<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>ADF Alliance Alert &#187; Court: U.S. Supreme</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.alliancealert.org/tag/court-u-s-supreme/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.alliancealert.org</link>
	<description>news from the frontlines of the culture war</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 23:12:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Occupy the Docket: How the Supreme Court Selects the 1%</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/24/occupy-the-docket-how-the-supreme-court-selects-the-1/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/24/occupy-the-docket-how-the-supreme-court-selects-the-1/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 16:47:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=134576</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.circuitsplits.com/2012/05/occupy-the-docket-how-the-supreme-court-selects-the-1-.html">Circuit Splits Blog</a>: Assuming this trend continues and all other things being equal, a petitioner is more likely to read about the discovery of life on Mars by the end of the year than to read the words “certiorari granted” next to their case—at least according to a website that bills itself as “the world’s leading prediction market.” <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/24/occupy-the-docket-how-the-supreme-court-selects-the-1/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/24/occupy-the-docket-how-the-supreme-court-selects-the-1/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is Justice Ginsburg Risking the Future of the Supreme Court?</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/24/is-justice-ginsburg-risking-the-future-of-the-supreme-court/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/24/is-justice-ginsburg-risking-the-future-of-the-supreme-court/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 14:42:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=134548</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Chris Geidner at the <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/05/24/is-justice-ginsburg-risking-the-future-of-the-supreme-court.html">Daily Beast</a>: The calls for her retirement started last year—she’s nearly 80 and a two-time cancer survivor—but Ruth Bader Ginsburg isn’t going anywhere. Chris Geidner looks into the tricky world of politicking and the court. <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/24/is-justice-ginsburg-risking-the-future-of-the-supreme-court/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/24/is-justice-ginsburg-risking-the-future-of-the-supreme-court/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;A Way Out of the Same-Sex Marriage Mess&#8221; &#124; NY Times</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/24/a-way-out-of-the-same-sex-marriage-mess-ny-times/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/24/a-way-out-of-the-same-sex-marriage-mess-ny-times/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 14:39:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Marriage & Family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Marriage and Family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Homosexual Agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Marriage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=134546</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[May Kuykendall at <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/24/opinion/a-way-out-of-the-same-sex-marriage-mess.html?_r=1">NY Times</a>: The Supreme Court, which will almost certainly have to take up the issue, should hold that while states may refuse to authorize same-sex marriages, they may not void — that is, refuse to recognize — gay marriages lawfully conducted in other states. <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/24/a-way-out-of-the-same-sex-marriage-mess-ny-times/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/24/a-way-out-of-the-same-sex-marriage-mess-ny-times/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The public trial of Justice Roberts</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/23/the-public-trial-of-justice-roberts/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/23/the-public-trial-of-justice-roberts/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 19:27:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Obamacare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=134490</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Kathleen Parker at the <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/democrats-put-john-roberts-on-trial/2012/05/22/gIQAijq8iU_story.html">Washington Post</a>: Novelist John Grisham could hardly spin a more provocative fiction: The president and his surrogates mount an aggressive campaign to intimidate the chief justice of the United States, implying ruin and ridicule should he fail to vote in a pivotal case according to the ruling political party’s wishes. If only it were fiction. <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/23/the-public-trial-of-justice-roberts/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/23/the-public-trial-of-justice-roberts/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Clinton Era Roadless Rule Headed to the Supreme Court?</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/21/clinton-era-roadless-rule-headed-to-the-supreme-court/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/21/clinton-era-roadless-rule-headed-to-the-supreme-court/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 17:33:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: 10th Circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Colorado]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Wyoming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Energy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Environmentalism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=134196</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://blogs.findlaw.com/tenth_circuit/2012/05/roadless-rule-headed-to-the-supreme-court.html?DCMP=NWL-pro_top">Findlaw</a>: Colorado Mining Association President Stuart Sanderson wants the Supreme Court to reverse the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals decision. Sanderson claims, "If allowed to stand, the roadless rule will effectively prevent future mining operations on roadless lands, leading to a decrease in mineral and coal production, job losses and sharp decreases in taxes and revenues from the coal mining industry that are critical to local governments and public school systems," the Denver Post reports. <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/21/clinton-era-roadless-rule-headed-to-the-supreme-court/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/21/clinton-era-roadless-rule-headed-to-the-supreme-court/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Justices will decide the fate of gay marriage&#8221; &#124; UPI</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/21/justices-will-decide-the-fate-of-gay-marriage-upi/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/21/justices-will-decide-the-fate-of-gay-marriage-upi/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 15:36:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Marriage & Family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Marriage and Family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Homosexual Agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Marriage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=134166</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2012/05/20/Under-the-US-Supreme-Court-Justices-will-decide-the-fate-of-gay-marriage/UPI-20131337499000/">UPI</a>: The president proposes, but the Supreme Court disposes: The apparent consensus in the legal writing community is that the issue of gay marriage will be fought out eventually on the battleground of the U.S. Supreme Court, and the justices will have the final say.
