2005 St. Mark‘s Affirmative Casebook
A & M Consolidated LM Affirmative .................................................................................................................... 3 Barstow BW Affirmative ....................................................................................................................................... 5 Bellaire AC Affirmative ......................................................................................................................................... 8 Bishop Guertin PE Affirmative .............................................................................................................................. 9 Bishop Guertin OG Affirmative ........................................................................................................................... 11 Booker T. Washington KC Affirmative ................................................................................................................ 15 Bronx LV Affirmative ......................................................................................................................................... 19 Caddo Magnet GC Affirmative ............................................................................................................................ 21 Calhoun JD Affirmative ....................................................................................................................................... 24 Celebration HD Affirmative ................................................................................................................................. 28 Chamindade College Prep DD ............................................................................................................................. 29 Chattahoochee ZJ Affirmative.............................................................................................................................. 31 Chattahoochee ZW Affirmative ........................................................................................................................... 34 College Prep SP Affirmative ................................................................................................................................ 36 Colleyville Heritage BL Affirmative .................................................................................................................... 38 Coppell ISD SC Affirmative ................................................................................................................................ 40 Cedar Rapids Washington VJ Affirmative ............................................................................................................ 42 Crosby WC Affirmative ....................................................................................................................................... 44 Deer Park SB Affirmative .................................................................................................................................... 46 Dowling Catholic KN Affirmative ....................................................................................................................... 48 Dulles HG Affirmative ......................................................................................................................................... 50 East Grand Rapids PT Affirmative ....................................................................................................................... 51 Edgemont BK Affirmative ................................................................................................................................... 54 Ft. Lauderdale WH Affirmative ........................................................................................................................... 55 Fullerton Union GG Affirmative .......................................................................................................................... 59 Georgetown Day BB Affirmative ......................................................................................................................... 60 Georgetown Day ZZ Affirmative ......................................................................................................................... 61 Glenbrook North FF Affirmative.......................................................................................................................... 62 Glenbrook North FW Affirmative ........................................................................................................................ 66 Glenbrook South CL Affirmative ......................................................................................................................... 69 Glenbrook South LP Affirmative ......................................................................................................................... 70 Greenhill HS Affirmative ..................................................................................................................................... 72 Greenhill PA Affirmative ..................................................................................................................................... 74 Groves GW Affirmative ....................................................................................................................................... 76 Head-Royce PK Affirmative ................................................................................................................................ 79 Lexington GC Affirmative ................................................................................................................................... 82 Hebron MH Affirmative....................................................................................................................................... 83 Heritage Hall SW Affirmative .............................................................................................................................. 85 Heritage Hall TD Affirmative .............................................................................................................................. 87 Jack C. Hayes SS Affirmative .............................................................................................................................. 89 Jenks LT Affirmative ........................................................................................................................................... 91 Jesuit Dallas OS Affirmative ................................................................................................................................ 92 Joshua BS Affirmative ......................................................................................................................................... 94 Kinkaid TH Affirmative ....................................................................................................................................... 97 Lakeland AM Affirmative .................................................................................................................................... 98 Leland LY Affirmative .......................................................................................................................................100 Lexington CG Affirmative ..................................................................................................................................102 Lexington DS Affirmative...................................................................................................................................104 Loyola HY Affirmative .......................................................................................................................................106
1
2005 St. Mark‘s Affirmative Casebook Continued
MacArthur BC Affirmative .................................................................................................................................108 Maine East PA Affirmative .................................................................................................................................109 Marist MD Affirmative .......................................................................................................................................110 Meadows CS Affirmative ....................................................................................................................................112 Mercer Island SP Affirmative .............................................................................................................................114 Wichita East QW ................................................................................................................................................117 Woodlands College Par VB ................................................................................................................................121 Mills University GW Affirmative........................................................................................................................123 Montgomery Bell Academy DB Affirmative .......................................................................................................124 Mountain Brook MF Affirmative ........................................................................................................................126 New Trier DR Affirmative ..................................................................................................................................127 Notre Dame MK Affirmative ..............................................................................................................................130 Pace Academy CF Affirmative............................................................................................................................132 Plano Senior BT Affirmative...............................................................................................................................134 Princeton PS Affirmative ....................................................................................................................................137 Reagan DM Affirmative......................................................................................................................................139 Round Rock DE Affirmative ...............................................................................................................................140 Salpointe Catholic AS Affirmative ......................................................................................................................142 Saratoga JP Affirmative ......................................................................................................................................143 Stratford Academy KR Affirmative.....................................................................................................................145 Vestavia Hills HL Affirmative ............................................................................................................................147 West JP Affirmative ............................................................................................................................................149 Westlake BM Affirmative ...................................................................................................................................151 Westminster BS Affirmative ...............................................................................................................................154 Weston SB Affirmative .......................................................................................................................................159 Westwood SS Affirmative...................................................................................................................................162 Winston Churchill KO Affirmative .....................................................................................................................164 Woodward BB Affirmative .................................................................................................................................167 Woodward RS Affirmative .................................................................................................................................170
2
A & M Consolidated LM Affirmative
Inherency
The United States Supreme Court decided in T.L.O. v. New Jersey that reasonable suspicion should apply to students in public schools rather than probable cause.
