Tournament: Northeastchampionship | Round: 4 | Opponent: New Trevett-Oakley | Judge: Hall
A. The Link—The affirmative’s faith in the legal system is misplaced.  The prevailing discourse of the law that they engage in is not neutral and objective but rather a discourse of power that serves to prevent marginalized voices from grasping hold of the levers of power.  The law itself is indeterminate and the rationalizing criteria the affirmative uses to make their legal argument is an excuse to freeze existing social relations and systems of oppression.
Robert W. GORDON, Professor of Law at Stanford University, 1987
“Unfreezing Legal Reality: Critical Approaches To Law,” Florida State University Law Review (15 Fla. St. U.L. Rev. 195), Summer, Available Online to Subscribing Institutions via Lexis-Nexis

Now a central AND a Florida case.

Subpoint B: The Impact—First—the affirmative’s faith in the legal system not only fails to secure the advantages they isolate but also actively contributes to authoritarianism.  The law and legal interpretation are unquestionably violent, ensuring the dominance of existing powerful interests and killing off alternative visions of justice.
Lynne HENDERSON, Professor of Law at the Indiana University School of Law at Bloomington, 1991
“Authoritarianism and the Rule of Law,” Indiana Law Journal (66 Ind. L.J. 379), Spring, Available Online to Subscribing Institutions via Lexis-Nexis

The lack of AND meaning and "law." 

Subpoint C: The Alternative—Vote negative to shake the rug out from under the legal system by engaging in constant, active criticism.  Even if we cannot articulate an alternative vision for the future, this form of reactive and destructive criticism is a necessary prerequisite to any successful move toward liberation.  Freeing us from the shackles of legal tradition is the only way for each of us to assume individual responsibility for the way we live our lives.
Joseph William SINGER, Associate Professor of Law at Boston University, 1984
“The Player and the Cards: Nihilism and Legal Theory,” Yale Law Journal (94 Yale L.J. 1), November, Available Online to Subscribing Institutions via Lexis-Nexis

What shall we AND that question ourselves.

Tournament: Jvnovicenationals | Round: 6 | Opponent: Liberty Miller-Wullschleger | Judge: Jensen
Red Dawn 

The Soviet Lion is far from Dead - one by one the nations of the free world are falling to the Communist Menace - Militarism and Strength now is Key
NYQUIST 2003 (J.R., Defence Analyst, April 28, http://www.jrnyquist.com/nyquist_2003_0428.htm)

The source of AND hoops of steel. 

The aff’s “kissy happy time” policy is traitorous and aids the Reds - their grand shift away from militarism opens the floodgates to Soviet Nuclear Strike.  Their hippie philosophy ignores the reality of the USSR
NYQUIST 99 (J.R. Nyquist, a WorldNetDaily contributing editor and a renowned expert in geopolitics and international relations, is the author of "Origins of the Fourth World War." http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=19774)

The greatest danger AND test the Americans. 

Soviet biological and nuclear attacks will kill millions and plunge the world into a New Dark Age, turning Case
NYQUIST 99 (J.R. Nyquist, a WorldNetDaily contributing editor and a renowned expert in geopolitics and international relations, is the author of "Origins of the Fourth World War." http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=19773)

In Russian thinking AND kind of deterrence. 

Heg K 

The Affirmative’s criticism of American policy is dangerous – it contributes to isolationism and the eventual collapse of U.S. primacy
Kagan, 98 (Robert, senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and PhD in American History from American University, “The Benevolent Empire,” Foreign Policy. Summer, http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=viewandid=275 AFM)

Those contributing to AND next American humbling. 

Their intellectual arrogance will get us killed – the debating and whining needs to end so we can face realistic threats
Hanson, 3 (Victor Davis, Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Professor Emeritus at California University, Fresno, Ph.D. from Stanford, “We Could Still Lose.” National Review Online. August 11. http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/3050721.html. AFM)

If one were AND they pass away. 

Ceding to the affirmative’s antics is suicide – the only risk of international violence is a world in which the U.S. succumbs to internal criticism
Sowell, 6 (Thomas Sowell, Senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, “Where is the West?” 11-19-2006, http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell110906.php3 AFM)

European nations protesting AND being annihilated ourselves? 

The failure to embrace violent solutions guarantees foreign aggression from Iran and other violent regimes – their criticism is an open invitation to a new generation of Hitlers
Sowell, 7 (Thomas Sowell, Senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, “Morally Paralyzed,” 7-24-2007, http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell072407.php3 AFM)

"Moral paralysis" is AND paralyzed, perhaps fatally? 

The result is wars around globe
Rosen, 3 (Stephen Peter Rosen, Beton Michael Kaneb Professor of National Security and Military Affairs at Harvard University, The National Interest. “An Empire, if You Can Keep It.” March 22. http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-99377575.html AFM)

Rather than wrestle AND much more attractive. 

To make matters worse, the affirmative is utterly incapable of describing or even comprehending the horrors of a world without active American engagement.  War has proven to be an effective vehicle for liberating millions and stopping Hitler and it is the only thing standing between us and greater evil in the form of terrorism.
Peters, 5 (Ralph, retired U.S. Army intelligence officer, The New York Post, "Protest Therapy," 9-27-2005,  http://terpsboy.com/Articles/protest-therapy.html AFM)

The reason no AND failed lives meaning. 

