[eDebate] Wake MW Aff

lacyjp lacyjp
Wed Sep 27 17:30:08 CDT 2006


Wake MW Morrison Aff


Contention One is Gender Violence:

First, Morrison established a public/private dichotomy in response to 
Congress?s attempt to prevent gendered violence. This dichotomy is the 
most vicious attack on women?s equality in judicial history.

Catharine A. MacKinnon* Elizabeth A. Long Professor of Law, The 
University of Michigan Law School  2000114 Harv. L. Rev. 135, The 
Harvard Law Review Association Harvard Law Review  November, THE SUPREME 
COURT, 1999 TERM COMMENT: DISPUTING MALE SOVEREIGNTY: ON UNITED STATES 
v. MORRISON
The Morrison majority does not simply respect a preexisting line between 
what is private? preclude relief for the violation of one half of its 
people by the other should survive.

Second, it is impossible to separate the violence we allow to occur at 
home and the violence that occurs elsewhere in the world. The 
public/private dichotomy is moral hypocrisy and perpetuates societal 
patriarchy.

Bunch 1997, Charlotte, Executive Director for Women?s Global Leadership 
at Rutgers, ?The intolerable status quo: violence against women and 
girls,? The Progress of Nations 1997, http://www.unicef.org/pon97/women1.htm
Further, in most countries today, domestic abuse is officially regarded 
as a private ?The lesson is never forgotten.


Finally, this gendered violence constitutes the world?s most pervasive 
human rights violation possible-  eliminating this violence is necessary 
to create a new paradigm of human security to avoid war- human progress 
is impossible absent the plan.
Bunch 1997, Charlotte, Executive Director for Women?s Global Leadership 
at Rutgers, ?The intolerable status quo: violence against women and 
girls,? The Progress of Nations 1997, http://www.unicef.org/pon97/women1.htm

Imagine a people routinely subjected to assault, rape, sexual slavery, 
arbitrary imprisonment, torture, verbal abuse, mutilation,? outrage 
aimed at an intolerable status quo there is instead denial, and the 
largely passive acceptance of ?the way things are?.

Contention Two is Congressional Deference:

The lack of deference represented in Morrison establishes a frontier for 
judicial supremacy that crushes Congressional interpretation of the 
Constitution
Rachel E. Barkow, B.A., 1993, Northwestern University, J.D., 1996, 
Harvard University, Associate Professor of Law, New York University 
School of Law, March, 2002, Article: More Supreme Than Court? The Fall 
of the Political Question Doctrine and the Rise of Judicial Supremacy, 
Columbia Law Review, Lexis
Thus, even in the wake of Cooper, the Warren Court deferred to 
Congress's factual findings under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment 
and left questions of Congress's Commerce Clause power largely ?Court 
must abandon either its theory of supremacy or the political question 
doctrine. It is hardly surprising that the Court has opted for the 
course that aggrandizes its own power.

Subpoint A is Progressivism

First, the status quo assures conservative takeover of the Constitution. 
Judicial supremacy over constitutional interpretation dooms progressive 
politics.

West, February, 1990 88 Mich. L. Rev. 641 (Robin , Professor, University 
of Maryland School of Law)
A constitutionalized progressive agenda would centralize progressive 
concerns and lend them far greater ?however, a disaster in which 
progressive constitutionalists seem perversely willing to acquiesce.


Second, judicial supremacy should be sacrificed in order to free 
progressive politics from the restraints of adjudication. The plan 
re-establishes the Constitution as a progressive text.

Robin West, Professor of Law at Georgetown University Law Center, 
Michigan LR, February 90 (Progressive and Conservative 
Constitutionalism, Lexis)

the sense, and even more modestly the relevance of the progressive 
interpretation of the Constitution, depend not only on the merits of its 
interpretive claims, ?and what Owen Fiss might call more dramatically an 
"interpretive crisis." n21

Finally, this constitutional re-conceptualization is necessary to solve 
racism, sexism, and private domination.
Robin West, Professor of Law at Georgetown University Law Center, 1994, 
(Progressive Constitutionalism: Reconstructing the Fourteenth Amendment, 
p 285)
if we were to recharacterize our progressive understanding of the 
constitutional guarantees ?to protect the citizenry against the damaging 
effects of rampant social and private inequality.

Subpoint B is Democracy
First, the current trend of judicial supremacy threatens the model of 
American constitutionalism and separation of powers.
Larry D. Kramer, Samuel Tilden Professor of Law, New York University, 
November 2001, The Supreme Court 2000 Term: Foreword: We The Court, 
Harvard law review, 115 Harv. L. Rev. 4, ln

Which brings us to the Rehnquist Court?threatened by a Court that truly 
sees the Constitution as nothing more than ordinary law. Judicial 
supremacy is becoming judicial sovereignty.

