Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ldsk

Legal Corps

Recommended Posts

Send 500,000 American attorneys a year to SSA as subjects for human experimentation and field testing on new, dangerous antibiotics and antivirals. Whatever happens, it would benefit both Continents...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't have it prepped out, probably won't have it prepped out. In fact, I'm not quite sure what the case looks like.

 

Anyway, CLS might be able to link pretty hard. Someone might need to correct me on it. Otherwise I'd imagine I'd run a states CP + federalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yeah, does anyone have a good neg strat?
just do your favorite generic increase offset-ish cp/pic da, etc..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh And also if you are talking specifically about Nevada union's version of this case run veto cheato because the plan text specifies that the president will sign the legislation.

 

theyre done debating, he's probably looking at MBA's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"VETO CHEATO?"

 

Its a counterplan to have the president veto the bill and have congress override it, with a net benefit of politics

 

The above poster recommended it im guessing because if the aff, like in nevada unions case, specifies the president signs the plan, the CP can then textually compete....then it's perfectly legitimate theoretically...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Its a counterplan to have the president veto the bill and have congress override it, with a net benefit of politics

 

Thanks for the very clear explanation. Now - maybe in a separate thread or by PM - could you explain to me:

 

(1) How could there be a legislative proposal (i.e. a "policy") to compel the Chief of the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government to perform a discretionary act? Fun's fun... but this is an absurd idea. Now I think I begin to understand a new term (to me, anyway) that I heard last night: "Fiat abuse." Indeed, the very name of this tactic - Veto Cheato - is perhaps a Freudian slip; it looks highly-suspicious to me.

 

(2) Assuming, arguendo, that Veto Cheato has a defensible theoretical basis, what possible "net benefits" could there be?

 

(3) This year's topic specifies that the USFG is the actor. Obviously, the President is part of the USFG. So are there any circumstances under which you (or others) envision the use of the Veto Cheato CP by Negatives this year? Thanks... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for the very clear explanation. Now - maybe in a separate thread or by PM - could you explain to me:

 

(1) How could there be a legislative proposal (i.e. a "policy") to compel the Chief of the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government to perform a discretionary act? Fun's fun... but this is an absurd idea. Now I think I begin to understand a new term (to me, anyway) that I heard last night: "Fiat abuse." Indeed, the very name of this tactic - Veto Cheato - is perhaps a Freudian slip; it looks highly-suspicious to me.

 

(2) Assuming, arguendo, that Veto Cheato has a defensible theoretical basis, what possible "net benefits" could there be?

 

(3) This year's topic specifies that the USFG is the actor. Obviously, the President is part of the USFG. So are there any circumstances under which you (or others) envision the use of the Veto Cheato CP by Negatives this year? Thanks... :)

 

First off, read the thread that I provided the link for a couple posts back. (it might help)

 

1) You are right. The Veto Cheato CP has always been viewed as vulnerable theoretically. Fiat abuse is a big issue, but teams who run this will be prepared to answer with reasons why the negative should be able to fiat a presidential veto and congressional override.

 

2) The biggest net benefit would be politics. Basically, the negative would run a Bush Good DA (link: plan makes bush unpopular) and then run this CP to avoid the link. When Bush vetoes the legislation, the argument holds that he will not suffer political repercussions and retain political capital (if not increase it). When congress overrides, the policy will be passed anyway, except the DA will be avoided.

 

3) The CP can be used against almost any affirmative case. Anything which has congress pass certain legislation can be vetoed and then overrided. Sometimes the negative will hold that the CP is actually non-topical because USFG means all three branches, not just two.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for the very clear explanation. Now - maybe in a separate thread or by PM - could you explain to me:

 

(1) How could there be a legislative proposal (i.e. a "policy") to compel the Chief of the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government to perform a discretionary act? Fun's fun... but this is an absurd idea. Now I think I begin to understand a new term (to me, anyway) that I heard last night: "Fiat abuse." Indeed, the very name of this tactic - Veto Cheato - is perhaps a Freudian slip; it looks highly-suspicious to me.

 

(2) Assuming, arguendo, that Veto Cheato has a defensible theoretical basis, what possible "net benefits" could there be?

 

(3) This year's topic specifies that the USFG is the actor. Obviously, the President is part of the USFG. So are there any circumstances under which you (or others) envision the use of the Veto Cheato CP by Negatives this year? Thanks... :)

http://judgephilosophies.wikispaces.com/Heidt%2C+David

Heidt has something to say about ridiculous CPs like this...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pro bono legal corps is part of americorps. it lets law students get some hands on-opportunities working with professional attorneys and communities.

 

http://www.equaljusticeworks.org/participants/pppblc.php

OK HERES MY IMPUT

USEFUL CARDS

The program is only supported by their grants, not actually within their program.

"The Pro Bono Legal Corps (PBLC) was created in 2003 with the goal of improving access to justice by increasing the availability of pro bono legal services. Supported by an AmeriCorps grant from the Corporation for National and Community Service, the PBLC offers law graduates the opportunity to promote public service among law students and at law schools, while developing their own legal and professional skills."

 

NON INHERENT--Their gonna increase the Katrina Program

http://www.equaljusticeworks.org/disaster-relief/pro_bono_index.php

In response to the devastation caused by Hurricane Katrina,Equal Justice Works is expanding its Pro Bono Legal Corps program, sending 10 Equal Justice Works AmeriCorps Attorneys to the hardest hit areas in the Gulf Coast region. These attorneys will be placed at organizations in Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama to help the hundreds of thousands of people left without homes, jobs and social services due to the damage from the hurricane. Program Description The mission of the Pro Bono Legal Corps (PBLC) is to build a commitment to pro bono service at law schools and among future lawyers by expanding law student and law school involvement in the delivery of legal services. Supported by an AmeriCorps grant from the Corporation for National and Community Service, the PBLC program offers its members, called Equal Justice Works AmeriCorps Attorneys, the opportunity to implement projects that promote public service among law students while providing critically needed legal services.For more information about the PBLC program, a list of PBLC member benefits, frequently asked questions and 2005-2006 PBLC member profiles, click here.Program Expansion - Katrina Pro Bono Legal Corps The program expansion will add 10 new members to serve at host organizations in Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama as part of the Equal Justice Works Katrina Initiative. The new members will implement projects to recruit hundreds of law students and lawyers to provide vital disaster-related legal services to hurricane survivors, including:Coordinating a statewide legal emergency hotline in Louisiana;Assisting hurricane evacuees in FEMA camps and other temporary housing facilities across Alabama overcome legal barriers to securing permanent housing; and Educating community members in Mississippi on new Internal Revenue Service tax rules benefiting those affected by Hurricane Katrina."

 

also the second card of solvency in the nevada union aff is solvency takeout and the third card in inherency

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 all programs under the americorps umbrella are funded this way, 2 yes, they are.. by ten people :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...