The phrase "argued to limit" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used in contexts where someone is presenting a case or reasoning that suggests a restriction or limitation on a particular subject or issue.
Example: "The researchers argued to limit the use of certain chemicals in agricultural practices due to their harmful effects on the environment."
Alternatives: "contended to restrict" or "asserted to constrain".
For example, he dissented in a case reversing convictions of sit-in protesters, arguing to limit the scope of the Civil Rights Act.
His question was an afterthought, late in the first round of oral arguments, with the justices questioning the Michigan attorney, John Bursch, he of the baby face and bow tie who had already argued before this court eight times and was now arguing to limit marriage to "one man, one woman".
Donovan was an insurance investigator and the movie begins with him representing the bad guys and arguing to limit liability; at the end playing the opposite role he successfully argues for more, effecting the release of two Americans (Powers and a Yale economics graduate student named Frederic Pryor, played in the film by Will Rogers).
Root cause analysis (RCA) is often adopted to complement epidemiologic investigation for outbreaks and infection-related adverse events in hospitals; however, RCA has been argued to have limited effectiveness in preventing such events.
Mr. Cooper's side, on the other hand, argued that to limit the claims would also have broad repercussions, for example making it easy for the government to silence whistleblowers by subjecting them to embarrassing disclosures.
Instead, the most recent judges argued that to limit the numbers of rickshaws hauled amid the cacophony of private cars, overloaded buses, motorbikes, carts and occasional elephants on Delhi's congested streets would be to deny their pullers the constitutional right of free choice of work.
Concurrent tasks are argued to, however, the limit the availability of conscious knowledge [37], [38].
Jonathan Gruber, an economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who was a deputy treasury secretary in the Clinton administration, argues that to limit overuse of health care, people should have to pay enough of the cost out of pocket that it pinches.
We now see Rauner people in multiple courts litigating budget matters he hasn't handled, even as Rauner elsewhere argues we need to limit lawsuits of the type some of his businesses faced in the past.
I argue that attempts to limit their semiotic meanings or to pathologise those who 'misinterpret' these technologies fundamentally misunderstand the nature of signs.
