[eDebate] A call to modify the list topics
Fri Jun 9 09:52:08 CDT 2006
My concern is that this may just be shifting the bias from the Aff to the
Neg. Focusing on Morrison, if the Aff plan is limited to defending that the
standard is good but should not have been applied to VAWA, isn't the Neg the
one who will run the CP to reject the underlying legal standard and now get
all the benefit of solving VAWA plus all the random advantages I've reported
that I've been finding in the law reviews? The perm here is interesting --
personally I think, in the context of the Court mechanism, distinguishing
and overruling the decision by rejecting the standard are mutually exclusive
as the legal and political ramifications of the different approaches are up
for substantive debate.
Basically I'm not opposed to this per se because I have no qualms about a
topic being Aff v. Neg biased, but I worry that, if you are willing to
believe the problems I've outlined along with my legal colleagues, these
amendments just shift the problem.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mailman