William Pitt Debating Union Tandem
Qualifies for National Debate Tournament
The Pittsburgh debate tandem of senior Melina Forte and first-year student Michael Mangus won the District VII qualifying tournament's final six ballots, defeating opponents from Clarion University and the U.S. Naval Academy to finish among the top eight teams in the region and qualify for the 61st National Debate Tournament (NDT).
This is the 10th consecutive year that the William Pitt Debating Union (WPDU) has qualified a team for the NDT. As intercollegiate policy debate's version of "March Madness," the NDT brings together the top 78 debate tandems in the nation for five days of intense analysis of a common topic, which this year deals with the U.S. Supreme Court.
At the District VII qualifying tournament, hosted by the University of Mary Washington in Fredericksburg, VA, on February 25-26, 2007, Forte and Mangus argued that the U.S. Supreme Court should overrule its decision in United States vs. Morrison on the grounds that such an overrule would advance the cause of women's rights and reverse a dangerous precedent. Specifically, the WPDU case contended that the Morrison decision codifies discrimination against women by reaffirming a public/private dichotomy in the law. The dichotomy is reinforced by the court's holding that Congress' enactment of statutory punishment for domestic violence does not fall under the scope of congressional regulatory authority flowing from the commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution. During contest round competition, Forte and Mangus blended research from judicial opinions, law review articles, and book chapters to support the claim.
Switch-side tournament debating requires each team to defend the resolution half the time, then argue on the opposite side during the remaining contest rounds. The focus of Forte and Mangus' argumentation on the negative side of the resolutional ledger this year has been an argument concerning the U.S. Supreme Court's political capital. Drawing from scholarly research published in journals such as the Journal of Political Economy, expert testimony before Congress, and recent news reports, Forte and Mangus argued that any dramatic Supreme Court decision in the near term would undercut the ability of the justices to make a controversial ruling protecting endangered species in the pending case of the Environmental Protection Agency vs. Defenders of Wildlife.
Forte and Mangus' triumph at the district tournament builds on a strong season of competitive success on the intercollegiate circuit, including elimination-round appearances at tournaments hosted by Miami (OH), Navy, and the University of Richmond.