 <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/21/justices-will-decide-the-fate-of-gay-marriage-upi/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/21/justices-will-decide-the-fate-of-gay-marriage-upi/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Unanimous SCOTUS: IVF children conceived after dad&#8217;s death not covered by Social Security</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/21/scotus-children-conceived-after-fathers-death-not-covered-by-social-security/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/21/scotus-children-conceived-after-fathers-death-not-covered-by-social-security/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 15:27:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Featured]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Marriage and Family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Sanctity of Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Bioethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: IVF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Parental Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Astrue v. Capato]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=134158</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[SCOTUS Blog: Case Information Page and Document Links _____________ SCOTUS Ruling here: Astrue v. Capato, No. 11-159 Eighteen months after her husband, Robert Capato, died of cancer, respondent Karen Capato gave birth to twins conceived through in vitro fertilization using &#8230; <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/21/scotus-children-conceived-after-fathers-death-not-covered-by-social-security/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/21/scotus-children-conceived-after-fathers-death-not-covered-by-social-security/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Crooks target Supreme Court Justice Breyer for second time in three months</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/18/crooks-target-supreme-court-justice-breyer-for-second-time-in-three-months/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/18/crooks-target-supreme-court-justice-breyer-for-second-time-in-three-months/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 14:57:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=134047</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/17/crooks-target-supreme-court-justice-breyer-for-second-time-in-three-months/?test=latestnews">Fox News</a>: Less than three months after he was robbed at his vacation home in the Caribbean, Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer has been targeted again -- this time by burglars at his Washington, D.C., house.
 <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/18/crooks-target-supreme-court-justice-breyer-for-second-time-in-three-months/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/18/crooks-target-supreme-court-justice-breyer-for-second-time-in-three-months/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is Campaign Disclosure Heading Back to the Supreme Court?</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/17/is-campaign-disclosure-heading-back-to-the-supreme-court/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/17/is-campaign-disclosure-heading-back-to-the-supreme-court/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 16:28:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Religious Freedom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Religious Freedom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Elections]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=133947</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Richard L. Hasen at <a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2012/05/don_t_get_too_excited_about_promises_of_imminent_campaign_finance_disclosure__1.html">Slate</a>: The news this week that a federal appeals court has refused to block a lower court ruling requiring the disclosure of more funders of campaign ads has campaign finance reformers tasting their first victory in a long time. “It's the first major breakthrough in overcoming the massive amounts of secret contributions that are flowing into federal elections," Fred Wertheimer of Democracy 21 told the Los Angeles Times.  <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/17/is-campaign-disclosure-heading-back-to-the-supreme-court/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/17/is-campaign-disclosure-heading-back-to-the-supreme-court/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Teresa Collett: &#8220;A Constitutional and Wise Way to Protect the Unborn: A Response to Paul Linton&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/17/teresa-collett-a-constitutional-and-wise-way-to-protect-the-unborn-a-response-to-paul-linton/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/17/teresa-collett-a-constitutional-and-wise-way-to-protect-the-unborn-a-response-to-paul-linton/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 15:58:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Sanctity of Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Sanctity of Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Abortion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Jurisprudence]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=133939</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Teresa Collett at <a href="http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/05/5437?utm_source=RTA+Collett+Unborn+Pain&#038;utm_campaign=email&#038;utm_medium=email">Public Discourse</a>: Paul is simply wrong as to his first