School of Law). "Confronting Race and Collateral Consequences in Public Housing." Seattle UL Rev. 39 (Summer 2016): 1123.
While barriers to AND child welfare agencies.

The plan is also key to public safety- 1-strike laws cause many ex-cons to live on the street or bounce around, increasing the chance of more violence, creating a vicious cycle. CAREY 3:
Corinne Carey (researcher with the U.S. Program at Human Rights Watch) "No second chance: People with criminal records denied access to public housing." U. Tol. L. Rev. 36 (2005): 545.
Many of those AND there are consequences." n96 

Framing

The standard is minimizing material inequalities. 

1) All ethical theories must assume the importance of material inequalities. Non-inclusive ethics are epistemically bankrupt because they exclude people from the moral calculus. WINTER AND LEIGHTON:   
(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 ustice and intergroup responses to transgressions of justice) (Peace, conflict, and violence: Peace psychology in the 21st century. Pg 4-5)
Finally, to recognize AND to reduce it.

2) Theoretical critique is insufficient—our discussion should be based around finding policies, changes in the empirical world, that can both reorient our values and change tangible conditions of oppression. CURRY: 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
Despite the pronouncement AND tendencies and politics.

Tournament: TFA State | Round: 6 | Opponent: Kinkaid JY | Judge: Victor Fu
Framework

Agency, or the setting and pursuing of ends, is inescapable. FERRERO:
Luca Ferrero (University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee) “Constitutivism and the Inescapability of Agency” Oxford Studies in Metaethics, vol. IV January 12th 2009 pp. 6-8
3.2 Agency is special AND closed under itself.15

This outweighs:
A. ANALYTICS:
B. ANALYTICS:

And, agency posits universalizability. Two warrants.

1. Ends must be universalizable. Any other norm justifies someone’s ability to impede on your ends, which also means reason acts as a side constraint on ends-based frameworks. SIYAR:
   Jamsheed Aiam Siyar: Kant’s Conception of Practical Reason. Tufts University, 1999:
   . Now, when I AND recognized by others. 

2. Universal willing is a prerequisite to self-determination of action. Anything else means desire controls our actions, thus the actor is no longer an agent. KORSGAARD:
“Self-Constitution in the Ethics of Plato and Kant” by Christine M. Korsgaard
The second step AND something inside him. 

Thus the standard is consistency with willing universal maxims. ANALYTICS Prefer the standard:
 

1. ANALYTICS
   2. ANAlYTICS
   3. Only the AC framework explains how a state obligation can function. This also takes out util, governments have side-constraints. KORSGAARD 2:
   Korsgaard, Christine M (Exceptionally practical reasoner). 2008.
   Taking the law AND to a government. 

Inherency
The housing agency currently uses a 1-strike policy in which any arrest is sufficient for denial of housing. CAMMETT:
Cammett, Ann (Professor of Law, Director, Family Law Practice Clinic, City University of New York School of Law). "Confronting Race and Collateral Consequences in Public Housing." Seattle UL Rev. 39 (Summer 2016): 1123.
One Strike remained AND public housing authorities. 

Advocacy
Resolved: The United States Federal Government should stop enforcing automatic exclusion and 1-strike laws. CAREY:
Carey, Corinne (researcher with the U.S. Program at Human Rights Watch) "No second chance: People with criminal records denied access to public housing." U. Tol. L. Rev. 36 (2005): 545.
The United States AND of entire communities.

Adv 1: Dependability
One Strike Laws Prevent Ex-convicts from getting access to housing. Landlords Exploit Ex-convicts creating dependency from the ex-convicts on landlords. MORAFF:
Cristopher Moraff “Housing first Helps Keep Ex-Inmates off the streets (and Out of Prison)” July 23, 2014 https://nextcity.org/daily/entry/housing-first-former-prisoners-homelessness
Many of the AND parole increases considerably.

This means you affirm. Dependency is never justifiable. It reduces an agent to a thing, and impedes them from willing freely. RIPSTEIN:
Arthur Ripstein, “Force and Freedom”. Harvard University Press, 2009
The parallel between AND of a thing. 

The State has an obligation to stop dependency. RIPSTEIN 2:
Arthur Ripstein, “Force and Freedom”. Harvard University Press, 2009
The requirement that AND to support themselves. 

And the situated nature of existence requires we own property before we are able to freely will actions. Housing ensures that everyone can wills freely regardless of your starting point. This means that One Strike Laws, which impede access to housing, are never justifiable. KING:
Housing as a Freedom Right” PETER KING Housing Studies, Vol. 18, No. 5, 661–672, September 2003 Centre for Comparative Housing Research, Department of Public Policy, De Montfort University, Leicester
“Property rules determine AND right to housing.” (667)

Adv 2: Discrimination

One Strike Policies are empirically discriminatory.  CAREY 2:
Carey, Corinne (researcher with the U.S. Program at Human Rights Watch) "No second chance: People with criminal records denied access to public housing." U. Tol. L. Rev. 36 (2005): 545.
This report, however AND their criminal histories.

Anyone with a Criminal Record is at Risk. CAREY 3:
Carey, Corinne (researcher with the U.S. Program at Human Rights Watch) "No second chance: People with criminal records denied access to public housing." U. Tol. L. Rev. 36 (2005): 545.
Using the authority AND from public housing.