Tournament: GSU | Round: 6 | Opponent: Missouri State | Judge: Stephen Weil

The United States federal judiciary should restrict the war powers authority of the President of the United States to retaliate to terrorist WMD strikes against the United States without Congressional approval.

Tournament: Kentucky | Round: 3 | Opponent: Emory KM | Judge: Ron Stevenson

The President of the United States should issue an executive order clarifying that offensive cyber operations presumptively rely on covert action authority and, unless being conducted as part of a conflict already authorized by Congress, require classified ex ante reports to congressional intelligence committees or the "Gang of Eight" whenever feasible. When ex ante reports are not feasible, the President must submit a timely ex post report with an explanation for the necessity of the delay. The Executive Branch should issue and abide by a Presidential Proclamation that in the case of armed conflict, the United States’ offensive cyber operations will be conducted in accordance with the Laws of Armed Conflict.

Counterplan is the best middle ground —- solves oversight and legal legitimacy of cyberattacks while preserving presidential flexibility —- doesn’t link to politics

Brecher 12 Aaron Brecher is a JD candidate @ the University of Michigan Law School. "Cyberattacks and the Covert Action Statute: Toward a Domestic Legal Framework for Offensive Cyberoperations," December, 111 Mich. L. Rev. 423, Lexis
This Part argues that the federal government should adopt the presumption that cyberattacks will be
AND
cyberattack context are too great to be left to the president alone. n156

Cyber declaratory policy solves miscalc and arms-racing—-the plan is a blanket restriction that crushes US flex

ICT4Peace 13, UN working group of experts in Information, Communications and Technology. The Foundation’s advisory board consists of a Nobel Peace Laureate, senior diplomats, world-renowned practitioners, industry and domain experts, academics and researchers in the use of ICTs for peacebuilding and humanitarian aid. - See more at: http://ict4peace.org/?page_id=96~~23sthash.LZRiKoUZ.dpuf Confidence Building in Cyberspace: Constructive work by UN experts, http://ict4peace.org/author/admin/~~23sthash.Io9Cwyh1.dpuf, ict4peace.org/author/admin/
noteRSO=regional security organization
Enhanced mechanisms for sharing of good practice between and among RSOs would be a powerful step to take forward. A first step in this regard would be to institutionalize dialogue among the RSOs. In the same vein, RSO involvement should be seen as complimentary to bilateral CBMs, such as those recently announced between Russia and the US. This is a complicated problem, and a "one size fits all" solution will not work. Much of the debate so far, whether about norms or CBMs, has been about the development of consensual approaches to the issue; but it is important to bear in mind the role that declaratory policy can also play. In this regard, it is worth recalling that in conventional domains, confidence building often begins with a unilateral concession by one or more parties: in Northern Ireland, the Middle East, and the Soviet Union, for example. Declaratory policy needs to be credible, but it is often the symbolism that is important, and it does not necessarily mean giving away your most valuable bargaining chips. For example, what signal would it send if a nation – or a group of nations – were to publicly declare that should an armed conflict arise, any form of cyber offensive would be conducted in accordance with the Laws of Armed Conflict (LOAC) and principles of necessity, proportionality and distinction. Today however, some states believe that if cyberspace is viewed as a strategic domain and the applicability of the LOAC to cyberspace is discussed, the latter will propel an arms race. Meanwhile, other states feel that clarity and observance of international law is vital, as the absence of clarity could in itself lead to misperceptions over the intent of a state, spurring a cyber arms race. States might also make a declaratory statement about how they would view and react to pre-positioning of offensive cyber capabilities on elements of their critical national infrastructure (CNI). Consensus on this topic will be difficult to achieve. Conversely, given that many nations would honour their international obligations in all domains in the event of an armed conflict, it remains unclear whether a declaratory policy or "unilateral concession" it is unclear whether this would be a helpful means to increase confidence. - See more at: http://ict4peace.org/author/admin/~~23sthash.Io9Cwyh1.dpuf

Presidential speech on cyber solves international norms and US influence without Congressional involvement—-doesn’t risk divulging key secrets like the plan does

Peter Singer 13, director of the 21st Century Defense Initiative at the Brookings Institution, and Thomas Wright, fellow in the Managing Global Order project.Obama, own your secret wars, 17 Feb 2013, www.nydailynews.com/opinion/obama-secret-wars-article-1.1265620?print
Irony pervades President Obama’s place in foreign policy today. He won the Nobel Peace
AND
new world with our heads held high and our voice loud and clear.

Tournament: Harvard | Round: 3 | Opponent: UMW MP | Judge: Carly Wunderlich

The Executive branch should publicly articulate the legal rationale for its targeted killing policy, including the process and safeguards in place for target selection.

The United States Congress should enact a resolution and issue a white paper stating that, in the conduct of its oversight it has reviewed ongoing targeted killing operations and determined that the United States government is conducting such operations in full compliance with relevant laws, including but not limited to the Authorization to Use Military Force of 2001, covert action findings, and the President’s inherent powers under the Constitution.

The CP’s the best middle ground—-preserves the vital counter-terror role of targeted killings while resolving all their downsides

Daniel Byman 13, Professor in the Security Studies Program at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University and a Senior Fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, July/August 2013, "Why Drones Work," Foreign Affairs, Vol. 92, No. 4
Despite President Barack Obama’s recent call to reduce the United States’ reliance on drones,
AND
, and with fewer civilian casualties than many alternative methods would have caused.
Critics, however, remain skeptical. They claim that drones kill thousands of innocent
AND
comparatively low-risk way of targeting these areas while minimizing collateral damage.
So drone warfare is here to stay, and it is likely to expand in
AND
drone warfare risks dragging the United States into conflicts it could otherwise avoid.

The CP’s combination of executive disclosure and Congressional support boosts accountability and legitimacy

Gregory McNeal 13, Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine University, 3/5/13, "Targeted Killing and Accountability," http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583
Perhaps the most obvious way to add accountability to the targeted killing process is for
AND
post 9/11 targeted killings. In fact, James Baker once noted
"In my experience, the United States does a better job at incorporating intelligence
AND
the decision cycle for that subset of targets raising the hardest issues…"519
Publicly defending the process is a natural fit for public accountability mechanisms. It provides
AND
control, thus their caution is understandable (albeit self-serving).520
It’s not just the Executive branch that can benefit from a healthier defense of the process. Congress too can bolster the legitimacy of the program by specifying how they have conducted their oversight activities. The best mechanism by which they can do this is through a white paper. That paper could include:
A statement about why the committees believe the U.S. government’s use of
AND
publicly withdraw our support for the program, and terminate funding for it."
A statement detailing the breadth and depth of Congressional oversight activities. When Senator Feinstein
AND
improper targeting? Are the members satisfied that internal disciplinary procedures are adequate?
3) Congressional assessment of the foreign relations implications of the program. The Constitution
AND
us to question the wisdom and perhaps even the legality of the program."

Tournament: GSU | Round: 2 | Opponent: Houston | Judge: Will Repko

The president should issue a declaration that the United States federal government will not introduce nuclear weapons first into hostilities

Counterplan solves cred and the case

Adrian Vermeule 7, Harvard law prof - AND - Eric Posner - U Chicago law, The Credible Executive, 74 U. Chi. L. Rev. 865
*We do not endorse gendered language
The Madisonian system of oversight has not totally failed. Some- times legislators overcome
AND
, we may speak of formal and informal means of self-binding:  

The counterplan maintains the benefits of the unitary executive while deterring excessive presidential adventurism

Neal Katyal 6, prof, Georgetown law, Internal Separation of Powers: Checking Today’s Most Dangerous Branch from Within, 115 Yale L.J. 2314
This Essay’s proposed reforms reflect a more textured conception of the presidency than either the
AND
-term consequences that short-term executivists may not fully appreciate. n9

Executive self-restraint is the only way to solve the case

Gillian Metzger 9, prof, Columbia Law, THE INTERDEPENDENT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL SEPARATION OF POWERS 59 Emory L.J. 423
The case in favor of internal mechanisms is in part comparative. Real limitations exist
AND
perceived as contributing to more fully informed and expertise-based decisionmaking. n79

Tournament: GSU | Round: 8 | Opponent: Wake | Judge: David Heidt

The United States Executive branch should establish binding policy that substantially restricts the use of signature strikes, defined as targeted killings of targets identified based on observed patterns of behavior or characteristics. The United States Executive branch should invite quarterly Congressional review of compliance with this policy under existing mechanisms for Congressional oversight of United States targeted killing policy, beginning in the first quarter of 2014.

