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: Harvard | Round: 1 | Opponent: Evanston HS | Judge: Bob Overing
Interpretation: Debaters should read substantively justified frameworks grounded in a normative starting point to combat and understand oppression. Consistency with the best liberation strategy for the oppressed requires a debate where we explain what this oppression is, how we react to it, and why it’s the only relevant impact. To clarify, my argument is not oppression is ok but that debating the justifications is inescapable from solving oppression. 

Violation:

Net Benefits: 

First, saying oppression is bad without normatively justifying it is insufficient. Connecting theory to the real world is key to produce social change. A non-reflective theory only reinforces stereotypes, turns their performance. SMITH AND EATON:
“Role of reflection and praxis in community-based learning and social justice work” by Toby Smith and Marie Eaton  http://cielearn.org/wp-content/themes/ciel/docs/Praxis_Social20Justice202-10.pdf
“If reflection is AND and our lives. ”

Second, their use of educational spaces as a sites of empowerment places the judge into the role of the authoritarian adjudicator who molds students in accordance to a particular political end. This kills any conception of critical citizenship and turns their performance. RICKERT:
Rickert, Thomas. ""Hands Up, You're Free": Composition in a Post-Oedipal World." JacOnline Journal
“An example of AND produced in class.” (299-300)

Third, their unquestionable model to oppression that justifies itself through self-reference ensures a rigid vision of resistance where the judge prescribes the student an imperialist model of education – turns their performance. RICKERT 2:
Rickert, Thomas. ""Hands Up, You're Free": Composition in a Post-Oedipal World." JacOnline Journal
“This essay will AND serve the other” (48)

Rickert 1 and 2 Outweigh:
ANALYSIS

Fourth, philosophy is ABOUT social realities and teaches us how to address them. My framework claims are about to real world, not playing some academic game. This is a pre-fiat turn because they’re trying to suppress philosophical discussion while I say we should argue about the best framework. TRABER:
Becca Traber. Extremely lit person that knows stuff about debate. http://nsdupdate.com/2013/in-defense-of-philosophy-by-becca-traber/
And, here is AND think about it.

Methods question so vote them down on prefiat level

Tournament: Harvard | Round: 4 | Opponent: Munster AW | Judge: Andrew Perez
Interpretation: If the aff reserves the right to clarify their plan text then they must specify the things they can and cannot clarify in a text in the AC.

Tournament: Harvard | Round: 1 | Opponent: Evanston HS | Judge: Bob Overing
A. Interpretation: the affirmative must defend hypothetical implementation of the resolution by a topical actor. Public Colleges and Universities are defined by USLEGAL as:
USLegal Site that defines legal terms “Public College Law and Legal Definition.” USLegal.
Public college means AND a governmental source.”(42 USCS § 2000c)

B. Violation: 

C. Standards:

1  Limits
Only limited topics protect participants from research overload which materially affects our lives outside of round. HARRIS:
Scott Harris (Director of Debate at U Kansas, 2006 National Debate Coach of the Year, Vice President of the American Forensic Association, 2nd speaker at the NDT in 1981). “This ballot.” 5 April 2013. CEDA Forums. http://www.cedadebate.org/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4762.0;attach=1655
I understand that AND my everyday existence.
ANALYTICS

2 Textuality:
Textual accuracy key:
A) ANALYTICS
B) pragmatic offense justifies changing the topic or it being bad that the topic is this one, not your counter interp. The topicality rule comes first. NEBEL:
Jake Nebel (PhD student at NYU, BPhil in philosophy from Oxford, 3 time TOC elim round participant, went 3-3 at the 2006 Florida Blue Key tournament). “The Priority of Resolutional Semantics.” VBriefly. 20 February 2015. JDN. http://vbriefly.com/2015/02/20/the-priority-of-resolutional-semantics-by-jake-nebel/
One reason why AND the argument above.

3 TVA:

4 Effects T:

Vote on in-round competitive equity:
A) ANALYTICS
B) Violations of competitive equity prevent effective dialogue and participation. GALLOWAY:
Ryan Galloway 7, Samford Comm prof, Contemporary Argumentation and Debate, Vol. 28, 2007
Debate as a AND time and power (Farrell, 1985, p. 114).

Drop the debater – Substance Skewed

Tournament: Harvard | Round: 4 | Opponent: Munster AW | Judge: Andrew Perez
ANALYTICS

Practical reflection is an inescapable aspect of agency. 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
Impacts: ANALYTICS

ANALYTICS

And- willing coercion is a contradiction in conception because you extend your own freedom while simultaneously undermining your ability to act in the first place. In order to prevent coercion individuals must submit to the omnilateral will. KANT:
Immanuel Kant (leading Kantian scholar) The Metaphysical Elements of Justice, trans. John Ladd. 1797. Indianapolis: Hackett Publsihing, 1999.
When I declare AND in a civil society.

Thus, the standard is consistency with the omnilateral will. Prefer the standard: ANALYTICS

Impact analysis: ANALYTICS B. We can’t be culpable for consequences—external forces determine them. HEGEL:
Hegel 20 George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel The Philosophy of Right 1820
The will has AND in the purpose.

I contend that public entities have an obligation to restrict some constitutionally protected free speech.