Kucharson 2004 (M. Casey, Akron Law Review, ―Please Report to the Principal‘s Office, Urine Trouble: The Effect of Board of Education v. Earls…‖)
Our argument will be the United States Federal Government should substantially decrease its authority to search without probable cause. Specifically, the Supreme Court should grant cert to the next available and appropriate test case to overturn the precedent of reasonable suspicion set in TLO v. New Jersey and restore that standard to probable cause in terms of searching students in public schools. Enforcement is guaranteed. We reserve the right to clarify.
Solvency
Overturning T.L.O. solves: Probable cause is a superior standard to reasonable suspicion Edward 1987 (Dale, Cornell Law Review, ―School searches under the fourth amendment: New Jersey v. TLO‖)
Solvency Spills Over: all post 1985 strip search cases are based on T.L.O.
Blickenstaff 1994 (David, Dickinson Law Review, ―Strip Searches of Public School Students: can new jersey v. tlo solve the problem?‖)
The Prison Industrial Complex
The court‘s current interretation constructs children as a subordinate class that is subsequently criminalized and scapegoated.
Toussaint, 1996 (Sherri, Nebraska Law Review, Veronia School District v. Acton 1995, Lexis)
This repression of youth is directly related to broader systems of oppression. The criminalization of youth in school searches is a feeder mechanism into the prison industrial complex.
Giroux 2003 (Henry, ―Authoritarianism‘s Footprint and the War Against Youth‖ Dissent Voice, Dec 8)
This fear of youth present in recent discourse and policy is a driving force in a broader culture of fear that squelches dissent and will ultimately turn us into a police state.
Giroux 2003 (Henry, ―Authoritarianism‘s Footprint and the War Against Youth‖ Dissent Voice, Dec 8)
We are uniquely situated to effectuate change: The criminalization of youth attempts to silence our voices as debaters and students. We are a critical part of a global movement that must engage itself in the political process and avoid tumbling into cynicism.
Giroux 2003 (Henry, ―Authoritarianism‘s Footprint and the War Against Youth‖ Dissent Voice, Dec 8)
Using you ballot as a safe haven for these ideas is the alternative-creating free spaces encourages activists to develop counter-hegemonic ideas
Polletta & Jasper 2001 (Francesca & James, ―Collective Identity and Social Movements,‖ Annual Review of Sociology, V. 27, p. 283-305)
The 1AC‘s acceptance of the establishment is merely a redefinition of criminality that further legitimates the
construction of ―criminal‖ identities that is itself the basic unit of social control and domination
Anarchist Black Cross 2002 (Information and Resources, Anarchist Black Cross, Jan,
http://anarchistblackcross.org/pdf/abciar.pdf)
3
Round 3
Observation I is Inherency
The Supreme Court established the precedent in T.L.O. V. New Jersey that searches in schools do not require probable cause.
M Kasey Kucharson ‘04, Akron Law Revie, 37, Akron L Rev. 131, Please Report to the Principal’s Office,
Urine Threat)
The United States Federal Government should substantially decrease its authority to search without probable cause. Specifically the Supreme Court should, in the next available test case should overturn T.L.O. V. New Jersey in a decision reinstating the pre-existing standard of probable cause within schools.
Observation II is Solvency
First, overturning TLO solves: probable cause is a superior standard than reasonable suspicion.
Dale Edward F.T. (Cornell Law Review, 72 Cornel 1 Rev 368, School Searches under the fourth amendment: New Jersey V. TLO)
Second, solvency spills over: all post 1985 strip search cases are based on TLO.
David C. Blickenstaff, (Law clerk to Chief judge of the US District court of Illinois, Fall 1994, Dickinson Law Review 99, Rev 1, Strip Searches of public schools: Can New Jersey V. TLO solve the problem?)