Internal executive procedures solve the case—-particularly credibility and perception

Jeh Johnson 13, former Pentagon General Counsel, 3/18/13, "Keynote address at the Center on National Security at Fordham Law School: A "Drone Court": Some Pros and Cons," http://www.lawfareblog.com/2013/03/jeh-johnson-speech-on-a-drone-court-some-pros-and-cons/
What is my alternative prescription?  I offer three things:
First, continued efforts at transparency, as an important government interest in and of
AND
American values are not trade-offs, and can co-exist.

Congress provides credible external oversight now while preserving executive flexibility

Amy Zegart 13, senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, a faculty member at Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation, and Professor of Political Economy, by courtesy, at the Stanford Graduate School of Business, 3/27/13, "Wait, Did the System Just Work?," http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/03/27/wait_did_the_system_just_work
The intelligence committee’s establishment politics and Paul’s populist filibuster proved strange but effective bedfellows. It took just 42 days from Brennan’s hearing to get wind that the CIA may be getting out of the drone business. That’s warp speed under any circumstances. Consider this: Immediately after 9/11, it took longer to pass the PATRIOT Act, and that’s back when Republicans and Democrats were singing "God Bless America" together on the Capitol steps.
However you feel about targeted killing, this moment was undoubtedly an oversight success, bringing an important policy into the public domain, where it can be scrutinized, defended, challenged, and discussed in a vigorous exchange between the legislative and executive branches, all without compromising national security. Was it pretty? No. But it was American democracy at its spirited best. Secrecy and accountability both won.
But don’t get used to it. The drone policy shift is the exception that proves the rule: On most intelligence issues on most days, intelligence oversight is feckless, and Congress knows it. "I’ve been on this committee for more than 10 years," Senator Barbara Mikulski told Brennan during his confirmation, "and with the exception of Mr. Panetta, I feel I’ve been jerked around by every CIA director." And that’s just what she says in public.

Tournament: GSU | Round: 2 | Opponent: Houston | Judge: Will Repko

Congressional restrictions cause adversaries to doubt the credibility of our threats —- causes crisis escalation

Matthew Waxman 8/25/13, Professor of Law @ Columbia and Adjunct Senior Fellow for Law and Foreign Policy @ CFR, "The Constitutional Power to Threaten War," Forthcoming in Yale Law Journal, vol. 123, August 25, 2013, SSRN
A claim previously advanced from a presidentialist perspective is that stronger legislative checks on war
AND
to use force in order to prevent a confrontation which might escalate.179

Credible US threats of force are the key pillar of US strategy —- solves a laundry list of impacts

Matthew Waxman 8/25/13, Professor of Law @ Columbia and Adjunct Senior Fellow for Law and Foreign Policy @ CFR, "The Constitutional Power to Threaten War," Forthcoming in Yale Law Journal, vol. 123, August 25, 2013, SSRN
After the Cold War, the United States continued to rely on coercive force –
AND
U.S. protection, to avert a destabilizing arms race.111

Tournament: Harvard | Round: 3 | Opponent: UMW MP | Judge: Carly Wunderlich

Plan collapses the effectiveness of targeted killing—-disrupts military operations and degrades the quality of decisions

Jeh Johnson 13, former Pentagon General Counsel, 3/18/13, "Keynote address at the Center on National Security at Fordham Law School: A "Drone Court": Some Pros and Cons," http://www.lawfareblog.com/2013/03/jeh-johnson-speech-on-a-drone-court-some-pros-and-cons/
Starting with the last of these criteria: this one is implicit in every military
AND
gained by having a federal judge try to review these details in advance.
Next, there are the questions of feasibility of capture and imminence.  These really are up-to-the-minute, real time assessments of the type I believe Judge Bates was referring to when he said that courts are "institutionally ill-equipped ’to assess the nature of battlefield decisions.’"~11~  Indeed, I have seen feasibility of capture of a particular objective change several times in one night.  Nor are these questions ones of a legal nature, by the way.
Judges are accustomed to making legal determinations based on a defined, settled set of
AND
believe we will also discourage the type of continual reevaluation I’m referring to.

Targeted killing’s vital to counterterrorism—-disrupts leadership and makes carrying out attacks impossible

Kenneth Anderson 13, Professor of International Law at American University, June 2013, "The Case for Drones," Commentary, Vol. 135, No. 6
Targeted killing of high-value terrorist targets, by contrast, is the end result of a long, independent intelligence process. What the drone adds to that intelligence might be considerable, through its surveillance capabilities — but much of the drone’s contribution will be tactical, providing intelligence that assists in the planning and execution of the strike itself, in order to pick the moment when there might be the fewest civilian casualties.
Nonetheless, in conjunction with high-quality intelligence, drone warfare offers an unparalleled means to strike directly at terrorist organizations without needing a conventional or counterinsurgency approach to reach terrorist groups in their safe havens. It offers an offensive capability, rather than simply defensive measures, such as homeland security alone. Drone warfare offers a raiding strategy directly against the terrorists and their leadership.
If one believes, as many of the critics of drone warfare do, that
AND
common enemies are examples of the methods that are just of military nature.
Drone warfare today is integrated with a much larger strategic counterterrorism target — one in
AND
acknowledged in communications, have a significant impact on planning and organizational effectiveness.

Limiting targeted killings in Pakistan causes a shift to ground assaults—-turns the case and collapses the Pakistani government

Richard Weitz 11, Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis at the Hudson Institute, 1/2/11, "WHY UAVS HAVE BECOME THE ANTI-TERROR WEAPON OF CHOICE IN THE AFGHAN-PAK BORDER," http://www.sldinfo.com/why-uavs-have-become-the-anti-terror-weapon-of-choice-in-the-afghan-pak-border/
Perhaps the most important argument in favor of using UAV strikes in northwest Pakistan and other terrorist havens is that alternative options are typically worse.
AND
Given these alternatives, continuing the drone strikes appears to be the best of the limited options available to deal with a core problem, giving sanctuary to terrorists striking US and coalition forces in Afghanistan and beyond.

Empowering Pakistani hardliners triggers nuclear war with India—-extinction

Greg Chaffin 11, Research Assistant at Foreign Policy in Focus, July 8, 2011, "Reorienting U.S. Security Strategy in South Asia," online: http://www.fpif.org/articles/reorienting_us_security_strategy_in_south_asia
This policy is probably not directed from the top. Indeed, any characterization of
AND
India, U.S. and Pakistani interests in Afghanistan will diverge.
Five Minutes to Midnight
The greatest threat to regional security (although curiously not at the top of most
AND
lead to all-out war between the two that could quickly escalate.