Second, this trend will only get worse as time goes on. Failure to stop 
the court will result in a collapse of American constitutional democracy.

Larry D. Kramer, Samuel Tilden Professor of Law, New York University, 
November 2001, The Supreme Court 2000 Term: Foreword: We The Court, 
Harvard law review, 115 Harv. L. Rev. 4, ln
Precedent gathers momentum slowly, but once things are rolling, an 
avalanche can be difficult to avoid?. to take a good hard look at what 
the Rehnquist Court is up to and ask whether we should put a stop to it. 
Before it is too late.

Third, Supreme Court decisions and Constitutional interpretation are 
modeled worldwide
Albert P. Blaustein, Professor of Law, Rutgers School of Law, March, 
2004, The U.S. Constitution: America?s Most Important Export, Issues of 
Democracy, http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itdhr/0304/ijde/ijde0304.htm

With the end of World War II, American influence was dominant in the 
preparation of ?.. of the U.S. Constitution has been carried abroad by 
Americans who have been called upon to serve as advisers in the writing 
of other constitutions.

Fourth, constitutionalism is essential to promote an effective 
transition to democracy.
Fareed Zakaria, managing editor, Foreign Affairs, contributing editor, 
Newsweek, November/December, 1997, The Rise of Illiberal Democracy, 
Foreign Affairs, Lexis

Lang's embarrassment highlights two common, and often mistaken, 
assumptions -- that the forces of democracy are the forces of ethnic 
?democratic peace, it turns out, has little to do with democracy.

Finally, the impact is extinction

Larry Diamond, Hoover Institution senior fellow, co-editor of the 
Journal of Democracy, December 1995, A Report to the Carnegie Commission 
on Preventing Deadly Conflict, ?Promoting Democracy in the 1990s: Actors 
and Instruments, Issues and Imperatives,? 
http://wwics.si.edu/subsites/ccpdc/pubs/di/1.htm

Nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons continue to proliferate? a new 
world order of international security and prosperity can be built.
Thus the plan:

The United States Supreme Court should rule that the United States 
Congress has power under Section Five of the Fourteenth Amendment to 
regulate the private activity in Section 13981 on the basis that 
Congress? facts do not have to indicate a problem that exists in all, or 
even most, States.

Contention Three is Solvency:
Morrison should be overturned on equal protection grounds.  State 
inaction encourages continued violence.
Deena Hausner, lawyer at House of Ruth Domestic Violence Center, Spring 
/ Summer, 2002, United States v. Morrison: A Critique of the Supreme 
Court's Restriction of Congress' Fourteenth Amendment Powers, The Boston 
Public Interest Law Journal, 11 B.U. Pub. Int. L.J. 261, ln
The Morrison Court misunderstood the facts and circumstances supporting 
Congress' enactment ? served as an "ancillary remedy," providing women 
legal vindication in the absence of state action. 77

Second, deference to political Constitutional interpretations improves 
Constitutional understanding and promotes dialogue
Rachel E. Barkow, B.A., 1993, Northwestern University, J.D., 1996, 
Harvard University, Associate Professor of Law, New York University 
School of Law, March, 2002, Article: More Supreme Than Court? The Fall 
of the Political Question Doctrine and the Rise of Judicial Supremacy, 
Columbia Law Review, Lexis

Placing some interpretive power with the political branches also insures 
?deference therefore helps to promote a dialogue between the Court and 
the political branches.

The law will never cease to exist. Engagement in legal method and 
discourse is necessary for any transformative change.

Lucinda M. Finley, Visiting professor of Law, SUNY Buffalo, 1989 [64 
Notre Dame L. Rev. 886, ?Breaking Women?s Silence In Law: The Dilemma of 
the Gendered Nature of Legal Reasoning.? P. lexis]

So, what's a woman do? Give up on law, ?pursue trying to bring more of 
women's experiences, perspectives, and voices into law in order to 
empower women and help legitimate these experiences.

Finally, the plan opens up a space from which we can redeploy the state 
progressively as a way to challenge hierarchies in the name of freedom. 
Oppression and coercion are inevitable absent this commitment to 
progressivism.
West, February, 1990 88 Mich. L. Rev. 641 (Robin , Professor, University 
of Maryland School of Law)
Second, for some progressives, the meaning of the good and the good life 
that the state ought to promote,?doing, and only by so doing, can it 
further rather than frustrate the "good life" of the citizens over whom 
it unquestionably holds dominion.






More information about the Mailman mailing list