point. The Court has never directly addressed whether preventing the pain of the unborn is an adequate independent basis for limiting abortions. It has, however, repeatedly noted that changes in medical knowledge and technology may require changes in its approach to abortion <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/17/teresa-collett-a-constitutional-and-wise-way-to-protect-the-unborn-a-response-to-paul-linton/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/17/teresa-collett-a-constitutional-and-wise-way-to-protect-the-unborn-a-response-to-paul-linton/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Scalia Turns Advocate Against Obama as Queries Criticized&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/16/scalia-turns-advocate-against-obama-as-queries-criticized/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/16/scalia-turns-advocate-against-obama-as-queries-criticized/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 16:57:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Environmentalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Jurisprudence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Obamacare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=133815</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-15/scalia-turns-advocate-against-obama-as-queries-criticized.html">Bloomberg</a>: Scalia’s approach is fueling the perception that the biggest cases this term, including health care, may be influenced by politics, rather than the legal principles that he and other justices say should be their guide. <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/16/scalia-turns-advocate-against-obama-as-queries-criticized/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/16/scalia-turns-advocate-against-obama-as-queries-criticized/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Paul Benjamin Linton: &#8220;The Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act: Unconstitutional and Unwise&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/16/paul-benjamin-linton-the-pain-capable-unborn-child-protection-act-unconstitutional-and-unwise/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/16/paul-benjamin-linton-the-pain-capable-unborn-child-protection-act-unconstitutional-and-unwise/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 15:17:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Sanctity of Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Sanctity of Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Abortion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=133781</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Paul Benjamin Linton at <a href="http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/05/5309?utm_source=RTA+Linton+Unborn+Pain&#038;utm_campaign=email&#038;utm_medium=email">Public Discourse</a>: The Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act does not deserve the support of the public because it is unconstitutional and represents poor public policy. <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/16/paul-benjamin-linton-the-pain-capable-unborn-child-protection-act-unconstitutional-and-unwise/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/16/paul-benjamin-linton-the-pain-capable-unborn-child-protection-act-unconstitutional-and-unwise/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Court says farmers must pay bankruptcy tax</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/14/court-says-farmers-must-pay-bankruptcy-tax/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/14/court-says-farmers-must-pay-bankruptcy-tax/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 16:16:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Taxation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=133506</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SUPREME_COURT_BANKRUPTCY_TAX?SITE=AP&#038;SECTION=HOME&#038;TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&#038;CTIME=2012-05-14-11-47-32">AP</a>: The high court on Monday voted 5-4 for the IRS in its fight with Lynwood and Brenda Hall over their bankruptcy sale of their 320-acre farm in Willcox, Ariz. &#124; <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-875.pdf">Hall v. United States</a> <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/14/court-says-farmers-must-pay-bankruptcy-tax/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/14/court-says-farmers-must-pay-bankruptcy-tax/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Leading Democratic Primary Candidate for Senator from Maine Calls for Court-Packing</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/09/leading-democratic-primary-candidate-for-senator-from-maine-calls-for-court-packing/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/09/leading-democratic-primary-candidate-for-senator-from-maine-calls-for-court-packing/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 20:43:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Maine]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=133346</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Eugene Volokh at the <a href="http://volokh.com/2012/05/09/leading-democratic-primary-candidate-for-senator-from-maine-calls-for-court-packing/#more-59812">Volokh Conspiracy</a>: An article by Will Tuell (who apparently is or was a local town selectman) in the Downeast Coastal Press reports that State Senator Cynthia Dill — seemingly the leader in the Democratic primary, though not necessarily a strong competitor to Independent candidate and former Governor Angus King — endorses Court-packing . . . 
