Tournament: CEDA | Round: 1 | Opponent: Arizona State WM | Judge: Brian, Box

1AC

The United States federal judiciary should restrict the war powers authority of the President of the United States to introduce nuclear armed forces into hostilities against a government for inadvertently releasing nuclear material used in an attack against the United States or its allies without Congressional approval.

1AC Negligence Adv—- RU + Pak

Nuclear terror is inevitable

Jaspal 2012 (Zafar Nawaz Jaspal, Associate Professor at the School of Politics and International Relations, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad, Pakistan "Nuclear/Radiological Terrorism: Myth or Reality?", Journal of Political Studies, Vol. 19, Issue - 1, 2012, 91:111)
The misperception, miscalculation and above all ignorance of the ruling elite about security puzzles
AND
the possibility that terrorist groups could acquire fissile material from the rogue states. 

*Latest IAEA assessment concludes the risk is underestimated

Sturdee 2013 (Simon Sturdee, AFP reporter, July 1, 2013, "UN atomic agency sounds warning on ’nuclear terrorism’," Fox News, http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/07/01/un-atomic-agency-sounds-warning-on-nuclear-terrorism/~~23ixzz2dsmqwOk3)
The head of the UN atomic agency warned Monday against complacency in preventing "nuclear
AND
," Michelle Cann, co-author of the report, told AFP.

Detonation is easy

Bunn 2010 (Matthew Bunn, Professor of Practice at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, April 2010, "Securing the Bomb 2010," NTI, http://www.nti.org/media/pdfs/Securing_The_Bomb_2010.pdf?_=1317159794)
Repeated assessments by the U.S. government and other governments have ¶ concluded
AND
¶ one would know for sure whether they ¶ could set it off. 

*Nuclear terrorism in and of itself does not pose an existential threat to survival

Wolfe 2009 (Kavan Wolfe, a Canadian author, IT consultant, June 25, 2009, "Imaginary Existential Threats", http://thewaronbullshit.com/2009/06/25/exaggerated_threats/)
Without venturing into the absurd, the realistic worse case for terrorism is a single
AND
The modern world would go on after the bombing of another major city. 

However, Obama will authorize nuclear retaliation against negligent states—- NPR explicitly says so

Beljac 2010 (Marko Beljac, PhD at Monash University, Teaches at LaTrobe University and the University of Melbourne, August 17, 2010, National Research Council Report on Nuclear Forensics Exposes the Soft Underbelly of Deterrence Policy, Nuclear Resonances, http://scisec.net/?p=435)
Before looking at this issue it would pay to have a look at the Obama
AND
US decides that that state was negligent in its oversight over nuclear materials. 

Causes nuclear war with Russia and collapses Pakistan

Knopf 2010 (Jeffrey Knopf, Ph.D., Political Science from Stanford University as well as an MA from Stanford and a BA from Harvard University, April 2010, "The Fourth Wave in Deterrence Research," Contemporary Security Policy, Vol.31, No.1)
Although many analysts want to hold accountable any state that becomes a source¶ of
AND
States declare it will not necessarily require de?nitive attribution before¶ responding.116

Russia nuke war causes extinction

Bostrum 2002 (Nick Bostrum, Professor of Philosophy at Yale, "Existential Risks: Analyzing Human Extinction Scenarios and Related Hazards," 2002, http://goo.gl/rmQyl)
A much greater existential risk emerged with the build-up of nuclear arsenals in
AND
preludes to the existential risks that we will encounter in the 21st century. 

Pakistan collapse causes global nuclear war

Pitt 2009 (William Pitt, New York Times and internationally bestselling author of two books: "War on Iraq: What Team Bush Doesn’t Want You to Know" and "The Greatest Sedition Is Silence.", May 8, 2009, "Unstable Pakistan Threatens the World," http://www.arabamericannews.com/news/index.php?mod=article26cat=commentary26article=2183)
But a suicide bomber in Pakistan rammed a car packed with explosives into a jeep
AND
to be gravely serious about addressing the situation. So should we all. 

Aff solves—- Congress won’t authorize nuclear retaliation—- failure to clarify authority now causes crisis of legitimacy whether we actually retaliate or not

Hemesath 2000 (Paul A. Hemesath, J.D./M.S.F.S. Georgetown University Law Center, School of Foreign Service, August 2000, "Who’s Got the Button? Nuclear War Powers Uncertainty in the Post-Cold War Era," Georgetown Law Journal, lexis)
Assuming a greater frequency and intensity of terrorist activity, the Executive may be faced
AND
the nonexistence of the Executive’s very constitutional authority to carry out the act. 

Negligence doctrine incentivizes nuclear terror—- gives them political support for high magnitude attacks

Beljac 2008 (Marko Beljac, PhD at Monash University, February 8, 2008, "Pakistan and the prospects for nuclear terrorism," Australian Policy Online, http://apo.org.au/commentary/pakistan-and-prospects-nuclear-terrorism)
One disturbing option that has been opened up by nuclear forensics and has been seriously
AND
immoral grounds would enrage, and hopefully radicalise, the entire Islamic world.

Nuclear terrorists cannot be deterred

Van de Velde 2010 (James Van de Velde, Associate for the consulting firm, Booz Allen Hamilton, has over 20 years of experience in academia, intelligence collection and analysis, political, counter terrorism and proliferation analysis, and national security affairs.  He is a former White House Appointee under President George H.W. Bush Sr., Yale University lecturer and residential college dean, State Department Foreign Service Officer and naval intelligence reserve officer, 2010, "The Impossible Challenge of Deterring ’Nuclear Terrorism’ by Al Qaeda," Studies in Con?ict 26 Terrorism, 33:682–699, EBSCO; the more you know: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/05/nyregion/james-van-de-velde-from-pariah-back-to-pillar.html?_r=0)
Conclusion¶ Al Qaeda continues to represent a worldwide threat to the United States and
AND
is defeated when no one (or¶ very few) join it.

