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

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...