 <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/09/leading-democratic-primary-candidate-for-senator-from-maine-calls-for-court-packing/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/09/leading-democratic-primary-candidate-for-senator-from-maine-calls-for-court-packing/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Supreme Court justice urges civility in legal talk</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/02/supreme-court-justice-urges-civility-in-legal-talk/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/02/supreme-court-justice-urges-civility-in-legal-talk/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2012 17:53:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=132703</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2012/may/01/nv-scotus-kennedy-vegas-3rd-ld-writethru/">Las Vegas Sun</a>: Then Kennedy leaned forward to the lectern to urge those schooled in what he called "the language of the law" to set a good example for the rest of the world with "rational, quiet, thoughtful, respectful discussion and debate." "The verdict on freedom is still out in over half the world, and the rest of the world is looking at us," Kennedy said. "They see the current dialogue and discourse and they are horrified by it." <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/02/supreme-court-justice-urges-civility-in-legal-talk/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/02/supreme-court-justice-urges-civility-in-legal-talk/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Will SCOTUS Stamp Out Montana&#8217;s Constitutional Mischief? &#8211; Corporate Campaign Expenditures</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/02/will-scotus-stamp-out-montanas-constitutional-mischief-corporate-campaign-expenditures/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/02/will-scotus-stamp-out-montanas-constitutional-mischief-corporate-campaign-expenditures/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2012 17:33:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Montana]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: American Tradition Partnership v. Attorney General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Citizens United v Federal Election Commission]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=132697</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://blogs.findlaw.com/supreme_court/2012/05/will-scotus-stamp-out-montanas-constitutional-mischief.html?DCMP=NWL-pro_top">Findlaw</a>: In February, the Supreme Court stayed the Montana decision, (now called American Tradition Partnership v. Bullock), pending a petition for writ of certiorari. Justice Ginsburg, joined by Justice Breyer, issued a statement supporting the stay in light of stare decisis, but expressing an interest in re-examining Citizens United. <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/02/will-scotus-stamp-out-montanas-constitutional-mischief-corporate-campaign-expenditures/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/02/will-scotus-stamp-out-montanas-constitutional-mischief-corporate-campaign-expenditures/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SCOTUS for law students: What does the Solicitor General do? (sponsored by Bloomberg Law)</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/02/scotus-for-law-students-what-does-the-solicitor-general-do-sponsored-by-bloomberg-law/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/02/scotus-for-law-students-what-does-the-solicitor-general-do-sponsored-by-bloomberg-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2012 15:45:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Solicitor General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=132669</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/05/scotus-for-law-students-what-does-the-solicitor-general-do-sponsored-by-bloomberg-law/#more-144154">SCOTUS Blog</a>: After the oral arguments in the health care cases in March, much attention was focused on the oral advocacy by Solicitor General Donald Verrilli. But who, exactly, is the Solicitor General and what does his office do? <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/02/scotus-for-law-students-what-does-the-solicitor-general-do-sponsored-by-bloomberg-law/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/05/02/scotus-for-law-students-what-does-the-solicitor-general-do-sponsored-by-bloomberg-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ken Klukowski: &#8220;Analysis: Supreme Court May Split Decision Arizona Immigration Law&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/26/ken-klukowski-analysis-supreme-court-may-split-decision-arizona-immigration-law/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/26/ken-klukowski-analysis-supreme-court-may-split-decision-arizona-immigration-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2012 18:01:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Arizona v. United States]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=132217</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ken Klukowski at <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/04/26/Supreme-Court-Might-Split-Decision-Arizona-Immigration-Law">Breitbart</a>: “What does sovereignty mean if it does not include the ability to defend your borders?” That question by Justice Antonin Scalia goes to the heart of the Supreme Court’s blockbuster immigration case, Arizona v. United States. <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/26/ken-klukowski-analysis-supreme-court-may-split-decision-arizona-immigration-law/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/26/ken-klukowski-analysis-supreme-court-may-split-decision-arizona-immigration-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Chief Justice Roberts: “It seems to me the federal government just doesn’t want to know who’s here illegally&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/25/chief-justice-roberts-%e2%80%9cit-seems-to-me-the-federal-government-just-doesn%e2%80%99t-want-to-know-who%e2%80%99s-here-illegally/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/25/chief-justice-roberts-%e2%80%9cit-seems-to-me-the-federal-government-just-doesn%e2%80%99t-want-to-know-who%e2%80%99s-here-illegally/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Apr 2012 21:23:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Department of Justice (DOJ)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Arizona v. United States]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=132122</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/apr/25/supreme-court-casts-doubt-obamas-immigration-law-c/">Washington Times</a>: “It seems to me the federal government just doesn’t want to know who’s here illegally,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said at one point.