Tournament: GSU | Round: 2 | Opponent: Houston | Judge: Will Repko

1NC Threats Fail Adv

The U.S. has nuclear primacy now—-credible threat of first-strikes is key
Lieber 26 Press 6 – Keir A. Lieber, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame, and Daryl G. Press, Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania, Spring 2006, "The End of MAD?: The Nuclear Dimension of U.S. Primacy," International Security, Vol. 30, No. 4, p. 7-44
For nearly half a century, the world’s most powerful nuclear-armed countries have
AND
—it suggests that the Chinese strategic nuclear arsenal is far more vulnerable.
Our model does not prove that a U.S. disarming attack against Russia would succeed. Nor does the model assume that the United States is likely to launch a nuclear first strike. Even if U.S. leaders were highly confident of success, a counterforce strike would entail enormous risks and costs. Rather, the model demonstrates that Russian (and Chinese) leaders can no longer count on having a survivable nuclear deterrent. 

Obama hasn’t implemented policy changes that would reduce U.S. primacy—-nuclear-armed adversaries still perceive credible primacy
RT 9 – Russia Today, April 15, 2009, "Nuclear deterrent needs reform – US think tank," online: http://russiatoday.com/Politics/2009-04-15/Nuclear_deterrent_needs_reform___US_think_tank.html
The 64-page report, entitled "
AND
The writers argued that "Unless Washington’s policies change or Moscow and Beijing take steps to increase the size and readiness of their forces, Russia and China – and the rest of the world – will live in the shadow of U.S. nuclear primacy for many years to come."

NFU makes nuclear primacy inoperative – first-strike threats define primacy
Lieber and Press 6 - Keir A. Lieber, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame, and Daryl G. Press, Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania, March-April 2006, "The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy," Foreign Affairs
During the Cold War, Washington relied on its nuclear arsenal not only to deter
AND
military doctrine and that nuclear primacy remains a goal of the United States.

Nuclear primacy’s key to hegemony—-makes unipolarity durable and deters great power competition  
Craig 9 – Campbell Craig, Professor of International Relations at the University of Southampton, 2009, "American power preponderance and the nuclear revolution," Review of International Studies, Vol. 35, p. 35-36
As Keir Lieber and Daryl Press have suggested, the US may be on the
AND
new instability, one likely to draw the United States back in again.
The alternative to American regional predominance in the Middle East and elsewhere is not a new regional stability. In an era of burgeoning nationalism, the future is likely to be one of intensified competition among nations and nationalist movements. Difficult as it may be to extend American predominance into the future, no one should imagine that a reduction of American power or a retraction of American influence and global involvement will provide an easier path.

Tournament: GSU | Round: 6 | Opponent: Missouri State | Judge: Stephen Weil

The U.S. has nuclear primacy now against every potential rival—-it’s a deliberate policy choice

Also answers cuts UQ because cuts have affected Russia MORE, which boosts U.S. primacy
Carl Osgood 13 and Rachel Douglas, Executive Intelligence Review, 3/15/13, "U.S. Moves Toward
Nuclear First Strike Capability," http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2013/4011nuke_first_strike.html
On March 1, the Strategic Studies Quarterly, a journal published by the U.S. Air Force’s Air University, published an article admitting what both Lyndon LaRouche
AND
Rather than pointing out the obvious—that the U.S. is building a first-strike capability against any potential adversary, including Russia and China—they ask, instead: "How is deterrence likely to work when nuclear use does not automatically imply suicide and mass slaughter?

New statutory restrictions collapse crisis response

John Yoo 8/30/13, Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law @ UC-Berkeley Law, visiting scholar @ the American Enterprise Institute, former Fulbright Distinguished Chair in Law @ the University of Trento, served as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Office of Legal Council at the U.S. Department of Justice between 2001 and 2003, received his J.D. from Yale and his undergraduate degree from Harvard, "Like it or not, Constitution allows Obama to strike Syria without Congressional approval," Fox News, http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/08/30/constitution-allows-obama-to-strike-syria-without-congressional-approval/
The most important of the president’s powers are commander-in-chief and chief
AND
time to introduce sweeping, untested changes in the way we make war.

Congressional restrictions cause adversaries to doubt the credibility of our threats —- causes crisis escalation

Matthew Waxman 8/25/13, Professor of Law @ Columbia and Adjunct Senior Fellow for Law and Foreign Policy @ CFR, "The Constitutional Power to Threaten War," Forthcoming in Yale Law Journal, vol. 123, August 25, 2013, SSRN
A claim previously advanced from a presidentialist perspective is that stronger legislative checks on war
AND
to use force in order to prevent a confrontation which might escalate.179

Conventional wars against nuclear-armed adversaries require primacy to control escalation—-otherwise adversaries will use nuclear weapons first

Lieber and Press 10 – Keir A. Lieber, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame, and Daryl G. Press, Associate Professor of Political Science at Dartmouth College, March/April 2010, "Second Strike: Is the U.S. Nuclear Arsenal Outmoded?," Foreign Affairs
Nuclear weapons are a boon for vulnerable states. During the Cold War, the
AND
Theories of deterrence and beliefs about strategic stability and nuclear force requirements must be reevaluated accordingly.

Nuclear primacy’s key to hegemony—-makes unipolarity durable and deters great power competition

Craig 9 – Campbell Craig, Professor of International Relations at the University of Southampton, 2009, "American power preponderance and the nuclear revolution," Review of International Studies, Vol. 35, p. 35-36
As Keir Lieber and Daryl Press have suggested, the US may be on the
AND
factor, and show how the nuclear revolution specifically reinforces each of them.

Taiwan war inevitable and draws in the U.S.—-we’d win the conventional war—-China will abandon their NFU

Zhang 8 - Baohui Zhang, Associate Professor of Political Science, Lingnan University, Hong Kong, March 2008, "The Taiwan Strait and the Future of China’s No-First-Use Nuclear Policy," Comparative Strategy, Vol. 27, No. 2, p. 164-182
For the above reasons the no-first-use principle remained unchallenged until the
AND
develop a nuclear doctrine "suitable for economically and technologically weak states."22 

U.S. first-strike is key to prevent or limit the damage of U.S.-China nuclear war

Lieber and Press 7 – Keir Lieber, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame, and Daryl Press, Associate Professor

Tournament: Kentucky | Round: 3 | Opponent: Emory KM | Judge: Ron Stevenson

Notification kills effective cyber responses —- speed is critical

Stephen Dycus 10, Professor, Vermont Law School, 8/11/10, "Congress’s Role in Cyber Warfare," http://jnslp.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/11_Dycus.pdf
Cyber weapons bear a striking resemblance to nuclear weapons in some important ways. An
AND
before launching a counterstrike, if that were U.S. policy. 

OCOs give the US coercive leverage to deescalate North Korean nuclear brinksmanship —- speed is key

Martin C. Libicki 13, Senior Management Scientist @ RAND and adjunct fellow @ Georgetown’s Center for Security Studies, "Brandishing Cyberattack Capabilities," RAND, http://www.rand.org/pub s/research_reports/RR175.html
Our inquiry is therefore more humble. Could a U.S. threat that
AND
up tensions in advance of the U.S. crossing red lines.

North Korea’s on the brink —- war goes global and nuclear

Steven Metz 13, Chairman of the Regional Strategy and Planning Department and Research Professor of National Security Affairs at the Strategic Studies Institute, 3/13/13, "Strategic Horizons: Thinking the Unthinkable on a Second Korean War," http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/12786/strategic-horizons-thinking-the-unthinkable-on-a-second-korean-war
Today, North Korea is the most dangerous country on earth and the greatest threat
AND
two continued mutual trade and investment. Stranger things have happened in statecraft.

Tournament: Kentucky | Round: 3 | Opponent: Emory KM | Judge: Ron Stevenson

Debt ceiling will be raised now but it’s not certain —- Obama’s ironclad political capital is forcing the GOP to give in

Brian Beutler 10/3/13, "Republicans finally confronting reality: They’re trapped21," Salon http://www.salon.com/2013/10/03/republicans_finally_confronting_reality_theyre_trapped/
After struggling for weeks and weeks in stages one through four, Republicans are finally
AND
final act, and revealed who’s being fitted with the red dye packet.

