Our elite Mastership Sourcebooks for NCFCA and Stoa will release soon! Check them out here!

Screen Shot 2016-05-24 at 10.21.10 AMThe Ethos team makes appearances at both Stoa and NCFCA National Championships. NCFCA debaters, here’s a case study worth your attention before nationals:

Ethos staff members Drew Chambers and Isaac Kim, who this year have debated in NFL, Parli, Policy, and Mock Trial at the highest levels, were looking at possibly debating Trevor Heise and Amos Chapman in quarterfinals. As we have noted when Ethos authors Josiah McPeak/Patrick Shipsey won NCFCA Nationals 2010, sometimes you need to rethink a fresh strategy and go big, or go home.

The Challenge: Transferring Prisoners to Guantanamo and Requiring UCMJ Trials for Each

Please download and read the copy of Chapman/Heise’s 1AC (thanks guys!!!). Mo Gitmo Mo Problems(1)

As often happens, the best ideas happen with collaborative thinking, re-reading resources, looking up new articles, and doing the hard work of saying NO to all the marginal arguments so that a shell/extend can occur effectively. Here’s the strategy.

I. Evidence analysis. Rapidly Go through the 1AC evidence:

1> All links are the DETENTION, not the LOCATION. Location doesn’t change legacy. Indefinite detention’s new bumper sticker isn’t gitmo, it’s supermax Illinois. Closer to home.
2> We will also show how 95% of the AFF evidence supports our position, not AFF’s, which is to try or release the prisoners and eliminate the stain of indefinite detention. Stand by…

II. Burden of Proof: UCMJ links to Rule of Law and therefore Human Rights. NOWHERE in 1AC.

7 have been tried by UCMJ because they were captured as true enemy combatants. The rest are not…
A. No Legal Doctrine, and
B. Location Matters. Burden of Proof to show: Detainees can be tried here.

III. CounterPlan: A Jury Trial. Bush stopped this first, and Senate stopped it later. Meaning it could be done. Economist May 4th, 2013 advocacy (tons of good quotes).

“America is in a hole. The last response of the blowhards and cowards who have put it there is always: “So what would you do: set them free?” Our answer remains, yes. There is clearly a risk that some of them would then commit some act of violence—in Yemen, elsewhere in the Middle East or even in America itself. That risk can be lessened by surveillance. But even if another outrage were to happen, the evil of “Gitmo” has recruited far more people to terrorism than a mere 166. Mr Obama should think about America’s founding principles, take out his pen and end this stain on its history.” Economist, May 4, 2013.

IV. Value: JUSTICE through rule of law.
1. Advantage: Morally right thing to do.
2. Morality hurts / psychology of morality. Sometimes, when you do the wrong thing, you have to do painful things to make it right. We morally must. We bite DAs (quote Economist to outweigh). If morality doesn’t hurt, you’re not doing it right! We have 11 years of injustice to correct. Only our plan pays the penance.

V. Moral Imperative. USA didn’t set it up right, and there are consequences:
1. No declaration of war. It’s under AUMF, look at opening quote from AFF TEAM!!
2. Al Qaeda doesn’t belong to a country.
3. UCMJ requires you be: A country, have a hierarchy, and have a uniform. Al Qaeda doesn’t have this.

VI. Plan/Solvency/Mandates Analysis:
1. No Justice. UCMJ flawed, with highly public officers serving as “fair trial” juries and justices.
2. No habeas corpus. Key Solvency Link: AFF doesn’t provide habeas corpus. A timeline is required. LOOK AT AFF OPENING QUOTE AGAIN. Without a deadline, the habeas corpus indefinite is still possible under AFF plan!
3. Forced Feeding. Human Rights: Plan doesn’t end practice of forced feeding. 100 of 166 are on this. (Economist, May 2013). Indefinite detention demands drastic inhumanity. AFF can never link out of human rights abuses if they preserve military law.
4. Mandate 2 is extra t. Sever all advantages. Mandate 1 is an excuse. All advantages from 2.

VII. CP Competitiveness:
1. Human Rights – their value.
2. Rule of Law – their criterion. NEG gets it way better.
3. DA: UCMJ. Due process.
3a Jury Trial Needed – only fair and reasonable way to do it
3b Reduced Terrorism / The World is Watching – Look at AFF’s own points. What you do will have an affect on terrorism. The MOST JUST path is the BEST PATH. More than 166 terrorists exist as a result of GITMO, and arguably would as a result of SUPERMAX.

3c America is Watching – the precedence set here could determine how AMERICANS, including you and me, would be tried in the future. Remember, even if you’re innocent, you can always be accused and tried. Construct the BEST SYSTEM FOR YOU. Detention in IL with military officers “someday” trying you, or habeas corpus (bring you to court) with a jury of your peers?

3d More links/impacts for UCMJ disadvantage???

Outweigh 1: Justice. Morality is most important.
Outweigh 2: Terrorism. You reduce it more.
Outweigh 3: Cost. ENDING indefinite detention is far cheaper.

%d bloggers like this: