Brian+and+Matt

=Classic KM Lab - Brian Hu and Matt Zhang - Court Drones Aff= toc =Surveillance State Advantage=

The war on terror has being brought to America in the form of aerial surveillance, making Orwell’s dystopia a reality Gohoshray 2013 (Saby [President, Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies Director, Research, and Compliance WorldCompliance Company]; Domestic Surveillance Via Drones: Looking Through the Lens of the Fourth Amendment; 33 N. Ill. U. L. Rev. 579) Imagine for a moment. A scenic drive along a picturesque highway, it is AND , may present a strong rationale for **rejecting drones introduction** at this time.

As police forces become increasing paramilitarized, drones will be a critical tool to stifle and kill dissidents Talai 14 - University of California, Berkeley, School of Law (Andrew, “The Fourth Amendment and Police Discretion in the Digital Age,” 102 Cal. L. Rev. 729, Lexis/SEP) Law enforcement agencies have begun deploying drones for routine domestic surveillance operations, unrestrained by AND and the use of force up to and including the authority to kill."

This will disproportionately impact communities of color " __You're not just talking about the physical border, you're talking about an area__ __AND__ kind of having the privacy debate after the fact with very little information."
 * Bernd 2015 ** (Candice; Proposed Rules Regulating Domestic Drone Use Lack Police Warrant Requirement; Feb 24; www.truth-out.org/news/item/29250-proposed-rules-regulating-domestic-drone-use-lack-police-warrant-requirement; kdf)

Furthermore, it will further exasperate structural racism Cyril 2015 (Malkia Amala [under and executive director of the Center for Media Justice (CMJ) and co-founder of the Media Action Grassroots Network]; Black America's State of Surveillance; Mar 30; www.progressive.org/news/2015/03/188074/black-americas-state-surveillance; kdf) Today, media reporting on government surveillance is laser-focused on the revelations by AND failed to tell the story of surveillance in the context of structural racism.

__ To study racism is to study walls __. We have looked at barriers and fences AND __ of the world and ourselves, we dare not allow it to continue. __
 * Racism must be rejected in every instance - independent reason to vote affirmative **
 * Barndt 91 **(Joseph R. Barndt co-director of Ministry Working to Dismantle Racism "Dismantling Racism" p. 155)

Reject their magnitude first claims – can’t calculate effects with low probability and not real world Hayenhjelm and Wolff 11 – associate professor at Department of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies at Umeå University AND Professor of Philosophy and Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Humanities at University College London [Madeleine and Jonathan, “The Moral Problem of Risk Impositions: A Survey of the Literature,” European Journal of Philosophy, pp. e35-e37, 2011, Wiley, Accessed 6/27/15]//schnall// // 6.2. Assessing the Probability for Harm Ultimately //the issue of probability is AND// in such cases cost-beneﬁt analysis appears little help (Hansson 2009).

And, plans exist to weaponized police drones Greenwald 2013 (Glenn [former columnist on civil liberties and US national security issues for the Guardian. An ex-constitutional lawyer]; The US Needs To Wake Up To Threat Of Domestic Drones; Mar 30; http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/mar/29/domestic-drones-unique-dangers; kdf) The use of drones by domestic US law enforcement agencies is growing rapidly, both AND a domestic drone regime is the key first step in constructing that coalition.

Drones remove any public anonymity and create an omnipresent Panopticon, enabling totalitarianism Burow 2013 (Matthew L [Candidate for JD @ New England School of Law]; The Sentinel Clouds above the Nameless Crowd: Prosecuting Anonymity from Domestic Drones; 39 New Eng. J. on Crim. & Civ. Confinement 443; kdf) Walking down the street. Driving a car. Sitting on a park bench. AND as immoral, antisocial and part of the dissident cult of individualism. 140

Empirically, this totalitarian state will be used to perpetuate genocide Burow 2013 (Matthew L [Candidate for JD @ New England School of Law]; The Sentinel Clouds above the Nameless Crowd: Prosecuting Anonymity from Domestic Drones; 39 New Eng. J. on Crim. & Civ. Confinement 443; kdf) This Note has explored the philosophical and psychological effects of panoptic surveillance and the need AND and pray to the better angels of our nature for a worthy answer.

Plan
The United States federal government should curtail its aerial surveillance by ruling that such searches constitute a search within the Fourth Amendment and is unreasonable without a warrant, barring exigent circumstances.

Solvency
Only court action on aerial surveillance solves privacy backsliding, keeps up with technology, and provides law enforcement with legal bright lines Celso 2014 (Joel [JD Candidate U of Baltimore Law]; DRONING ON ABOUT THE FOURTH AMENDMENT: ADOPTING A REASONABLE FOURTH AMENDMENT JURISPRUDENCE TO PREVENT UNREASONABLE SEARCHES BY UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS; 43 U. Balt. L. Rev. 461; kdf) IV. ENSURING A REASONABLE FUTURE BY PREVENTING UNREASONABLE UAS SURVEILLANCE Speaking for the Supreme AND that UAS technology remains within the scope of Fourth Amendment protections.

