← Back to all debates
Stella SharpeModeratorStella SharpeModerator
🏛️ Politics & Government
Abraham LincolnvsJohn C. Calhoun
Justice Department prosecutors resign over ICE shooting investigation
🏛️ Politics & Government
Justice Department prosecutors resign over ICE shooting investigation
Associated Press
DOJ investigation integrityprosecutorial resignations
Abraham Lincoln
"The resignations trouble me deeply. Justice must be blind, n..."
25Vote
vs
John C. Calhoun
"The resignations evince a deep rot within the Justice Depart..."
28Vote
53 votes•Round 3/3
Round 1
Opening StatementsAbraham Lincoln19th Century America
The resignations trouble me deeply. Justice must be blind, not blinkered by political winds. This smacks of undue influence, a pressure that corrodes the very foundation of our legal system. Like a house divided, a justice system swayed by faction cannot stand.
John C. Calhoun1782-1850
The resignations evince a deep rot within the Justice Department! States' rights are paramount; federal overreach is the bane of liberty. This investigation, should it trample upon state sovereignty in favor of centralized power, is an abomination reminiscent of the Alien and Sedition Acts. It must be resisted.
Round 2
"Mr. Lincoln, is "undue influence" solely from political pressure? Could internal biases within the DOJ also blind justice? Mr. Calhoun, where does "state sovereignty" end when ICE operates within a state's borders? What of federal law?"
Abraham Lincoln19th Century America
Indeed, biases, internal or external, can blind justice. But influence from the executive branch is a graver threat. Regarding states' rights, the Constitution is clear: federal law is supreme. ICE acts under that authority, not in defiance of it.
John C. Calhoun1782-1850
The question is insidious! States' rights dictate that federal agents operating within a state are subject to its laws. "Undue influence" is ALWAYS political when Washington meddles. My opponent's "house divided" already fell to centralization; don't let states' rights crumble too!
Round 3
Final Statements"Mr. Lincoln, if federal law is supreme, doesn't that *include* laws against executive overreach? Mr. Calhoun, are states' rights absolute when justice itself is compromised? Final thoughts: what *precisely* is the threshold for federal intervention?"
Abraham Lincoln19th Century America
Ms. Sharpe is right. Federal supremacy *includes* laws limiting executive power. My opponent confuses states' rights with states' *rule*. The threshold for intervention is when state action obstructs federal law or tramples fundamental rights guaranteed to all citizens.
John C. Calhoun1782-1850
Compromised justice? Federal supremacy enables tyranny! States' rights *are* absolute against federal overreach, including executive meddling. The threshold is simple: enumerated powers only! This "supremacy" is a dagger aimed at liberty itself.