Observation III is the prison industrial complex
The current interpretation constructs children as a subordinate class that is sub sequentially criminalized and scape-goated.
Toussaint 1996 [Sherri L 75 neb l rev 151 school district, Lexis]
This repression of youth is directly related to broader systems of oppression. The Criminalization of youth in school searches is a feeder mechanism into the prison industrial complex.
Giroux 2003 (Henry, Authoritarianism‘s footprint and the war against youth dissent voice, dec 8)
This fear of youth present in recent discourse and policy is a driving force in a broader culture of fear that squelches dissent and will ultimately turn into a police state.
Giroux 2003 (Henry, Authoritarianism‘s footprint and the war against youth dissent voice, dec 8)
Finally, we are uniquely situated to effectuate change. The criminalization of youth attempts to silence our voices as debaters and students. We are a critical part of a global movement that must engage itself in the political process.
Giroux 2003 (Henry, Authoritarianism‘s footprint and the war against youth dissent voice, dec 8)
4
Barstow BW Affirmative
Terry V Ohio Aff
Observation 1 Inherency
Terry V Ohio ruled that probable cause doesn‘t matter for a search
Smith 2001
Observation 2 Harms
Advantage 1 Civil Liberties
TVO lead to a slippery slope of loose of many rights Smith 2001
The inconsistency of the ruling has let the police search at whim Raymond 1999
This leads to totalitarianism
Calderon 2000
We must uphold civil liberties at any cost
Herber 2003
Advantage 2 Racism
TVO has lead to racist policies
Ronner 2001
Under the Terry decision race based searches will become inevitable Calveron 2000
Racial profiling leads to dehumanization
Herber 2003
We must stand against racism, it is a moral imperative. Post 1991
We should reject racism at every instance
Barndt 1991
Text: In a test case involving a search by a federal official based on reasonable suspicion , the supreme court will
rule that the government has no authority to search with reasonable suspicion and that probable cause is required.
Observation 3 is Solvency
Overturning TVO is the best way to uphold the reasonability standard Haris 94
Also over turning is necessary to acknowledge the US racist past Herber 2003
Legal decision on racial matters effectively shape social norms Herber 2003
5
Round 3
Observation 1-inherency
In the Terry V. Ohio, the Supreme court decided for the first time that probable cause was not needed to search individuals-stead, officers can rely on reasonable suspicion
Smith, et al in 2k1, (Alisa, JD PhD, Michael Copeland MA JD, Illya Lichtenberg PhD, Touro Law Review, Terry
and Beyond, Winter, LN)
Advantage 1-Civil liberties
First, Terry V. Ohio has initiated a slipper slope of lost rights, it has become the basis for multiple divisions eliminating the probable cause requirement for searches in the home, automobile, or on the person.
Smith, et al in 2k1, (Alisa, JD PhD, Michael Copeland MA JD, Illya Lichtenberg PhD, Touro Law Review, Terry
and Beyond, Winter, LN)
And, the inconsistency of court decisions make reasonable suspicion an arbitrary standard, allowing police officers to circumvent restrictions and stop anyone at their choosing in high crime areas.