 <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/25/chief-justice-roberts-%e2%80%9cit-seems-to-me-the-federal-government-just-doesn%e2%80%99t-want-to-know-who%e2%80%99s-here-illegally/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/25/chief-justice-roberts-%e2%80%9cit-seems-to-me-the-federal-government-just-doesn%e2%80%99t-want-to-know-who%e2%80%99s-here-illegally/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito Says Pragmatism, Stability Should Guide Court</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/25/u-s-supreme-court-justice-samuel-alito-says-pragmatism-stability-should-guide-court/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/25/u-s-supreme-court-justice-samuel-alito-says-pragmatism-stability-should-guide-court/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Apr 2012 18:25:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Jurisprudence]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=132089</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.law.columbia.edu/media_inquiries/news_events/2012/april2012/justice-alito-burke-conference">Columbia Law School</a>: Addresses Jurisprudence at Law School Conference on Burkean Constitutionalism <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/25/u-s-supreme-court-justice-samuel-alito-says-pragmatism-stability-should-guide-court/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/25/u-s-supreme-court-justice-samuel-alito-says-pragmatism-stability-should-guide-court/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>High court seems favorable to Arizona immigration law</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/25/high-court-seems-favorable-to-arizona-immigration-law/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/25/high-court-seems-favorable-to-arizona-immigration-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Apr 2012 17:41:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Arizona]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Department of Justice (DOJ)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Arizona v. United States]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=132079</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/223659-justices-seem-favorable-to-arizona-immigration-law">The Hill</a>: The ideologically diverse group of justices pummeled Solicitor General Donald Verrilli with a morning full of questions, expressing serious doubts to the government’s claim that Arizona cannot require state law enforcement officials to verify a person’s legal status when they’re stopped on suspicion of committing a separate offense.  <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/25/high-court-seems-favorable-to-arizona-immigration-law/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/25/high-court-seems-favorable-to-arizona-immigration-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SCOTUS hears AZ Immigration case today</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/25/scotus-hears-az-immigration-case-today/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/25/scotus-hears-az-immigration-case-today/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Apr 2012 15:20:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Global]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Arizona]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Arizona v. United States]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=132027</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[SCOTUS Blog has full coverage <a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/04/court-to-consider-arizona-immigration-law-a-preview-in-plain-english/">here</a> and <a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/04/wednesday-round-up-132/#more-143807">here</a>.  <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/25/scotus-hears-az-immigration-case-today/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/25/scotus-hears-az-immigration-case-today/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sen. Dick Lugar&#8217;s challenger, Richard Mourdock: I&#8217;ll be more conservative on Supreme Court nominees</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/24/sen-dick-lugars-challenger-richard-mourdock-ill-be-more-conservative-on-supreme-court-nominees/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/24/sen-dick-lugars-challenger-richard-mourdock-ill-be-more-conservative-on-supreme-court-nominees/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 18:21:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Indiana]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Nominations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=131947</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/sen-dick-lugars-challenger-richard-mourdock-conservative-supreme/story?id=16198170">NY Times</a>: Sen. Dick Lugar of Indiana has argued that he voted for Supreme Court Justices Elena Kagen and Sonia Sotomayor because other nominees would have been more liberal, said Richard Mourdock, state treasurer and Lugar's Republican primary challenger on Monday afternoon at a Federalist Society candidate