Reducing war powers will end Obama’s credibility with Congress —- cause stronger GOP pushback on the debt ceiling

Seeking Alpha 9/10/13 ("Syria Could Upend Debt Ceiling Fight", http://seekingalpha.com/article/1684082-syria-could-upend-debt-ceiling-fight)
Unless President Obama can totally change a reluctant public’s perception of another Middle-Eastern
AND
U.S. obligations unless another last minute deal can be struck.

Debt ceiling collapses the global economy —- fast timeframe and no resiliency

Adam Davidson 9/10/13, economy columnist for The New York Times, co-founder of Planet Money, NPR’s team of economics reporters, "Our Debt to Society," NYT, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/15/magazine/our-debt-to-society.html?pagewanted=all26_r=0
If the debt ceiling isn’t lifted again this fall, some serious financial decisions will
AND
free asset more risky, the entire global economy becomes riskier and costlier.

Economic collapse causes global nuclear war

Cesare Merlini 11, nonresident senior fellow at the Center on the United States and Europe and chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Italian Institute for International Affairs, May 2011, "A Post-Secular World?", Survival, Vol. 53, No. 2
Two neatly opposed scenarios for the future of the world order illustrate the range of
AND
theocratic absolutes, competing or converging with secular absolutes such as unbridled nationalism.

Tournament: GSU | Round: 2 | Opponent: Houston | Judge: Will Repko

Congress will ultimately compromise to avert shutdown – GOP divisions make it more likely, not less

Tom Cohen, 9-20-2013, "Congress: will it be a government shutdown or budget compromise?" CNN, http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/19/politics/congress-shutdown-scenarios/index.html?utm_source=feedburner26utm_medium=feed26utm_campaign=Feed3A+rss2Fcnn_allpolitics+(RSS3A+Politics)
There hasn’t been a government shutdown in more than 17 years, since the 28
AND
changes to provide Boehner and House Republicans with political cover to back it.

The plan would trade off with Congress’s ability to avert the shutdown - GOP has momentum and will, but they need literally every hour to get it done

Frank James, 9-13-2013, "Congress Searches For A Shutdown-Free Future," NPR, http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/09/13/221809062/congress-searches-for-a-shutdown-free-future
The only thing found Thursday seemed to be more time for negotiations and vote-
AND
people. When we have something to report, we’ll let you know."

Shutdown wrecks the economy

Yi Wu, 8-27-2013, "Government Shutdown 2013: Still a Terrible Idea," PolicyMic, http://www.policymic.com/articles/60837/government-shutdown-2013-still-a-terrible-idea
Around a third of House Republicans, many Tea Party-backed, sent a
AND
to demand cancellation of the entire health care reform enacted a year before.

Global nuclear war

Harris 26 Burrows 9 Mathew, PhD European History @ Cambridge, counselor of the U.S. National Intelligence Council (NIC) and Jennifer, member of the NIC’s Long Range Analysis Unit "Revisiting the Future: Geopolitical Effects of the Financial Crisis" http://www.ciaonet.org/journals/twq/v32i2/f_0016178_13952.pdf
Of course, the report encompasses more than economics and indeed believes the future is
AND
within and between states in a more dog-eat-dog world.

Tournament: USC | Round: 2 | Opponent: Kentucky GV | Judge: Dave Strauss
ERROR

Tournament: GSU | Round: 4 | Opponent: GSU | Judge: David Cram Helwich

Topical fairness requirements are key to effective dialogue—monopolizing strategy and prep makes the discussion one-sided and subverts any meaningful neg role

Galloway 7—Samford Comm prof (Ryan, Contemporary Argumentation and Debate, Vol. 28, 2007)
Debate as a dialogue sets an argumentative table, where all parties receive a relatively
AND
substitutes for topical action do not accrue the dialogical benefits of topical advocacy.

True challenges to authority require acts of dialogue and self criticism—-they otherwise result in the same authoritative exclusion that they critique

Morson 4—Northwestern prof (Greg, Bakhtinian Perspectives on Language, Literacy, and Learning, 317-23)
Sarah Freedman and Arnetha Ball describe learning as a dialogic process. It is not
AND
and by other convictions, then one may allow the dialogue to continue. 

Framework does not deny the embodied nature of knowledge, but rather serves as a regulative ideal that that maintains the conditions for ongoing argumentation—-exclusions are inevitable in this process, so ensuring that they occur along RECIPROCAL lines that allow for negative engagement is the only way to foster democratic practices that avoid ARBITRARY exclusions which are worse—-this process outweighs the content of the aff

Anderson 6—prof of English at Johns Hopkins (Amanda, The Way We Argue Now, 25-8)

25¶ Whether such a procedural approach actually helps to yield any substantive normative guidance
AND
by the principles of recognition and respect that underpin democratic institutions and practices.

Tournament: GSU | Round: 4 | Opponent: GSU | Judge: David Cram Helwich

T

"USFG should" means the debate is only about government policy

Ericson 3 (Jon M., Dean Emeritus of the College of Liberal Arts – California Polytechnic U., et al., The Debater’s Guide, Third Edition, p. 4)

The Proposition of Policy: Urging Future Action In policy propositions, each topic contains
AND
compelling reasons for an audience to perform the future action that you propose. 

Resolved is legislative 
AOS 4, Army Officer School, 5-12, "~23 12, Punctuation – The Colon and Semicolon", http://usawocc.army.mil/IMI/wg12.htm)

The colon introduces the following: a.  A list, but only after "
AND
resolved:" Resolved: (colon) That this council petition the mayor.

First, a limited topic of discussion that provides for equitable ground is key to productive inculcation of decision-making and advocacy skills in every and all facets of life—-even if their position is contestable that’s distinct from it being valuably debatable—-this still provides room for flexibility, creativity, and innovation, but targets the discussion to avoid mere statements of fact—-T debates also solve any possible turn

Steinberg 26 Freeley 8 *Austin J. Freeley is a Boston based attorney who focuses on criminal, personal injury and civil rights law, AND David L. Steinberg , Lecturer of Communication Studies @ U Miami, Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making pp45-
Debate is a means of settling differences, so there must be a difference of
AND
particular point of difference, which will be outlined in the following discussion.

Second, discussion of specific policy-questions is crucial for skills development—-we control uniqueness: university students already have preconceived and ideological notions about how the world operates—-government policy discussion is vital to force engagement with and resolution of competing perspectives to improve social outcomes, however those outcomes may be defined—-and, it breaks out of traditional pedagogical frameworks by positing students as agents of decision-making

Esberg 26 Sagan 12 *Jane Esberg is special assistant to the director at New York University’s Center on. International Cooperation. She was the winner of 2009 Firestone Medal, AND Scott Sagan is a professor of political science and director of Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation "NEGOTIATING NONPROLIFERATION: Scholarship, Pedagogy, and Nuclear Weapons Policy," 2/17 The Nonproliferation Review, 19:1, 95-108
These government or quasi-government think tank simulations often provide very similar lessons for
AND
quickly; simulations teach students how to contextualize and act on information.14

Key to social improvements in every and all facets of life

Steinberg 26 Freeley 8 *Austin J. Freeley is a Boston based attorney who focuses on criminal, personal injury and civil rights law, AND David L. Steinberg , Lecturer of Communication Studies @ U Miami, Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making pp9-10
If we assume it to be possible without recourse to violence to reach agreement on all the problems implied in the employment of the idea of justice we are granting the possibility of formulating an ideal of man and society, valid for all beings endowed with reason and accepted by what we have called elsewhere the universal audience.14
AND
in our intelligent self-interest to reach these decisions through reasoned debate.