1AC PQD Adv

The plan modifies the political question doctrine to recognize Congressional standing in WPR suits

Hemesath 2000 (Paul A. Hemesath, J.D./M.S.F.S. Georgetown University Law Center, School of Foreign Service, August 2000, "Who’s Got the Button? Nuclear War Powers Uncertainty in the Post-Cold War Era," Georgetown Law Journal, lexis)
The Campbell case was then considered by the United States Court of Appeals for the
AND
constitutional authority will haunt and delegitimize such a decision for generations to come.

Shifts to judicial dynamism—- makes room for judicial review when Congress is prevented from checking the prez by saying that’s NOT a political question

Roberts 2009 (Caprice L. Roberts, Associate Dean of Faculty Research 26 Development and Professor of Law, West Virginia University, Spring 2009, "ALTERNATIVE VISIONS OF THE JUDICIAL ROLE: Asymmetric World Jurisprudence," Seattle University Law Review, Lexis)
The Supreme Court has not clarified whether the political question doctrine is a constitutional or
AND
, even when, ordinarily, a doctrine of restraint might dictate otherwise.

This is key to avert executive groupthink

Marshall 2008 (William P. Marshall, Kenan Professor of Law, University of North Carolina, "ELEVEN REASONS WHY PRESIDENTIAL POWER INEVITABLY EXPANDS AND WHY IT MATTERS," Boston University Law Review, http://www.bu.edu/law/central/jd/organizations/journals/bulr/documents/MARSHALL.pdf)
The expansion of presidential power is also a product of executive branch ¶ lawyering.
AND
pressure for DOJ to develop expansive ¶ interpretations of presidential power is inexorable.

Inevitable crises and black swans will test Obama—- sound policy responses key to prevent escalation

Indyk 2013 (Martin S. Indyk, president and director of the Foreign Policy Program, is currently on a leave of absence serving as the U.S. special envoy for the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. During the Clinton administration Indyk served as U.S. ambassador to Israel, assistant secretary of state for Near East affairs, and as special assistant to the president and senior director for Near East and South Asia on the U.S. National Security Council, January 18, 2013, "Over the Horizon," Brookings, http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2013/01/18-five-global-crises-obama-indyk)
U.S. President Barack Obama begins his second term at a critical moment
AND
a crisis could take the form of a domestic revolution or foreign war.

Without judicial checks groupthink makes all those go nuclear

Adler 2008 (David Gray Adler, professor of Political Science at Idaho State University, June 1, 2008, "The Judiciary and Presidential Power in Foreign Affairs: A Critique," http://www.freerangethought.com/index.php?option=com_content26task=blogsection26id=626Itemid=41)
~{1~}The unmistakable trend toward executive domination of U.S. foreign
AND
to an examination of the judiciary’s contribution to executive hegemony in foreign affairs.

Independently, deference to the military makes extinction inevitable

Kellman 1989 (Barry Kellman, Professor of Law at Depaul University, December 1998, "Judicial Abdication of Military Tort Accountability: But Who is to Guard the Guards Themselves?," Duke Law Journal, lexis)
In this era of thermonuclear weapons, America must uphold its historical commitment to be
AND
or not they have been overstepped in a particular case, are judicial questions

Second term appointments leave Obama especially susceptible to groupthink

Ignatius 2013 (David Ignatius, February 22, 2013, "Out: Team of rivals. In: Obama’s guys.," Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/david-ignatius-in-obamas-new-cabinet-rivals-out-loyalists-in/2013/02/22/13f2f27e-7c73-11e2-82e8-61a46c2cde3d_story.html)
During President Obama’s first term, there was hidden friction between powerful Cabinet secretaries and
AND
are going in the same direction, he is perilously close to groupthink. 

Internal checks fail—- Syria proves

Moghaddam, prof of psychology at Gtown, 9/3 (Fathali M. Moghaddam, Ph.D., professor in the Department of Psychology and the director of the Conflict Resolution Program, Department of Government at Georgetown University, September 3, 2013, "Groupthink, Syria, and President Obama," Psychology Today, http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-psychology-dictatorship/201309/groupthink-syria-and-president-obama)
Irrespective of what your position is on the possible US strike against Syria, you
AND
lose situations – like our current situation vis-à-vis Syria.   

Groupthink causes failure of the Asia pivot

Tsai 2013 (Sabrina Tsai, Research Fellow at Project 2049 Institute, September 2013, "Obama’s Second Term in the Asia-Pacific Region: Reflecting on the Past, Looking to the Future," Project 2049, http://project2049.net/documents/Tsai_Obama_Second_Term_in_Asia_Pacific_Region.pdf)
What effect will these personnel changes in Obama’s foreign policy team have on the ¶
AND
be how the officials in Obama’s second term ¶ carry out these objectives.

Solves Asia wars

Barno and Bensahel 2012 (David Barno, Lieutenant General, Center for a New American Security Senior Advisor and Senior Fellow, Nora Bensahel, Ph.D., CNAS Deputy Director of Studies and Senior Fellow, 1/6/12, You Can’t Have It All, www.cnas.org/node/7641)
The pivot to the Asia-Pacific is essential because the region stands poised to
AND
worry about American decline by clearly conveying an unwavering commitment to Asian security.

Asia conflict likely and goes nuclear war

Landy 2000 (Jonathan Landy, National Security expert at Knight Ridder, March 10, 2000, Lexis)
Few if any experts think China and Taiwan, North Korea and South Korea,
AND
that totaled 24600 billion last year, according to the Commerce Department.