forum. <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/24/sen-dick-lugars-challenger-richard-mourdock-ill-be-more-conservative-on-supreme-court-nominees/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/24/sen-dick-lugars-challenger-richard-mourdock-ill-be-more-conservative-on-supreme-court-nominees/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Supreme Court is political by design</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/24/supreme-court-is-political-by-design/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/24/supreme-court-is-political-by-design/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 17:03:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: History]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Jurisprudence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=131930</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Anna Harvey at <a href="http://www.philly.com/philly/opinion/20120424_Supreme_Court_is_political_by_design.html">Philadelphia Inquirer</a>:  But, unfortunately for the president, the justices have an incentive to defer to sitting House majorities, not the majorities that enacted the laws being considered. A defeated party can expect little sympathy from the court for its past policy victories. <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/24/supreme-court-is-political-by-design/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/24/supreme-court-is-political-by-design/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Supreme Court Declines to Hear Rent-Control Challenge</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/23/supreme-court-declines-to-hear-rent-control-challenge/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/23/supreme-court-declines-to-hear-rent-control-challenge/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2012 15:29:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: New York]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=131779</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/24/us/supreme-court-declines-to-hear-rent-control-challenge.html">NY Times</a>: The Supreme Court on Monday refused to hear a challenge to the constitutionality of New York City’s rent regulations. As is customary, the court’s order gave no reasons, and there were no noted dissents. <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/23/supreme-court-declines-to-hear-rent-control-challenge/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/23/supreme-court-declines-to-hear-rent-control-challenge/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>FCC asks Supreme Court to uphold fine for Super Bowl &#8216;wardrobe malfunction&#8217;</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/19/fcc-asks-supreme-court-to-uphold-fine-for-super-bowl-wardrobe-malfunction/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/19/fcc-asks-supreme-court-to-uphold-fine-for-super-bowl-wardrobe-malfunction/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Apr 2012 17:11:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Miscellaneous]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Federal Communications Commission (FCC)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Indency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Fox Television Stations v. FCC]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=131539</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/222341-fcc-asks-supreme-court-to-uphold-fine-for-super-bowl-wardrobe-malfunction-">The Hill</a>: The Federal Communications Commission on Wednesday asked the Supreme Court to review whether the FCC has the authority to fine CBS for broadcasting a split-second glimpse of singer Janet Jackson’s bare breast in 2004. <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/19/fcc-asks-supreme-court-to-uphold-fine-for-super-bowl-wardrobe-malfunction/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/19/fcc-asks-supreme-court-to-uphold-fine-for-super-bowl-wardrobe-malfunction/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Chemerinsky: Arizona Immigration Case Closes a Momentous Court Term</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/19/chemerinsky-arizona-immigration-case-closes-a-momentous-court-term/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/19/chemerinsky-arizona-immigration-case-closes-a-momentous-court-term/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Apr 2012 15:48:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Arizona]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Arizona v. United States]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=131520</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Erwin Chemerinksy at the <a href="http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/chemerinsky_arizona_immigration_case_closes_a_momentous_court_term/">ABA Journal</a>: The issue before the court is whether key provisions of Arizona's statute SB 1070—which calls on state and local law enforcement to aggressively enforce federal immigration laws—are preempted by federal law. The case poses basic questions about the allocation of power between federal and state governments and does so in a context that arouses deep emotion on both sides.