Only portable skill—-means our framework turns case

Steinberg 26 Freeley 8 *Austin J. Freeley is a Boston based attorney who focuses on criminal, personal injury and civil rights law, AND David L. Steinberg , Lecturer of Communication Studies @ U Miami, Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making pp9-10
After several days of intense debate, first the United States House of Representatives and
AND
customer for out product, or a vote for our favored political candidate.

Effective deliberation is the lynchpin of solving all existential global problems

Christian O. Lundberg 10 Professor of Communications @ University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, "Tradition of Debate in North Carolina" in Navigating Opportunity: Policy Debate in the 21st Century By Allan D. Louden, p311
The second major problem with the critique that identifies a naivety in articulating debate and
AND
with the existential challenges to democracy ~in an~ increasingly complex world.

Tournament: GSU | Round: 8 | Opponent: Wake | Judge: David Heidt

Security is a psychological construct—the aff’s scenarios for conflict are products of paranoia that project our violent impulses onto the other

Mack 91 – Doctor of Psychiatry and a professor at Harvard University (John, "The Enemy System" http://www.johnemackinstitute.org/eJournal/article.asp?id=23 *Gender modified)

The threat of nuclear annihilation has stimulated us to try to understand what it is
AND
, taking their cues from the leadership, contribute powerfully to the process.

Their paranoid projections guarantee extinction—it’s try or die

Hollander 3 – professor of Latin American history and women’s studies at California State University (Nancy, "A Psychoanalytic Perspective on the Politics of Terror:In the Aftermath of 9/11" www.estadosgerais.org/mundial_rj/download/FLeitor_NHollander_ingl.pdf)

In this sense, then, 9-11 has symbolically constituted a relief in
AND
believes that such denial only increases reliance on projective mechanisms and stimulates paranoia. 

Don’t call it an alternative—-our response is to interrogate the epistemological failures of the 1ac—-this is a prereq to successful policy

Ahmed 12 Dr. Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed is Executive Director of the Institute for Policy Research and Development (IPRD), an independent think tank focused on the study of violent conflict, he has taught at the Department of International Relations, University of Sussex "The international relations of crisis and the crisis of international relations: from the securitisation of scarcity to the militarisation of society" Global Change, Peace 26 Security Volume 23, Issue 3, 2011 Taylor Francis

While recommendations to shift our frame of orientation away from conventional state-centrism toward
AND
, effective, and joined-up policy-making on these issues.

Tournament: NDT | Round: 4 | Opponent: Baylor BB | Judge: s herndon, malsin, holland
1nc

OFF-CASE
*Off
Detention is not a space of exception but of hyper-legality—reforms result in the naturalization of power
Fleur Johns 05, Co-Director of the Sydney Centre for International Law (with Associate Professor Tim Stephens) and an Associate Professor in the Faculty of Law, “Guantánamo Bay and the Annihilation of the Exception,” The European Journal of International Law Vol. 16 no.4, http://ejil.oxfordjournals.org/content/16/4/613.full.pdf+html

The sovereign gets its power from law—thus appeals to return to legal norms legitimize it and prevent broader resistance
Mark Neocleous 06, Professor of Government at Brunel University, Alternatives, Vol. 31, p. 206-208

The alternative is to reject the 1AC—refusing the legitimacy of any current governance is crucial to remove the sovereign’s power
Mark Neocleous 06, Professor of Government at Brunel University, Alternatives, Vol. 31, p. 206-208

*Off
Text: The United States Congress should pass a constitutional amendment that restricts the indefinite detention war powers authority of the president of the United States by imposing a clean hands doctrine on that authority. The amendment should specify that the state ratification process must begin immediately. The appropriate number of the 50 states of the United States should ratify the amendment.
Constitutional amendments solve the case, including perception and modeling
Goldstein 88 (Yonkel, J.D. – Stanford Law School and Has the Sweetest of Names, “The Failure of Constitutional Controls over War Powers in the Nuclear Age: The Argument for a Constitutional Amendment,” Stanford Law Review, July, 40 Stan. L. Rev. 1543, Lexis)
Amendments are a predictable alternative --- the CP is fast
Denning and Vile 2 (Brannon P., Assistant Professor of Law – Southern Illinois University School of Law, and John R., Political Science Department Chair – Middle Tennessee State University, “The Relevance of Constitutional Amendments: A Response to David Strauss,” Tulane Law Review, November, 77 Tul. L. Rev. 247, Lexis)
Avoids the disad
Vermeule 4 (Adrian, Professor of Law – Harvard Law School, “Constitutional Amendments and the Constitutional Common Law,” Public Law and Legal Theory Working Paper No. 73, University of Chicago Law School, September, http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/files/73-av-amendments.pdf)
Decision costs and benefits
*Off
The Supreme Court will vote against the EPA’s climate regs on a 5-4 now---but that requires overcoming deference to an executive agency’s interpretation of statute
Richard Frank 2-24, Professor of Environmental Practice and Director of the U. C. Davis School of Law’s California Environmental Law and Policy Center, 2/24/14, “Deconstructing Today’s U.S. Supreme Court Arguments in Utility Air Regulatory Group,” http://legal-planet.org/2014/02/24/deconstructing-todays-u-s-supreme-court-arguments-in-utility-air-regulatory-group/
The Court perceives that both overcoming deference to agency interpretation, and ruling against the government on war powers cases, require institutional capital---there’s a direct tradeoff
Neomi Rao 9, Assistant Professor of Law, George Mason University School of Law, 2009, “The President’s Sphere of Action,” Wilmette Law Review, Vol. 45, No. 3, p. 527-555
Ruling for EPA destroys the economy
Paul Driessen 3-1, senior policy adviser for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow, 3/1/14, “Will the Supreme Court Permit EPA Fraud?,” http://townhall.com/columnists/pauldriessen/2014/03/01/will-the-supreme-court-permit-epa-fraud-n1802465/print
U.S. key to the global economy
David Caploe 9, CEO of the Singapore-incorporated American Centre for Applied Liberal Arts and Humanities in Asia, 4/7/9, “Focus still on America to lead global recovery”, The Strait Times
Extinction
Geoffrey Kemp 10, Director of Regional Strategic Programs at The Nixon Center, served in the White House under Ronald Reagan, special assistant to the president for national security affairs and senior director for Near East and South Asian affairs on the National Security Council Staff, Former Director, Middle East Arms Control Project at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2010, The East Moves West: India, China, and Asia’s Growing Presence in the Middle East, p. 233-4

*Off
Restrictions are prohibitions on action --- the aff is oversight
Jean Schiedler-Brown 12, Attorney, Jean Schiedler-Brown and Associates, Appellant Brief of Randall Kinchloe v. States Dept of Health, Washington,  The Court of Appeals of the State of Washington, Division 1, http://www.courts.wa.gov/content/Briefs/A01/68642920Appellant20Randall20Kincheloe27s.pdf
Vote neg---
Neg ground---only prohibitions on particular authorities guarantee links to every core argument like flexibility and deference
Precision---only our interpretation defines “restrictions on authority”---that’s key to adequate preparation and policy analysis
*Off
The United States Federal Government should offer Israel consultation over whether or not to increase judicial restrictions on the indefinite detention war powers authority of the president of the United States by imposing a clean hands doctrine on that authority. The United States Federal Government should tell Israel that the consultation is binding. The United States Federal Government should not increase judicial restrictions on the indefinite detention war powers authority of the president of the United States by imposing a clean hands doctrine on that authority.
US-Israel relations are at a new low
Chris Good, 1-14-2014, "US-Israeli Relations Strained by 'Messianic Fervor'," ABC News Blogs, http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/01/us-israeli-relations-strained-by-messianic-fervor/
Consultation with Israel would repair relations
Daniel Drezner, 11-5-2013, "The Unconstant Gardener," Foreign Policy, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/11/04/the_unconstant_gardener_obama_us_foreign_policy
US-Israel relations are key to stop terrorism and prolif
Michael Eisenstadt, senior fellow @ Washington Inst., and David Pollock, ditto, 11-7-2012, "Friends with Benefits: Why the U.S.-Israeli Alliance Is Good for America," Foreign Affairs, http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/friends-with-benefits-why-the-u.s.-israeli-alliance-is-good-for-america

