<?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>SaddleBrooke Republican Club &#187; Law and Civil Liberties</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sbrc1.net/tag/law-and-civil-liberties/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sbrc1.net</link>
	<description>Western United States Largest Republican Club</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 15:21:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Under ObamaCare, Anti-Discrimination Law Trumps Religious Liberty</title>
		<link>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/o4-eDA7wDKY/</link>
		<comments>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/o4-eDA7wDKY/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 14:42:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Roger Pilon</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Health care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government and Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Civil Liberties]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/?p=44193</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>By Roger Pilon</p>The three-week battle over ObamaCare’s contraceptive-abortifacient ruling isn’t letting up. Catholics for Choice has a full-page ad in this morning’s Washington Post, urging the president to stay firm. And it’s the lead story today on NPR’s Morning Edition, which in printed form devotes fully 2 of 16 paragraphs&#8212;the last 2&#8212;to the other side (not bad for [...]<p><a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/under-obamacare-anti-discrimination-law-trumps-religious-liberty/">Under ObamaCare, Anti-Discrimination Law Trumps Religious Liberty</a> is a post from <a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org">Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog</a></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/under-obamacare-anti-discrimination-law-trumps-religious-liberty/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obamacare Challenge Not Barred By a Weird Technicality</title>
		<link>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/8_O6P7qbse4/</link>
		<comments>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/8_O6P7qbse4/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 13:28:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ilya Shapiro</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Health care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AIA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amicus briefs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Anti-Inunction Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Civil Liberties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obamacare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ppaca]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/?p=44169</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>By Ilya Shapiro</p>Cato&#8217;s third Supreme Court brief in the Obamacare litigation concerns the issue of whether the federal tax Anti-Injunction Act prevents federal courts from timely reviewing Congress&#8217;s most egregious attempt to exceed its power to regulate interstate commerce. The AIA bars courts from enjoining &#8220;any tax&#8221; before that tax is assessed or collected. One would think [...]<p><a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/obamacare-challenge-not-barred-by-a-weird-technicality/">Obamacare Challenge Not Barred By a Weird Technicality</a> is a post from <a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org">Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog</a></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/obamacare-challenge-not-barred-by-a-weird-technicality/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Prison Terms for Not Installing ADA Ramps?</title>
		<link>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/yHi_ho6xrkM/</link>
		<comments>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/yHi_ho6xrkM/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 21:43:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Walter Olson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Civil Liberties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulatory Studies]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/?p=44161</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>By Walter Olson</p>We&#8217;ve often deplored the continued push of criminal prosecution into matters that were once considered more suitable for regulation or for the operation of civil law. A little-noted report a few weeks back in the Los Angeles Times may indicate the next milestone in overcriminalization: The U.S. attorney has launched a fraud investigation to determine [...]<p><a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/prison-terms-for-not-installing-ada-ramps/">Prison Terms for Not Installing ADA Ramps?</a> is a post from <a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org">Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog</a></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/prison-terms-for-not-installing-ada-ramps/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiving Goodbye to the Constitution</title>
		<link>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/eJ3Wk3HemUU/</link>
		<comments>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/eJ3Wk3HemUU/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:47:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Neal McCluskey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Education and Child Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Civil Liberties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nclb]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Neal McCluskey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[no child left behind]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[waivers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/?p=44111</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>By Neal McCluskey</p>Today the Obama administration will announce, according to early press reports, that ten states (of eleven that applied) will be receiving waivers from key provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act. That&#8217;s right, the 2002 education law passed by Congress and signed by President Bush that absurdly insisted that all children will be proficient in mathematics and reading [...]<p><a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/waiving-goodbye-to-the-constitution/">Waiving Goodbye to the Constitution</a> is a post from <a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org">Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog</a></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/waiving-goodbye-to-the-constitution/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Wise Crowds Say Individual Mandate Is Unconstitutional</title>
		<link>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/ME4lVT47lZk/</link>
		<comments>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/ME4lVT47lZk/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 13:47:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ilya Shapiro</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Health care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crowdsourcing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FantasySCOTUS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government and Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Civil Liberties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obamacare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/?p=44092</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>By Ilya Shapiro</p>FantasySCOTUS.net, a project of the Constitution-educating Harlan Institute (on whose non-profit board I sit), has been tracking its 12,000+ members&#8217; predictions in the Obamacare case before the Supreme Court.  You can read more in-depth about the current state of the prediction market &#8212; with fancy graphs! &#8211; but here&#8217;s a summary: 90.6% predict that the lawsuit can [...]<p><a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/the-wise-crowds-say-individual-mandate-is-unconstitutional/">The Wise Crowds Say Individual Mandate Is Unconstitutional</a> is a post from <a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org">Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog</a></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/the-wise-crowds-say-individual-mandate-is-unconstitutional/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CPAC Panel on the Constitutionality of Obamacare Has No Lawyers</title>