Raymond in 99 (Margaret, Associate Prof. Of Law-Univ. of Iowa, Ohio State Law Journal, Down on the corner,
out in the street)
The decision in Terry eroded the most important search and seizure clause in the constitution, paving the way for totalitarianism
Calderon, 200, (Tovah Renee, JD, Howard Law Journal, Race-based Policing from Terry to Wardlow: Steps Down
the Totalitarian Path, Fall)
Also, the terry decision drastically increases police power, stomping on our fourth amendment rights Katz, 2004, (Lewis, Professor of Law at Case Western Reserve University, Mississippi Journal of Law, The Tools to Interpret the Fourth Amendment, 2004)
The fourth amendment is vital to all civil liberties-It is the only thing that prevents us from living in a police state
Herbert, 2003 (Lenese, Associate Professor of Law @ Albany Law School, Michigan Journal of Race and Law, Bete Noire, Fall)
We must uphold liberty in every instance-security never justifies the erosion of civil liberties. Sylvester Petro, Professor of Law at Wake Forest University, Toledo law Review, 1974, p. lexis
6
Advantage 2-Racism in America
Probable cause is the most important part of the Fourth amendment because it affords protection to minority groups. By eliminating the probable cause requirement, Terry has become the foundation for racially biased law in America
Ronner, 2001 (Amy, Prof. Law @ ST. Thomas, Columbia Human Rights Law Review, fleeing while black: The fourth
amendment apartheid, Spring)
Under the Terry decision race-based policing is inevitable. By giving police officers their own discretion in conducting searches, Terry ensures that personal racial biases are legitimized as a legal reason for searching minorities
Calderon, 200, (Tovah Renee, JD, Howard Law Journal, Race-based Policing from Terry to Wardlow: Steps Down the
Totalitarian Path, Fall)
Racial policing grants police power reminiscent of the slave owner-the ability to stop the freedom of movement and sanctity of African Americans at will. This allows the state to relegate minorities as underclass citizens and is dehumanizing
Herbert, 2003 (Lenese, Associate Professor of Law @ Albany Law School, Michigan Journal of Race and Law, Bete Noire,
Fall)
We must stand in solidarity against Racism-It is the utmost moral imperative
Post in 91 (Robert, Prof. Of law@ Univ. Calif-Berkeley, William and Mary Law Review, Free Speech and Religious, Winter)
Racism must be fought in every instance- we can dismantle it brick by brick starting in places like this debate round
Barndt, 1991 (Joseph, Minister, Dismantling Racism)
Plan: In a test case involving a search by a federal official based on reasonable suspicion, the Supreme court will rule that the Government has no authority to search with reasonable suspicion and that probable cause is required.
Solvency:
Overturning Terry is the best way to uphold probable cause as fundamental
Harris in 1994, (David, Balk, Professor of Law and Values, University of Toledo College of Law, and Soros Senior Justice fellow, open society institute, New York, Indiana Law Journal, Factors for Reasonable suspicion: when Black and Poor means stopped and Frisked, Summer, 1994.)
Also, the Overturning of the Terry decision is a necessary acknowledgement of the history of Racism in America-The Supreme court has the power to make this acknowledgement
Herbert, 2003 (Lenese, Associate Professor of Law @ Albany Law School, Michigan Journal of Race and Law, Bete Noire,
Fall)
Finally, Legal decisions on racial matters effectively shape social norms-The current state of racism in policing proves
Herbert, 2003 (Lenese, Associate Professor of Law @ Albany Law School, Michigan Journal of Race and Law, Bete Noire,
Fall)
7
Bellaire AC Affirmative
1. ECHELON LISTENS TO TELEPHONE AND EMAIL W/O PROBABLE CAUSE MCLEAN 99 2. NOT USED TO STOP TERROR, IT IS USED ON DIPLOMATS- MCLEAN 99 3. SECTION 502 LEGITIMIZES ECHELON- BRANDON 99
4. PLN TXT- USFG USING CONGRESS WILL DISMANTLE ECHELON 5.ADVANTAGE- US EU RELATIONS BAD
US EU ON VERGE OF ALLIANCE NOW
ECHELON KEY TO SOLIDIFYING ALLIANCE-STOA 98
IRAN
a. WE NEED TO COOPERATE WITH IRAN
b. INTEL GATHERING KEY TO IRAN DEFENSE- CNN 2005
c. US EU RELATIONS=REGIMES-REFRITES 04
d. US INVASION OF IRAN= COLLAPSE- 05
SOLVENCY
2. EST OUR AFF KEY TO BREAK DOWN ECHELON- 01
3. INDISCRIMINABLE USE OF ECHELON LEADS TO THE COLLAPSE OF CIVIL RIGHTS-
POLL 01
4. US MUST ACT TO STOP ALLINACE WITH EU-TEETERING 01
8
Bishop Guertin PE Affirmative
Plan- The United States Federal Government, specifically the congress, should substantially decrease its authority to detain without charge by passing legislation requiring all individuals captured in the War on Terror to be charged.