The alternative is to vote negative to align yourself with American hegemony

The only tangible threat to US primacy is isolationism – rhetoric of support is critical to preserving international stability
Kristol and Kagan, 96 (William Kristol – visiting professor in government at Harvard University and Robert Kagan – senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and PhD in American History, “Toward a Neo-Reganite Foreign Policy,” Foreign Affairs. July/August, http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=viewandid=276 AFM)

Twenty years later AND and moral confidence. 

Framework

A. Interpretation—Debate rounds should preserve a politically-enabling discussion by ratifying constraints that make the round accessible and predictable for both sides.  These considerations form an a-priori reason to vote negative. Use your ballot to ratify minimal constraints on discourse.
Ruth Lessl Shively, Associate Professor of Political Science at Texas AandM, 2000, Political Theory and Partisan Politics, p. 179

To put this AND can give them. 

B. Violation – The affirmative claims to win the debate for reasons other than the desirability of topical USFG action. Their advocacy is insufficient because it fails to place requisite limits on the range of argument.  A definitive stable and unconditionally topical action is key. 

C. Standards – You should evaluate framework like a cplan.  Here are multiple disadvantages to their interpretation.

1. Preparation and Clash- The aff will always win that the principles of their advocacy are good in the abstract – meaningful debate can only occur if they defend specific political proposals so that the imperfections of all choices can be explored through prior research and examined faithfully in the debate round

Michael Ignatieff, Carr Professor of Human Rights Practice, Director of the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at the JFK School of Government, Harvard University, 2004, The Lesser Evil: Political Ethics in an Age of Terror, p. 20-1 

There are two AND supposed to defend. 

 2. Policy Education – Education through participation in policy debates is our best hope for protecting justice in the real world.  That knowledge provides the method to check manipulation of the government by powerful private interests
Donald S. Lutz, Professor of Polisci at Houston, 2000, Political Theory and Partisan Politics, p. 36-7

The position argued AND the long run. 

3. In-round abuse.  Even if the affirmative wins their interpretation is salient, their advantages extend well beyond the instrumentality of judicial or statutory restrictions to clam advantages.  Extra-topicality is an independent voter because it proves the resolution insufficient and is outside the judge’s jurisdiction. 

4. Predictable research limits--There are limitless contexts or avenues through which they could purport to advocate the plan.   Our interpretation establishes a research pool that facilitates both sides engaging in relevant dialogue and structured communication.
Donald S. Lutz, Professor of Political Science at Houston, 2000, Political Theory and Partisan Politics, p. 39-40

Aristotle notes in AND the non-theorist. 

D. Vote negative and ratify constraints for reasons of jurisdiction and education.

Tournament: Jvnovicenationals | Round: 1 | Opponent: CUNY McIntyre-Joseph | Judge: Godbey
Every time a debate occurs in which the debate space is discussed, there is a moment when we should ask not only “what now” but “what’s next”.   This moment is derived not simply from performative resistance but the standpoint of those identified as allies, non-allied or in direct opposition to that movement.   Those who are pressed into opposition by construction of a pairing not personal choice have an opportunity to add tremendously to the conversation not only through their participation but by their observations.  We note that the power of CUNY in this debate has rendered a success unreflected in the discussion thus far.  White supremacy may be alive outside this room and re-inscribe itself with every new word but inside in this round where their power flourishes it is very much dead.   By calling attention to their power,  all of us can bring down structural racism. Their method of disrupting the master’s house does not include a method for accepting “we’ve won”.  That realization is undermined by years of mistrust and deception by the instruments of whiteness and we do not dream of ignoring our own culpability and privilege as part of that discussion.   We are the paladin, a mass communication strategy centered in the microcosm of this round positioned far enough on the outside to comment on their unacknowledged success which is essential to shape the larger policy debate.  Acknowledgement builds their power to move future policy.

Quiroz-Martinez 10 {Julie- Senior Fellow, Movement Strategy Center, former Akonadi Senior Program Consultant FROM THE ROOTS: Building the Power of Communities of Color to Challenge Structural Racism January 2010 akonadi.org/document/download/607}

Good work is AND structural racism analysis.

Our methodology requires talking about power, building objectives and establishing tools for local control.  Theses methodologies arise from the most extensive study ever done on power and issues of race.  
Stone and Butler in 2000 {Rebecca- senior research associate at the Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago, Benjamin-founder and principal of Community Development Associates, Feb Chapin Hill Ctr for Children Core Issues in Comprehensive Community-Building Initiatives Exploring Power and Race http://www.chapinhall.org/sites/default/files/CB_24.pdf p120-121}

In sum, there AND to future generations.

When we voice a message that recognizes victories over domination, they take steps towards power.  Building this power, builds movements.  Building movements builds capacity to advance our project’s mission and create change by advancing social and economic justice and diffusing the dominant structure
Pruett in 02 {Holly-editor Western Progressive Leadership Network Building Grassroots Power: An Introduction to Electoral Politics www.westernstatescenter.org/tools-and-resources/...power.../download}

For the past AND the political process.