Terror causes extinction
Hellman 8 (Martin E, emeritus prof of engineering @ Stanford, “Risk Analysis of Nuclear Deterrence” SPRING, THE BENT OF TAU BETA PI, http://www.nuclearrisk.org/paper.pdf)

prolif causes nuclear war
Shmuel Bar 13, director of studies at the Institute of Policy and Strategy in Herzliya, Israel, February 2013, “The Dangers of a Poly-Nuclear Mideast,” Hoover Policy Review, http://www.hoover.org/publications/policy-review/article/139416
*Off
Expanding habeas kills warfighting and intel necessary to WOT
Jay Carafano 7, Vice President, Foreign and Defense Policy Studies, E. W. Richardson Fellow, and Director, Heritage, The War on Terrorism: Habeas Corpus On and Off the Battlefield, www.heritage.org/research/reports/2007/07/the-war-on-terrorism-habeas-corpus-on-and-off-the-battlefield

Terrorism causes extinction---hard-line responses are key  
Nathan Myhrvold '13, Phd in theoretical and mathematical physics from Princeton,  and founded Intellectual Ventures after retiring as chief strategist and chief technology officer of Microsoft Corporation , July 2013, "Stratgic Terrorism: A Call to Action," The Lawfare Research Paper Series No.2, http://www.lawfareblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Strategic-Terrorism-Myhrvold-7-3-2013.pdf
CASE
Solvency vs. Courts
Wheeler 9 associate professor of political science at Ball State University (Darren A., “Checking Presidential Detention Power in the War on Terror: What Should We Expect from the Judiciary?”  Presidential Studies Quarterly 39.4 (Dec 2009): 677-700, ebsco)
Solvency
US engagement and reintervention are inevitable---it’s only a question of making it effective---the plan prevents failed engagement that triggers their turns
Robert Kagan 11 is a contributing editor to The Weekly Standard and a senior fellow in foreign policy at the Brookings Institution. "The Price of Power" Jan 24 Vol 16 No18 www.weeklystandard.com/articles/price-power_533696.html?page=3
The Courts have willingly developed institutional checks that lock them into deference
Daniel Abebe and Eric A. Posner 11, Assistant Professor and Kirkland and Ellis Professor, University of Chicago Law School, The Flaws of Foreign Affairs Legalism, 51 Va. J. Int'l L. 507
Deference inevitable---it’s institutionally locked in, the judiciary wants it, * and the aff doesn’t clarify multiple constitutional issues
Jonathan L. Entin 12, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs (School of Law), David L. Brennan Professor of Law, and Professor of Political Science, Case Western Reserve University. War Powers, Foreign Affairs, and the Courts: Some Institutional Considerations, 45 Case W. Res. J. Int'l L. 443

There’s no chance the plan spills over---all federal courts are either siding with the executive’s terror policies through narrow rulings or declining to even hear the cases---the plan will just be distinguished away
Jonathan L. Entin 12, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs (School of Law), David L. Brennan Professor of Law, and Professor of Political Science, Case Western Reserve University. War Powers, Foreign Affairs, and the Courts: Some Institutional Considerations, 45 Case W. Res. J. Int'l L. 443

The plan can’t set a precedent---Roberts is a sly dog
William D. Araiza, Law Prof @ Brooklyn, Summer 2012, “PLAYING WELL WITH OTHERS-BUT STILL WINNING,” 46 Ga. L. Rev. 1059, ln
The aff can’t solve the broader power grabs of the state
Nasser Hussain 07, an assistant professor in the Department of Law, Jurisprudence, and Social Thought at Amherst College, Summer 07, “Beyond Norm and Exception: Guantánamo,” Critical Inquiry, Vol. 33, No. 4
The POINT of the state of exception is that rights the plan provides will be suspended
Andrew Neal 05, PhD candidate and part-time Research Associate in the School of Politics, Philosophy, and International Relations and Keele University, 4/12/05, http://www.libertysecurity.org/article199.html
Impact D
Numerous cultural and historical factors have gone into Guantanamo—that means the aff can’t solve broader violence and there is no broader impact
Halit Tagma 09, Professor of Political Science, Arizona State , “Homo Sacer vs. Homo Soccer Mom: Reading Agamben and Foucault in the War on Terror,” Alternatives: Global, Local, Political, Vol. 34, No. 4 (Oct.-Dec. 2009), pp. 407-435
No risk of endless or imperial wars due to pre-emption
Gray 7—Director of the Centre for Strategic Studies and Professor of International Relations and Strategic Studies at the University of Reading, graduate of the Universities of Manchester and Oxford, Founder and Senior Associate to the National Institute for Public Policy, formerly with the International Institute for Strategic Studies and the Hudson Institute (Colin, July, “The Implications of Preemptive and Preventive War Doctrines: A Reconsideration”, http://www.ciaonet.org/wps/ssi10561/ssi10561.pdf)
Solvency
US engagement and reintervention are inevitable---it’s only a question of making it effective---the plan prevents failed engagement that triggers their turns
Robert Kagan 11 is a contributing editor to The Weekly Standard and a senior fellow in foreign policy at the Brookings Institution. "The Price of Power" Jan 24 Vol 16 No18 www.weeklystandard.com/articles/price-power_533696.html?page=3
The Courts have willingly developed institutional checks that lock them into deference
Daniel Abebe and Eric A. Posner 11, Assistant Professor and Kirkland and Ellis Professor, University of Chicago Law School, The Flaws of Foreign Affairs Legalism, 51 Va. J. Int'l L. 507
Deference inevitable---it’s institutionally locked in, the judiciary wants it, * and the aff doesn’t clarify multiple constitutional issues
Jonathan L. Entin 12, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs (School of Law), David L. Brennan Professor of Law, and Professor of Political Science, Case Western Reserve University. War Powers, Foreign Affairs, and the Courts: Some Institutional Considerations, 45 Case W. Res. J. Int'l L. 443

There’s no chance the plan spills over---all federal courts are either siding with the executive’s terror policies through narrow rulings or declining to even hear the cases---the plan will just be distinguished away
Jonathan L. Entin 12, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs (School of Law), David L. Brennan Professor of Law, and Professor of Political Science, Case Western Reserve University. War Powers, Foreign Affairs, and the Courts: Some Institutional Considerations, 45 Case W. Res. J. Int'l L. 443
The plan can’t set a precedent---Roberts is a sly dog
William D. Araiza, Law Prof @ Brooklyn, Summer 2012, “PLAYING WELL WITH OTHERS-BUT STILL WINNING,” 46 Ga. L. Rev. 1059, ln

The aff can’t solve the broader power grabs of the state
Nasser Hussain 07, an assistant professor in the Department of Law, Jurisprudence, and Social Thought at Amherst College, Summer 07, “Beyond Norm and Exception: Guantánamo,” Critical Inquiry, Vol. 33, No. 4
The POINT of the state of exception is that rights the plan provides will be suspended
Andrew Neal 05, PhD candidate and part-time Research Associate in the School of Politics, Philosophy, and International Relations and Keele University, 4/12/05, http://www.libertysecurity.org/article199.html
Impact D
Numerous cultural and historical factors have gone into Guantanamo—that means the aff can’t solve broader violence and there is no broader impact
Halit Tagma 09, Professor of Political Science, Arizona State , “Homo Sacer vs. Homo Soccer Mom: Reading Agamben and Foucault in the War on Terror,” Alternatives: Global, Local, Political, Vol. 34, No. 4 (Oct.-Dec. 2009), pp. 407-435
No risk of endless or imperial wars due to pre-emption
Gray 7—Director of the Centre for Strategic Studies and Professor of International Relations and Strategic Studies at the University of Reading, graduate of the Universities of Manchester and Oxford, Founder and Senior Associate to the National Institute for Public Policy, formerly with the International Institute for Strategic Studies and the Hudson Institute (Colin, July, “The Implications of Preemptive and Preventive War Doctrines: A Reconsideration”, http://www.ciaonet.org/wps/ssi10561/ssi10561.pdf)

