How to read the evidence. Each evidence entry gives the exact citation, what the source shows in our words, and a link. Read the original and cut your own card before you run this case; do not read our summaries as evidence in a round.
Framework
Value: governmental legitimacy. The resolution concerns what democracies ought to do; a democracy's obligations flow from what makes its authority legitimate.
Criterion: consistency with the consent of the governed. Democratic authority is legitimate because citizens authorize it, and citizens can only authorize a government that protects the liberties that make authorization meaningful: speech, association, privacy, and due process. A government that suspends those liberties in the name of security has removed the conditions of its own authority. Security is instrumentally valuable, as a condition for exercising liberty; liberty is what security is for.
Legitimate authority rests on consent
Locke, J. (1689). Second Treatise of Government, chapters 8 and 9. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Argues that political power is legitimate only by the consent of the governed, and that governments exist to preserve the liberties and property of those who consent. The classic source for the criterion; read the chapters, not a summary.
Contention one: security powers expand and do not contract
Emergency surveillance authorities are enacted as temporary and become permanent. The post-2001 authorities were renewed and expanded through 2024, and independent oversight bodies have repeatedly documented compliance failures in their use against Americans. When a democracy prioritizes security, the institutional incentive is one-directional: no agency volunteers to give power back. Prioritizing liberty is the only stable default, because it forces every expansion to justify itself.
Surveillance authority renewed and expanded
Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act, Pub. L. 118-49 (April 2024). congress.gov
Reauthorized Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act for two years and expanded the categories of providers subject to compelled assistance; the affirmative uses the reauthorization history to show that temporary authorities persist.
Documented compliance failures
Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (2023). Report on the Surveillance Program Operated Pursuant to Section 702 of FISA. pclob.gov
Reviews the program's operation and documents repeated compliance incidents involving queries of Americans' communications, along with the board's recommendations for reform.
Contention two: prioritizing security produces the harms it promises to prevent
The historical record of democracies in crisis, from wartime internment to blacklists to mass surveillance, shows that security-first policy targets minorities and dissenters, erodes trust between citizens and the state, and weakens the social cohesion that actual security depends on. A democracy that protects liberties keeps the loyalty of the people it governs, and loyalty, not surveillance, is what prevents the harms security policy fears.
Security-first policy targets minorities and dissenters
Stone, G. (2004). Perilous Times: Free Speech in Wartime. W. W. Norton.
A history of how the United States restricted civil liberties during every major war and later regretted it, from the Sedition Act to the Cold War; the standard source for the historical contention.
1AR block file
- "Without security there are no liberties." Grant that security matters; the resolution is about priority when they conflict. Under the criterion, the burden is on security measures to justify themselves, which is exactly the priority the affirmative defends.
- "Prioritizing liberties gets people killed." Ask for the empirical record. Oversight reports show that mass collection produced few or no unique counterterrorism successes while creating documented abuses.
- "Democracies can choose security democratically." Majorities can vote to suspend minorities' liberties; the criterion explains why that is illegitimate even when popular.
This resolution is no longer in competition; use it for framework practice and scrimmages from the resolution bank.
New cases by email
A message when cases for a new topic are published.