 <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/19/chemerinsky-arizona-immigration-case-closes-a-momentous-court-term/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/19/chemerinsky-arizona-immigration-case-closes-a-momentous-court-term/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ronald Dworkin: If Obamacare is stricken &#8220;our eighteenth- century constitution is not the enduring marvel of statesmanship we suppose but an anachronistic, crippling burden&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/19/ronald-dworkin-if-obamacare-is-stricken-our-eighteenth-century-constitution-is-not-the-enduring-marvel-of-statesmanship-we-suppose-but-an-anachronistic-crippling-burden/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/19/ronald-dworkin-if-obamacare-is-stricken-our-eighteenth-century-constitution-is-not-the-enduring-marvel-of-statesmanship-we-suppose-but-an-anachronistic-crippling-burden/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Apr 2012 15:28:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Insurance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Jurisprudence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Obamacare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Florida v. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=131514</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ronald Dworkin at NY Review of Books, <a href="http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/may/10/why-mandate-constitutional-real-argument/">Why the Mandate Is Constitutional: The Real Argument</a>, : If the Court does declare the act unconstitutional, it would have ruled that Congress lacks the power to adopt what it thought the most effective, efficient, fair, and politically workable remedy—not because that national remedy would violate anyone’s rights, or limit anyone’s liberty in ways a state government could not, or be otherwise unfair, but for the sole reason that in the Court’s opinion our constitution is a strict and arbitrary document that denies our national legislature the power to enact the only politically possible national program. If that opinion were right, we would have to accept that our eighteenth- century constitution is not the enduring marvel of statesmanship we suppose but an anachronistic, crippling burden we cannot escape, a straitjacket that makes it impossible for us to achieve a just national society. <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/19/ronald-dworkin-if-obamacare-is-stricken-our-eighteenth-century-constitution-is-not-the-enduring-marvel-of-statesmanship-we-suppose-but-an-anachronistic-crippling-burden/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/19/ronald-dworkin-if-obamacare-is-stricken-our-eighteenth-century-constitution-is-not-the-enduring-marvel-of-statesmanship-we-suppose-but-an-anachronistic-crippling-burden/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SCOTUS takes close look at NYC rent control petition that challenges police powers scope</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/18/scotus-takes-close-look-at-nyc-rent-control-petition-that-challenges-police-powers-scope/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/18/scotus-takes-close-look-at-nyc-rent-control-petition-that-challenges-police-powers-scope/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Apr 2012 15:30:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Harmon v. Kimmel]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=131413</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/04/relist-and-hold-watch-17/#more-143427">SCOTUS Blog reports</a> that the Court is taking a closer look at the cert. petition in <a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/harmon-v-kimmel/">Harmon v. Kimmel</a>.  <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/18/scotus-takes-close-look-at-nyc-rent-control-petition-that-challenges-police-powers-scope/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/18/scotus-takes-close-look-at-nyc-rent-control-petition-that-challenges-police-powers-scope/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Private lawyers hired by local governments get same immunity as public employees</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/17/private-lawyers-hired-by-local-governments-get-same-immunity-as-public-employees/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/17/private-lawyers-hired-by-local-governments-get-same-immunity-as-public-employees/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2012 15:02:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Filarsky v. Delia]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=131262</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SUPREME_COURT_LAWYER_IMMUNITY?SITE=AP&#038;SECTION=HOME&#038;TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&#038;CTIME=2012-04-17-10-46-27">AP</a>: The Supreme Court has ruled unanimously that private individuals hired temporarily by local governments have the same protection against civil rights lawsuits as public employees. &#124; Opinion: <a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/filarsky-v-delia/?wpmp_switcher=desktop">Filarsky v. Delia</a> <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/17/private-lawyers-hired-by-local-governments-get-same-immunity-as-public-employees/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/17/private-lawyers-hired-by-local-governments-get-same-immunity-as-public-employees/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ideologues In Robes: The major theories about interpreting the Constitution serve competing schools of activism</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/16/ideologues-in-robes-the-major-theories-about-interpreting-the-constitution-serve-competing-schools-of-activism/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/16/ideologues-in-robes-the-major-theories-about-interpreting-the-constitution-serve-competing-schools-of-activism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2012 16:05:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Global]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Jurisprudence]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=131173</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304356604577337721563419672.html?mod=djemEditorialPage_h">Wall Street Journal</a>: J. Harvie Wilkinson's "Cosmic Constitutional Theory" departs from those well-rehearsed patterns. The author, a highly regarded federal judge, writes not to praise any particular constitutional school of thought but to bury them all.