Block
V2l

Value to life is inevitable and subjective
Schwartz 2 (Lisa, professional metaphysician, Medical Ethics: A case based approach, “The Value of Life: Who Decides and How?”, p. 112)
Epist/Ontol
No prior questions
Owen 2 David Owen, Reader of Political Theory at the Univ. of Southampton,  Millennium Vol 31 No 3 2002 p. 655-7
Predic
Our method for prediction is sound
Earl C. Ravenal 9, distinguished senior fellow in foreign policy studies @ Cato, is professor emeritus of the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service. He is an expert on NATO, defense strategy, and the defense budget. He is the author of Designing Defense for a New World Order. What's Empire Got to Do with It? The Derivation of America's Foreign Policy.” Critical Review: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Politics and Society 21.1 (2009) 21-75
PC
flow
The Court perceives itself to be required to risk institutional capital when they reject an agency’s interpretation of statute
William N. Eskridge 8, the John A. Garver Professor of Jurisprudence, Yale Law School, April 2008, “ARTICLE: The Continuum of Deference: Supreme Court Treatment of Agency Statutory Interpretations from Chevron to Hamdan,” Georgetown Law Journal, 96 Geo. L.J. 1083
WW
The link only goes one way---Court decisions don’t build political capital
Schauer 4 Frederick Schauer, Professor of the First Amendment, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, 2004 (92 Calif. L. Rev. 1045)
Sdf
The EPA decision will be announced in June too
Warren Richey 2-24, “Did EPA overstep in tackling global warming? Supreme Court sharply split,” 2/24/14, http://news.yahoo.com/did-epa-overstep-tackling-global-warming-supreme-court-002000738.html

Yes PC
They think aggressive rulings trade off---and they don’t think that issuing several decisions can build capital, so no risk of a turn
Ernest A. Young 99, Assistant Professor at the University of Texas School of Law, 1999, “ARTICLE: State Sovereign Immunity and the Future of Federalism,” Supreme Court Review, 1999 Sup. Ct. Rev. 1, p. lexis

Tournament: NDT | Round: 5 | Opponent: MSU CZ | Judge: 

Offcase

Off

Restrictions are prohibitions on authority —- the aff is a just oversight which is distinct

Jean Schiedler-Brown 12, Attorney, Jean Schiedler-Brown 26 Associates, Appellant Brief of Randall Kinchloe v. States Dept of Health, Washington,  The Court of Appeals of the State of Washington, Division 1, http://www.courts.wa.gov/content/Briefs/A01/68642920Appellant20Randall20Kincheloe27s.pdf
3. The ordinary definition of the term "restrictions" also does not include the reporting and monitoring or supervising terms and conditions that are included in the 2001 Stipulation.
Black’s Law Dictionary, ’fifth edition,(1979) defines "restriction" as;
A limitation often imposed in a deed or lease respecting the use to which the
AND
or by interposing obstacle, to repress or suppress, to curb.
In contrast, the terms "supervise" and "supervisor" are defined as
AND
merely routine or clerical nature, but required the use of independent judgment.
Comparing the above definitions, it is clear that the definition of "restriction" is very different from the definition of "supervision"-very few of the same words are used to explain or define the different terms. In his 2001 stipulation, Mr. Kincheloe essentially agreed to some supervision conditions, but he did not agree to restrict his license.

Vote neg—-

Ground—-only prohibitions on actions guarantee links to every core argument like flexibility—-they allow rubber stamp affs which makes the topic bi-directional

Limits—-there are an infinite number of conditions they could require the president to jump through—-overstretches our research burden

Off

The United States federal government should create a centralized database of every member of its privately contracted Armed forces. The United States federal government should ensure payment for every member of its privately contracted Armed forces.

The United States Congress should create a Joint Congressional committee to oversee introduction of privately contracted Armed Forces into combat. The Executive Branch should introduce privately contracted Armed Forces into combat only if it receives Congressional authorization through a policy trial and engage in meaningful consultation and transparency efforts with the committee in regards to introduction of privately contracted Armed Forces into combat.

CP solves the whole case without restricting war powers which links to politics

Warren Christopher 8, et al 63rd Secretary of State. He also served as Deputy Attorney General in the Lyndon Johnson Administration, and as Deputy Secretary of State in the Carter Administration, Over 14 months, this bipartisan body met seven times in full-day sessions, interviewing more than 40 witnesses about the respective war powers of the President and Congress., James A. Baker, III, Slade Gorton Lee H. Hamilton Carla A. Hills John O. Marsh, Jr Edwin Meese, III Abner J. Mikva  J.  Paul Reason Brent Scowcroft Anne-Marie Slaughter Strobe Talbott, National War Powers Commission Report, http://web1.millercenter.org/reports/warpowers/report.pdf
The need for reform stems from the gravity and uncertainty posed by war powers questions
AND
ability to question or challenge the constitutional war powers of the other branch." 

Avoids politics—-turf battles over authority are key

James A. Baker 11, was secretary of state from 1989 to 1992. Lee H. Hamilton is a former Democratic representative from Indiana who chaired the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Breaking the war powers stalemate, www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/breaking-the-war-powers-stalemate/2011/06/08/AGX0CrNH_story.html
Breaking the war powers stalemate¶ With our country engaged in three critical military conflicts
AND
reality, the resolution has only further complicated the issue of war powers.

*only with extra plank*

Off

Momentum for patent reform now – Obama’s pushing and PC is key

David Kravets, WIRED senior staff writer, 3-20-2014, "History Will Remember Obama as the Great Slayer of Patent Trolls," Threat Level, http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2014/03/obama-legacy-patent-trolls/
But Obama will leave another gift to posterity, one not so obvious, one
AND
back to the House for final approval before landing on the president’s desk.

Plan costs PC

Douglas L. Kriner 10, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Boston University, 2010, After the Rubicon: Congress, Presidents, and the Politics of Waging War, p. 68-69
Raising or Lowering Political Costs by Affecting Presidential Political Capital
Shaping both real and anticipated public opinion are two important ways in which Congress can
AND
rear-guard action against congressional critics of the war in Iraq.61

Reform that targets patent trolling is key to the entire green tech sector

Adam Gerschel-Clarke 13, independent design strategist specialising in the societal aspects of design and a contributing writer at Sustainable Brands, 11/14/13, "Are patent trolls strangling sustainable innovation?," http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/patent-trolls-sustainable-innovation
Disputes over intellectual property have risen dramatically over the last few years and, despite
AND
our journey towards a sustainable future will become ever slower and more difficult.

U.S. green tech leadership’s key to overall hegemony and preventing warming—-extinction

Klarevas 9 –Louis Klarevas, Professor for Center for Global Affairs @ New York University, 12/15, "Securing American Primacy While Tackling Climate Change: Toward a National Strategy of Greengemony," http://www.huffingtonpost.com/louis-klarevas/securing-american-primacy_b_393223.html
As national leaders from around the world are gathering in Copenhagen, Denmark, to
AND
best approach for achieving this is to promote a national strategy of greengemony.

Off

The United States Federal Government should offer Israel consultation over whether or not to require Congressional authorization through a policy trial prior to the introduction of privately contracted Armed Forces into combat. The United States Federal Government should tell Israel that the consultation is binding. The United States Federal Government should not require Congressional authorization through a policy trial prior to the introduction of privately contracted Armed Forces into combat.