		<link>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/YP4mqJvSB0Q/</link>
		<comments>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/YP4mqJvSB0Q/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 21:37:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ilya Shapiro</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cpac]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government and Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Civil Liberties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obamacare]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/?p=44079</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>By Ilya Shapiro</p>Some libertarians boycott CPAC because it&#8217;s &#8220;too conservative,&#8221; others embrace it to try to steer the conservative movement in a more liberty-minded direction (on which, see Reason.tv&#8217;s excellent interview of Sen. Jim DeMint).  I have no principled feelings on the subject.  I&#8217;ve never attended &#8211; wasn&#8217;t really on my radar in college, couldn&#8217;t make it to DC during [...]<p><a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/cpac-panel-on-the-constitutionality-of-obamacare-has-no-lawyers/">CPAC Panel on the Constitutionality of Obamacare Has No Lawyers</a> is a post from <a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org">Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog</a></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/cpac-panel-on-the-constitutionality-of-obamacare-has-no-lawyers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>This Month’s Cato Unbound: What Is Due Process?</title>
		<link>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/N1K1kUnFTeQ/</link>
		<comments>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/N1K1kUnFTeQ/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 15:05:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jason Kuznicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cato Publications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Civil Liberties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political Philosophy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/?p=44020</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>By Jason Kuznicki</p>What is due process? Virtually everyone would agree that &#8220;due process&#8221; refers to a set of judicial procedures that create at least a strong tendency toward fair results. But why do we have these procedures and not some others? Why do we have trial by jury, and not trial by fire? Why not just flip [...]<p><a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/this-months-cato-unbound-what-is-due-process/">This Month&#8217;s Cato Unbound: What Is Due Process?</a> is a post from <a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org">Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog</a></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/this-months-cato-unbound-what-is-due-process/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Gay Marriage Still Has an Uphill Climb</title>
		<link>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/-BDCnhHxGc8/</link>
		<comments>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/-BDCnhHxGc8/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 21:16:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Robert A. Levy</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court of appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[equal protection clause]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fifth Amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fourteenth Amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Civil Liberties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[marital benefits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prop 8]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[same-sex marriage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/?p=43999</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>By Robert A. Levy</p>The right answer to the same-sex marriage question is to remove government from the marriage business altogether.  That’s a legislative matter, however, and not something the courts should decree. Until then, because state and federal laws confer benefits based on marital status, the equal protection provisions of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments require that same-sex [...]<p><a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/gay-marriage-still-has-an-uphill-climb/">Gay Marriage Still Has an Uphill Climb</a> is a post from <a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org">Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog</a></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/gay-marriage-still-has-an-uphill-climb/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Appeals Court Upholds Gay Marriage, Sort Of</title>
		<link>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/k7HncWr4DL4/</link>
		<comments>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/k7HncWr4DL4/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 20:47:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ilya Shapiro</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government and Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Civil Liberties]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/?p=43971</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Today’s victory for equal liberty was narrow, but important nonetheless.  All that Prop 8 did was to deny gay couples the right to have their relationships labeled “marriage,” without any effect on the rights, privileges, and responsibilities attending that marital designation (which legal incidents California had already granted to gays who entered into civil unions).  As [...]<p><a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/appeals-court-upholds-gay-marriage-sort-of/">Appeals Court Upholds Gay Marriage, Sort Of</a> is a post from <a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org">Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog</a></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/appeals-court-upholds-gay-marriage-sort-of/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Our Constitution Is Out of Step with the Rest of the World</title>
		<link>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/yyXVgyKzVS0/</link>
		<comments>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/yyXVgyKzVS0/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 20:39:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Roger Pilon</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Entitlements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enumerated powers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[justice ginsburg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and Civil Liberties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ninth amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Constitution]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/?p=43963</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Is the Constitution out of date? That’s the impression that comes across from an article in yesterday’s New York Times, written by the paper’s crack Supreme Court reporter, Adam Liptak. It comes in turn from an article he points to by two law professors, David S. Law at Washington University in St. Louis and Mila [...]<p><a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/our-constitution-is-out-of-step-with-the-rest-of-the-world/">Our Constitution Is Out of Step with the Rest of the World</a> is a post from <a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org">Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog</a></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/our-constitution-is-out-of-step-with-the-rest-of-the-world/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