A Supreme Court ruling on aerial surveillance is __uniquely key__ to revitalizing 4th Amendment’s ability to protect privacy and to stop the onslaught of advancing technologies Celso 2014 (Joel [JD Candidate U of Baltimore Law]; DRONING ON ABOUT THE FOURTH AMENDMENT: ADOPTING A REASONABLE FOURTH AMENDMENT JURISPRUDENCE TO PREVENT UNREASONABLE SEARCHES BY UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS; 43 U. Balt. L. Rev. 461; kdf) [*493] The Katz reasonable expectation of privacy test has been criticized for its AND even the widespread use of UAS will not erode society's legitimate privacy expectations.

The plan solves for invasive surveillance for multiple reasons

First, requiring warrants on drones acts as a catalyst to jolt privacy law forward Ahsanuddin et al 2014 (Sadia - principal investigator for the report and MPAC research fellow; Domestic Drones: Implications for Privacy and Due Process in the United States; Sep 8; www.mpac.org/publications/policy-papers/domestic-drones.php; kdf) Simultaneously, the IHSS survey respondents indicated apprehensiveness over any domestic drone operations: two AND to civil liberties is profound. The law must catch up with technology.

Second, the plan grants adversarial standing, making it possible to challenge the constitutionality of all surveillance programs Correia 2014 (Evan RC [JD Candidate, 2015 @ Temple]; PULLING BACK THE VEIL OF SECRECY: STANDING TO CHALLENGE THE GOVERNMENT'S ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES; 24 Temp. Pol. & Civ. Rts. L. Rev. 185; kdf) Looking back at the events of 2013, in light of the extensive legislative history AND creates the proper balance between national security and the protection of individual privacy.

Third, our precedent of the plan sets a constitutional floor for states & municipalities, and empirically will be modeled internationally Rushin 2011 (Stephen [PhD student at the University of California, Berkeley, Jurisprudence and Social Policy Program; J.D., University of California, Berkeley]; THE JUDICIAL RESPONSE TO MASS POLICE SURVEILLANCE; 2011 U. Ill. J.L. Tech. & Pol'y 281; kdf) To begin with, skeptics allege that legislations can more carefully analyze a problem, AND of the courts exercising their proper role as a limited but effective policymakers.

This is particularly important because current counter-terror initiatives are failing Zenko 2015 (Micah [Douglas Dillon fellow in the Center for Preventive Action @ CFR]; America's Virulent, Extremist Counterterrorism Ideology; May 21; foreignpolicy.com/2015/05/21/americas-virulent-extremist-counterterrorism-ideology-perpetual-war-islamic-state/; kdf) Throughout the 13-plus years of the war on terrorism, one line of AND ideology that Washington is expressing is hazardous, illusory, and sadly unchallenged.

The deference the court shows to the executive is to blame Deeks 13 – Associate Professor of Law, University of Virginia Law School (Ashley S., //The Observer Effect: National Security Litigation, Executive Policy Changes, and Judicial Deference//, 82 Fordham L. Review, 827, 2013, http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4941&context=flr) One of the core tenets of national security doctrine is that courts play a deeply AND play only a limited role in executive calculations about appropriate national security policies.

Deference is to blame for the failures of counterterrorism Cover 14 - Assistant Professor of Law, Case Western Reserve University School of Law; Director, Institute for Global Security Law and Policy (Avidan, Cardozo Law Review, “Presumed Imminence: Judicial Risk Assessment in the post-9/11 World,” 5 Cardozo L. Rev. 1415, Lexis/SEP) Arguments favoring judicial abdication because of temporary and possibly exigent circumstances are less persuasive in AND the risks we face should not be left only to the experts. [|n298]

The judicial observer effect provides a counterweight that shifts executive decision-making towards more careful procedures as well as rights-sensitive policies Deeks 13 – Assistant Professor of Law, University of Virginia Law School, Attorney-Adviser in the Office of the Legal Adviser at the U.S. Department of State (Ashley S., “The Observer Effect: National Security Litigation, Executive Policy Changes, and Judicial Deference,” 82 Fordham Law Review 2, SEP) The observer effect provides an important counterweight to the executive’s instinct to prioritize national security AND judicial oversight will shift the substantive policy in a more rightssensitive direction. 156

Observer effect spills over to other executive policies, particularly when the triggering case directly implicates individual rights Deeks ’13 (Ashley S., attorney-adviser in the Office of the Legal Adviser at the U.S. Department of State, advised on the law of armed conflict, including detention, the U.S. relationship with the International Committee of the Red Cross, intelligence issues, conventional weapons, and the legal framework for the conflict with al-Qaeda, “The Observer Effect: National Security Litigation, Executive Policy Changes, and Judicial Deference”, Fordham Law Review, Vol. 82, No. 2, cl) More systemically, the observer effect reminds the executive of the courts’ presence, and AND in which the courts show less deference are those that implicate individual rights.

Lastly, Justifications for maintaining the squo are wrought with faulty logic—only increasing the amount of info available to public can keep us safe Scheer 2015 (Robert [Prof @ USC’s School of journalism and communication]; They Know Everything About You; Nation Books; p. 208-212; kdf) WE MUST CHALLENGE THE ASSUMPTION THAT PROTECTING national security requires sacrificing the constitutional rights of AND don't have sufficient information. We're fighting for the soul of this democracy."

=Neg Strategies= ex post CP drone strike CP T surveillance T curtail T domestic surveillance Terror DA Iran DA Foucault K impact turn totalitarianism