US-Israel relations are at a new low

Chris Good, 1-14-2014, "US-Israeli Relations Strained by ’Messianic Fervor’," ABC News Blogs, http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/01/us-israeli-relations-strained-by-messianic-fervor/
U.S.-Israeli relations have at times been rocky since early in President
AND
the caste of Ya’alom especially, that such aggressive criticism is publicly aired.

Consultation with Israel would repair relations

Daniel Drezner, 11-5-2013, "The Unconstant Gardener," Foreign Policy, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/11/04/the_unconstant_gardener_obama_us_foreign_policy
Newcomers to international relations may be forgiven for believing that allied resentment at the United
AND
public level, it seems like there’s been almost no pruning and tending.

US-Israel relations are key to stop terrorism and prolif

Michael Eisenstadt, senior fellow @ Washington Inst., and David Pollock, ditto, 11-7-2012, "Friends with Benefits: Why the U.S.-Israeli Alliance Is Good for America," Foreign Affairs, http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/friends-with-benefits-why-the-u.s.-israeli-alliance-is-good-for-america
U.S.-Israeli security cooperation dates back to heights of the Cold War
AND
), sensors and electronic warfare systems, and advanced defenses for military vehicles.

Terror causes extinction

Hellman 8 (Martin E, emeritus prof of engineering @ Stanford, "Risk Analysis of Nuclear Deterrence" SPRING, THE BENT OF TAU BETA PI, http://www.nuclearrisk.org/paper.pdf)
The threat of nuclear terrorism looms much larger in the public’s mind than the threat
AND
assume that  preventing World War III is a necessity—not an option. 

prolif causes nuclear war

Shmuel Bar 13, director of studies at the Institute of Policy and Strategy in Herzliya, Israel, February 2013, "The Dangers of a Poly-Nuclear Mideast," Hoover Policy Review, http://www.hoover.org/publications/policy-review/article/139416
Even ideologically, or religiously, highly charged leaderships may be aware of the dangers
AND
, and to result ultimately in perennial nuclear instability or even nuclear war.

Case

Adv 1

Empirically denied—-their Blakely ev is 12 yrs old—-thei impacts should have happened already—-at worst proves that there’s no possible brink

Nato can’t deter Russia now—-Ukraine proves obviously

No Iranian adventurism impact

Zenko 26 Cohen 12 – Micah Zenko, Fellow in the Center for Preventive Action at the Council on Foreign Relations; and Michael A. Cohen, Fellow at the Century Foundation, March/April 2012, "Clear and Present Safety," Foreign Affairs, Vol. 91, No. 2, p. 79-93
IT is a matter of faith among many American politicians that Iran is the greatest
AND
threat to the U.S. homeland would continue to be minimal.

Obama will attempt to circumvent the aff —- that results in a massive interbranch standoff that destroys cooperation over foreign policy

Jules Lobel 8, Professor of Law @ University of Pittsburgh, "Conflicts Between the Commander in Chief and Congress: Concurrent Power over the Conduct of War," Ohio State Law Journal, Vol. 69
The critical difficulty with a contextual approach is its inherent ambiguity and lack of clarity
AND
over the constitutionality of the War Powers Resolution. Pg. 407-409

Turns Afghanistan

Lieberman 10—Independent Democratic senator from Connecticut ~Joseph I. Leiberman, "Back to a Bipartisan Foreign Policy," Wall Street Journal, November 16, 2010, pg. http://tinyurl.com/m5z623w~~
This year’s midterm elections marked the first time since 9/11 that national security
AND
war effort in Afghanistan, which remains critical to our security at home.

Adv 2

Legislation not key—-their evidence is about parliaments and doesn’t speak to perception of the US system at all

Tournament: GSU | Round: 2 | Opponent: Houston | Judge: Will Repko
The aff is not topical —- introducing armed forces only refers to human troops, not weapons systems such as nuclear weapons
Lorber 13 – Eric Lorber, J.D. Candidate, University of Pennsylvania Law School, Ph.D Candidate, Duke University Department of Political Science. January 2013, "Executive Warmaking Authority and Offensive Cyber Operations: Can Existing Legislation Successfully Constrain Presidential Power?" University of Pennsylvania Journal of Contsitutional Law, 15 U. Pa. J. Const. L. 961, lexis nexis
As is evident from a textual analysis, n177 an examination of the legislative history
AND
is highly unlikely - such operations will not trigger the War Powers Resolution.

Vote negative for predictable limits —- nuclear weapons is a whole topic on its own —- requires research into a whole separate literature base —- undermines preparedness for all debates.

Tournament: Kentucky | Round: 3 | Opponent: Emory KM | Judge: Ron Stevenson

Restrictions are prohibitions on action —- the aff is oversight

Jean Schiedler-Brown 12, Attorney, Jean Schiedler-Brown 26 Associates, Appellant Brief of Randall Kinchloe v. States Dept of Health, Washington,  The Court of Appeals of the State of Washington, Division 1, http://www.courts.wa.gov/content/Briefs/A01/68642920Appellant20Randall20Kincheloe27s.pdf
3. The ordinary definition of the term "restrictions" also does not include the reporting and monitoring or supervising terms and conditions that are included in the 2001 Stipulation.
Black’s Law Dictionary, ’fifth edition,(1979) defines "restriction" as;
A limitation often imposed in a deed or lease respecting the use to which the
AND
or by interposing obstacle, to repress or suppress, to curb.
In contrast, the terms "supervise" and "supervisor" are defined as
AND
merely routine or clerical nature, but required the use of independent judgment.
Comparing the above definitions, it is clear that the definition of "restriction" is very different from the definition of "supervision"-very few of the same words are used to explain or define the different terms. In his 2001 stipulation, Mr. Kincheloe essentially agreed to some supervision conditions, but he did not agree to restrict his license.

Restrictions on authority are distinct from conditions

William Conner 78, former federal judge for the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York United States District Court, S. D. New York, CORPORACION VENEZOLANA de FOMENTO v. VINTERO SALES, http://www.leagle.com/decision/19781560452FSupp1108_11379
Plaintiff next contends that Merban was charged with notice of the restrictions on the authority
AND
were not authorized to act except upon the fulfillment of the specified conditions.

Vote neg—-

Neg ground—-only prohibitions on particular authorities guarantee links to every core argument like flexibility and deference

Precision—-only our interpretation defines "restrictions on authority"—-that’s key to adequate preparation and policy analysis

Tournament: GSU | Round: 8 | Opponent: Wake | Judge: David Heidt

Targeted killings are strikes carried about against pre-meditated, individually designated targets—-signature strikes are distinct

Kenneth Anderson 11, Professor at Washington College of Law, American University, Hoover Institution visiting fellow, Non-Resident Visiting Fellow at Brookings, "Distinguishing High Value Targeted Killing and ’Signature’ Attacks on Taliban Fighters," August 29 2011, http://www.volokh.com/2011/08/29/distinguishing-high-value-targeted-killing-and-signature-attacks-on-taliban-fighters/
From the US standpoint, it is partly that it does not depend as much
AND
will not tell one very much without knowing what mission is at issue.

Vote neg —- signature strikes and targeted killings are distinct operations with entirely separate lit bases and advantages—-they kill precision and limits

Kenneth Anderson 11, Professor at Washington College of Law, American University, Hoover Institution visiting fellow, Non-Resident Visiting Fellow at Brookings, "Efficiency in Bello and ad Bellum: Targeted Killing Through Drone Warfare," Sept 23 2011, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1812124
Although targeted killing and drone warfare are often closely connected, they are not the
AND
than individualized "high value" targets, whether Taliban or Al Qaeda.