Jump to content
Sjama

What arguments go best against T

Recommended Posts

If you're running T on neg, the most applicable on is T-Reduce Restrictions. You argue that creating a new category of admissibility is not a reduction of restrictions.

For aff, you essentially argue that reducing restrictions on the attorney general and reversing Session's decision.

Standards would be based around the usual ground, limits, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Typically an arbitrary interp, but T-substantial could be applicable. 

The un way to do T debates: combine all 3 of the above violations into one shell and then strategically choose interps to kick or extend based on how well the 2ac contextualizes their standards debate to your shell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×