[eDebate] Fwd: why not topic 8? please forward
Thu Jul 13 09:52:20 CDT 2006
>From BV to you:
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Brandi Villarreal <june131986 at yahoo.com>
Date: Jul 13, 2006 10:47 AM
Subject: why not topic 8? please forward
To: jbhdb8 at gmail.com
Hey Josh, would you mind forwarding this to e-debate?
Josh, would you mind forwarding this to e-debate?
I think Scott Harris' sentiments on 4 cases limiting
too much really only applies to topic 7. With that I
think the community should give more consideration to
First, the term overrule really does not provide much
of a limit and I think that means one of the smaller
topics should be preferred. Although the neg may be
able to win their limiting interpretation in front of
good T judges, I think this provides some problems
against the more critical affs and with judges who
really don't value limits.
Second, hamdan does provide uniqueness problems for
quirin and we still have no idea how the legal
literature is going to go about this problem. I will
echo the sentiment that the neg should not have to
rely on their (god-given) uniqueness CP to get back to
square one in this debate.
Third, the uniqueness problems with Morrison are
really not overwhelming whatsoever. Reich may provide
questions on the federalism advantage but Morrison
still provides vast advantage areas on questions of
international law and women's rights.
Fourth, I think this topic is a perfect opportunity
for inclusion of race and gender issues which have
been excluded in previous topics. The 4 cases provide
timely and substantial literature on issues which are
often close to our daily lives. I don't think this
opportunity for inclusion of these important social
issues in policy debate should be overlooked.
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mailman