Speech acts that intend to incite revolution dissolve the authority of the sovereign and must be prohibited. VARDEN:
Varden 10 Helga Varden (Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Illinois) "A Kantian Conception of Free Speech" May 22nd 2010 Freedom of Expression in a Diverse World Volume 3 of the series AMINTAPHIL: The Philosophical Foundations of Law and Justice pp 39-55 http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.10072F978-90-481-8999-1'4
To understand Kant’s AND a public crime (6: 331).

And according to Cornell Law, the Brandenburg v. Ohio U.S. Supreme Court decision maintains that seditious speech is protected by the First Amendment so long as it does not indicate an “imminent” threat.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/395/444

Tournament: Harvard | Round: 4 | Opponent: Munster AW | Judge: Andrew Perez
Counterplan text: "Resolved: Public colleges and Universities in the United States ought not restrict any speech except for term papers produced by professionals who sell them to students who turn them in as original work for academic credit."

And the CP’s competitive- Term papers prepared by professionals and sold to students, even though they are cut and dry examples of plagiarism, are constitutionally protected free speech. Duke Law Journal:
Term Paper Companies and the Constitution, 1973 Duke Law Journal 1275-1317 (1974) Available at: http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/dlj/vol22/iss6/3
The preparation and AND value to society."

Turns Case:
ANALYTICS

Tournament: TFA State | Round: 2 | Opponent: Southlake Carroll TP | Judge: Drew Marshall
Any public is composited with a plurality of views. This creates a dilemma between accepting subjectivity or coercion. However, subjectivity is untenable. I can’t say, “the sky is blue, but I don’t believe it”, since I have already committed myself the truth of the statement by uttering the preceding statement. This leaves us with coercion, but this just begs the question of what “just” coercion is in the first place. BENHABIB:
Seyla Benhabib 96 (Turkish-American philosopher. She is Eugene Mayer Professor of Political Science and Philosophy at Yale University, and director of the program in Ethics, Politics, and Economics, and a well-known contemporary philosopher), ed. Democracy and difference: Contesting the boundaries of the political. Vol. 31. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996. RC
In the last AND continue the battle.

We solve this with deliberation—communicative action bridges the gap between public and private subjectivities, creating ethics. LIU:
Hsin-I Liu 02 (University of Hong Kong). “HABERMAS ON NORMATIVE INTERSUBJECTIVITY: THE SOCIOLOGICAL AMBIVALENCE OF “PUBLIC COMMUNICATION”. 2002 http://www.portalcomunicacion.com/bcn2002/n_eng/programme/prog_ind/asp4.asp?id_pre=118 RC
“In my view AND implied in it.3”

Moreover, governments represents the conclusion that people reach through deliberation since that determines what is “just” coercion. BENHABIB 2:
Seyla Benhabib 2 (Turkish-American philosopher. She is Eugene Mayer Professor of Political Science and Philosophy at Yale University, and director of the program in Ethics, Politics, and Economics, and a well-known contemporary philosopher), ed. Democracy and difference: Contesting the boundaries of the political. Vol. 31. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996. RC
When delegitimation walks AND  unfair and unjust.

Thus, the standard is promoting deliberation.

I contend that granting a right to housing forecloses public deliberation. Labeling housing as a right shuts down dialogue; it becomes a trump card that prevents us from discussing foundation of the issue. FITZPATRICK AND WATTS:
Fitzpatrick and Watts 10 -- Suzanne Fitzpatrick and Beth Watts. "‘The Right to Housing’for Homeless People." Homelessness Research in Europe (2010): 105-122. RC
First, and most AND least, highly arguable (Finch, 1979; Miller, 1999; Lukes, 2008).

Tournament: TFA State | Round: 2 | Opponent: Southlake Carroll TP | Judge: Drew Marshall
Counterplan Text: The United States should take a needs based approach to the right to housing.

Competition:
ANALYTICS:

Net Benefits:

Rights based approaches to housing are extremely vague and inefficient when held to particular instances- guts solvency and proves needs based approaches do more for the oppressed. NOONAN AND WATSON:
Jeff Noonan (Professor of Philosophy at the University of Windsor), and Josie Watson (clinical nursing Instructor at the University of Windsor). "Against Housing: Homes as a Human Life Requirement." Alternate Routes: A Journal of Critical Social Research 28 (2017).
The Universal Declaration AND satisfy their need.

Tournament: TFA State | Round: 1 | Opponent: Southlake Carroll TP | Judge: Drew Marshall
Interpretation: The affirmative must defend the right to housing as a positive right. VELASQUEZ ET AL:
Velasquez et al 14 -- Manuel Velasquez, Claire Andre, Thomas Shanks, S.J., and Michael J. Meyer. “Rights”. MARKKULA CENTER FOR APPLIED ETHICS, Aug. 8, 2014. https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/ethical-decision-making/rights/ RC
Kant's principle is AND need of help.

Violation: They defend negative right

Standards:

1. Ground-

2. Field context- The overwhelming majority of the literature sees the right to housing as an issue of social welfare.
Bo Bengtsson 01 (Uppsala University, Department of Government and Institute for Housing and Urban Research). “Housing as a Social Right: Implications for Welfare State Theory”. Nordic Political Science Association, 2001. RC
The article contributes AND be seriously blurred.
  

Voters:
Fairness, Jurisdiction DTD on T, CI, No RVIs