Contention One is Leadership-
Detention without charge is the Achilles Heel of U.S. foreign policy killing America‘s reputation abroad
Tesfaye-EDP North America & Australia Council of Representatives- 2005
[Seyoum, Atlanta Journal and Constitution, 6/20, ―Guantanamo Abuses Emboldens Tyrants‖, http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/0605/20edseyoume.html]
Detention policies in Guantanamo have put credibility at an all time low
Radack – Executive Director of the Coalition of Civil Rights and Democratic Liberties- 2005
[Jesselyn A., ―You say Defendant, I say Combatant…‖, 29 N.Y.U Rev. L. & Soc. Change 525]
Gitmo detention destroys U.S. soft power
Cohen – Writer for the Washington Post and Recipient of Washington – Baltimore Newspaper Guild Award for
Excellence – 2004
[Richard, 1/20, The Washington Post, ―Lawless in Guantanamo‖]
Soft power is critical to Hegemony
Ikenberry, Professor of Geopolitics and Global Justice @ Georgetown University and Transatlantic Fellow @ the German Marshall Fund of the United States, 2004
[John, Spring, ―The End of the NeoConservative Moment‖- Survival, http://survival.oupjournals.org]
Guantanamo kills U.S. security by undermining international co-operation along with our repute and stature
Amnesty International 2004
[4/9/04, ―Undermining security: violations of human dignity, the rule of law and the National Security Strategy in ―war on terror‖ detentions‖, http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engamr510612004]
Detention policies at Guantanamo Crush US leadership- three reasons
Leahy – Senator from Vermont and J.D. from Georgetown Law School- 2005
[Patrick, ―Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy, Ranking Member, Committee on the Judiciary Hearing on Detainees‖, http://judiciary.senate.gov/member_statement.cfm?id=1542&wit_id=2629]
Bush‘s unilateral policy that is epitomized by Gitmo is wrecking U.S. soft power and credibility. This stance will inevitably kill U.S. hegemony.
Sen – Former Director of the American Police Academy- 2005
[Sankar, The Statesman (India), Global News Wire, April 5]
The double standard of Gitmo destroys U.S. rights credibility and soft power which are critical to United States leadership
Koh – Dean of Yale Law School and the Gerard C. and Bernice Latrobe Smith Professor of International Law. Former assistant secretary of state for democracy, human rights, and labor -2004
[Harold HongJu, The American Prospect, October]
9
Reversing our detention policy at Guantanamo is key to leadership Biancheri- Director of Studies and Strategy for Europe 2020 – 2004
[Franck, 5/28, ―Suppress Guantanamo as first step to restore constructive transatlantic Relations‖, http://www.newropeans-
magazine.org/index.php?option=com_context&task=view&id=784<emid=110]
Congressional guarantee of charge will restore U.S. credibility abroad Schulhofer – Professor of Law @ NYU – 2005
[Stephen, June 15, ―Detainees‖, Congressional Quarterly, Federal Document Clearing House Congressional Testimony]
Leadership solves global nuclear war
Khalilzad- Former Reagan Administration Official and RAND Institute- 1995
[Zalmay, Spring, Washington Quarterly]
The end of unipolarity results in multiple nuclear wars
Ferguson – Professor of History @ New York University and Senior Fellow @ Hoover Institution @ Stanford University –
2004
[Niall, October, ―A World Without Power‖ – Foreign Policy p. infotrac]
Soft power solves over 30 scenarios for conflict
Nye – Dean of the Kennedy School of Government @ Harvard – 1996
[Joseph, Winter, ―Conflicts after the Cold War‖, The Washington Quarterly]
Contention Two is Argentina-
Erosion of SOP has been steadily on the increase due to detention without charge of enemy combatants
Shleppele – Professor of Comparitive Law & Sociology at UPenn – 2004
[Kim Lane, May, University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law]
Congressional action on detention is critical to restore SOP Washington Post 1/21/05
US separation of powers gets modeled globally
Calabresi, Professor of Constitutional Law at Northwestern University, 2001
[Stephen G., Constitutional Commentary, Spring, Lexis]
Specifically, the US model is key to Argentinian democracy.
Garcia-Mansilla, LLM from Georgetown University Law Center, 2004
[Manuel Jose, Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, Spring, Lexis]
And, Argentinean democracy key to Latin American nuclear-weapons free zone. Litwak, Director of International Studies at the Woodrow Wilson Center of the Smithsonian Institute, 2004
[Robert, Survival, Winter 2003-4, http://wwics.si.edu/topics/pubs/survival2.pdf]
And, Latin American zone is a model for other regions – solves nuclear proliferation.
M2 Presswire October 28, 2002
And, rapid proliferation is uniquely destabilizing – it leads to global anarchy, destroys US leadership, and causes nuclear war
Roberts, (Research Staff at the Institute for Defense Analysis), 1999
[Brad, The Nonproliferation Review, Fall, p. 79-81, http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/npr.vol06/64/robert64.pdf]
Prolif is not inevitable- trends prove
Brad Roberts, Research Staff at Institute for Defense Analysis & Chair of the research advisory council @ Chemical and
Biological Arms Control Institute, Nonproliferation Review, Fall, p. 71, 1999
10