Jump to content
shreethebsmaster

Korematsu Solvency

Recommended Posts

I know that there are a million korematsu threads, but i couldn't really find a response to my question in any of them.

 

What would be good arguments against the fact that the executive branch would ignore decisions that the supreme court passed anyway?

 

-S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay fine, I was using Korematsu as a theoretical example.

 

How about in the case of any court aff? The President could just ignore the decision, right?

 

-S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends on what aff it is, I think. If there's no reason for the President to follow the courts decision, there's no way you're gonna get solvency. On the other hand, if it's something like Lawyer-client confidentiality, expediting circumstances, DNA databases, or Zoos (ie all the domestic stuff), there'd be no reason for the Executive branch to keep demanding searches that are unconstitutional.

Fiat solves is always a good one, although there is a legit argument that you can't fiat plan solvency, only plan passage. If they don't understand that argument though, you can always beat them on it.

Your best answer might just be "OK fine, but at best that mitigates case. There will be fewer abuses post-plan - we set up the legal standard, so Bush will be forced to think twice before doing it. That means there will be less he can get away with and not be charged with crimes." Then find some "impeach Bush" evidence and say that every supreme court decision he violates by running roughshod over it is just another strike against him, and only makes it more likely that he'll be kicked out. Bush doesn't want to be impeached, obviously, so he'll try to avoid it if at all possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For korematsu specifically, however, the best answers come in the way the public would percieve executive action after a court ruling. The evidence is out there (my tub's at school so i can't get cites) that the courts are seen by the public as sort of the "concience" of the nation. The public would no longer tolerate the executive doing whatever it wanted after the courts specifically said it went against the constitution, which is percieved as the moral values of the nation. (This tack also works really well with racism korematsu or other courts racism affs.) Another argument you could make would be that fiat ensures normal response by other branches, which would mean that the executive wouldn't violate the constitutional interpretation of the courts. You can justify this by talking about rollback and how enduring fiat is key, and about how you can't predict the negative's making up wierd stories about how other branches would react. It might not be the most theoretically legitimate argument, but it's basically a no risk option because it's going to be hard for the neg to win a voter; there's only offense for the aff.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

first off, korematsu is not a bad aff. In fact, no aff is a bad aff. It's how the debater constructs the 1ac and blocks, and the skill used by the debaters as speakers, not necessarily the name being "bad." And also, I'd like a copy of the cards which say that the supreme court is seen as a concience to the public, seeing as how this could be answers to the XO counterplan as well I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is NOT a bad Aff case!.. I totally agree with the person who posted last... This case is very important in our society today... how can this be a bad Aff...I have run Neg against this Aff case and won BUT the case wasn't run as well as it could have been.. If you have the right people debating this topic is a great one!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes....i also agree that no aff is ever a bad aff (generally)....it does depend, heavily, on the way an individual team runs it. The suggestions given above are similary to what i would suggest....so i wont repeat them all: just find cards that indicate that either

A. the plan is some kind of advantage to the executive branch....and they wouldnt have any valid reason to reject it.

B. The courts decision will be enough to persuade the action

C. Fiat (although....alone.....this isnt enough) it goes well with the arguments above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...