 <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/16/ideologues-in-robes-the-major-theories-about-interpreting-the-constitution-serve-competing-schools-of-activism/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/16/ideologues-in-robes-the-major-theories-about-interpreting-the-constitution-serve-competing-schools-of-activism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>U.S. Supreme Court won&#8217;t hear appeal over ministerial exception</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/16/u-s-supreme-court-wont-hear-appeal-over-ministerial-exception/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/16/u-s-supreme-court-wont-hear-appeal-over-ministerial-exception/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2012 15:41:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Religious Freedom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Religious Freedom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Church Sovereignty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Linklater v. Prince of Peace Lutheran Church]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=131166</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SUPREME_COURT_MINISTERIAL_EXCEPTION?SITE=AP&#038;SECTION=HOME&#038;TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&#038;CTIME=2012-04-16-10-19-37">AP</a>: The Supreme Court won't let a woman sue a Maryland church for retaliation after she complained of sexual harassment from its pastor. <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/16/u-s-supreme-court-wont-hear-appeal-over-ministerial-exception/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/16/u-s-supreme-court-wont-hear-appeal-over-ministerial-exception/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Today&#8217;s Supreme Court Order List</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/16/todays-supreme-court-order-list-6/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/16/todays-supreme-court-order-list-6/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2012 15:10:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=131158</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/041612zor.pdf">Here</a>. <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/16/todays-supreme-court-order-list-6/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/16/todays-supreme-court-order-list-6/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SCOTUS for law students: What happens now in the health care cases? (sponsored by Bloomberg Law)</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/13/scotus-for-law-students-what-happens-now-in-the-health-care-cases-sponsored-by-bloomberg-law/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/13/scotus-for-law-students-what-happens-now-in-the-health-care-cases-sponsored-by-bloomberg-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Apr 2012 15:08:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Insurance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Obamacare]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=131063</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/04/scotus-for-law-students-what-happens-now-in-the-health-care-cases-sponsored-by-bloomberg-law/#more-143127">SCOTUS Blog</a>: But from the study of the papers of past Justices (to which I will link throughout this post to help illustrate the process), books about the Court, and articles in law reviews, it is possible to describe the process ongoing behind the scenes. This description should be of interest to students in constitutional law, seminars on the Court, federal courts, health law classes and many others following the debate over the health care cases. <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/13/scotus-for-law-students-what-happens-now-in-the-health-care-cases-sponsored-by-bloomberg-law/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/13/scotus-for-law-students-what-happens-now-in-the-health-care-cases-sponsored-by-bloomberg-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Justice Scalia defends view of the Constitution</title>
		<link>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/12/justice-scalia-defends-view-of-the-constitution/</link>
		<comments>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/12/justice-scalia-defends-view-of-the-constitution/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Apr 2012 15:07:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ADF Alliance Alert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bench & Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Bench and Bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: U.S. Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Jurisprudence]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=130933</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://dailytrojan.com/2012/04/10/justice-scalia-defends-view-of-the-constitution/">Daily Trojan</a>: U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia discussed his philosophy of Constitutional originalism and how it can be applied to modern cases at the Gould School of Law’s 2012 Justice Lester W. Roth Lecture on Tuesday. <a href="http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/12/justice-scalia-defends-view-of-the-constitution/"> <span class="meta-nav"></span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.alliancealert.org/2012/04/12/justice-scalia-defends-view-of-the-constitution/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

