Hollow Hope DA

Cross - Ex Questions
1. What agency enforces your plan? ((dividends))
a. Gonna be the epa
2. How do you ensure compliance with your plan? ((it doesnt get mailed))
a. Normal means, court system
i. Act confused lol

Courts are Bad as a Mechanism of Change

1. Resource trade off dias
a. Movements and social groups only have so much money
and time and to waste that in terms of litigation is a waste
b. It lures activists to these less successful avenues
2. Courts literally have not been able to create any force of social change
because they always rely on another mechanism
a. Even with desegregation, we needed to use us marshalls
(other enforcement)
b. Change social circumstances first, at best, a court
decision is only symbolic
3. Empirically inspires backlash
a. These symbolic victories, why do nothing for the people
who win, does cause actual backlash and strengthens movements
against them
i. The people against it rallies (roe v wade,
brown v board of ed)
b. Empirical evidence, not just theory
c. Court cases slow down movements towards
desegregation etc bc we were moving towards them already but this
backlash slowed
4. Kills coalitions between movements
a. As soon as this backlash happens, linked groups dissipate
and other groups get slowed as well
b. The only way for social change to happen is if we link
groups and join together

What happens if someone doesnt get their check, people who dont get them now
have to rely on lawyers
A dividend check after the fact doesnt help someone today
 Those help the middle class and upper lower class dont have the ability to
wait, what about people under a different name
Homeless people who dont have a mailbox but still pay for things
ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENTS ARE SOLVING NOW, UNIQUENESS, SO ALL THEIR
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ARE ALREADY BEING TAKEN CARE OF IN THE STATUS
QUO SO THE AFF ONLY RISKS RUINING THOSE

Novices:
Run as da
Environmental movements are succeeding
rn, you derail them with the hollow hope of courts
Or, run on case as hidden arg (like apocalyptic rhetoric)

We control uniqueness on the question of environmental impacts because

movements are solving now, which means theres only a risk that they derail those
movements and stop them from working. All their impacts as a result of warming
like ocean acidification are already being solved in the status quo by these activists
by teaching them to do things like decreasing consumption, promoting awareness,
and actively convincing companies to change their practices. Our is evidence
empirically based and indicates that 2016 has been increasing theses gains. The
only question is if these gains continue to increase or they get sidetracked by the
courts.
Our link evidence says ensurance of compliance, especially in regards to carbon tax
requires litigation because courts will continue to fight these battles. This draws
resources away from groups like the epa whose time would better spend doing
literally anything else than being in court.
Court decisions also create backlash against these movements, but the
implementation of the policy creates this hollow hope that the courts will be able to
enforce it, when in reality the time wasted in litigation and these empty decisions
makes the steps being taken towards environmental justice lesser than if the plan
had not been implemented.
This means that any of their extinction impacts are all the more likely with the
passage of the plan, turning the case.