<?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>damnum absque injuria &#187; Law</title>
	<atom:link href="http://xrlq.com/category/law/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://xrlq.com</link>
	<description>Politische Kommentare mit Snarkenremarken</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 23:36:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>On Vaughn Walker&#8217;s Non-Recusal</title>
		<link>http://xrlq.com/2010/08/06/on-vaughn-walkers-non-recusal/</link>
		<comments>http://xrlq.com/2010/08/06/on-vaughn-walkers-non-recusal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Aug 2010 01:49:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Xrlq</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://xrlq.com/?p=5681</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Patterico asks whether it was proper for a gay judge to rule on the constitutionality of gay marriage. My take is that to the extent you agree with Judge Walker&#8217;s substantive ruling that allowing gays to marry in no way diminishes the value of a traditional marriage, while it obviously makes a huge difference to [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://xrlq.com/2010/08/06/on-vaughn-walkers-non-recusal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Anchor Baby Amendment</title>
		<link>http://xrlq.com/2010/08/01/the-anchor-baby-amendment/</link>
		<comments>http://xrlq.com/2010/08/01/the-anchor-baby-amendment/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Aug 2010 18:38:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Xrlq</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://xrlq.com/?p=5670</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lindsey Graham seems intent on shedding his nickname &#8220;Grahamnesty&#8221; and is hinting he may soon introduce a constitutional amendment denying citizenship to children of illegal aliens born as a result of their illegal presence in the U.S.  It seems like a reasonable enough idea, but of course President Obama will veto it.*  Kudos to Graham [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://xrlq.com/2010/08/01/the-anchor-baby-amendment/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>North Carolina Laws Are So Gay</title>
		<link>http://xrlq.com/2010/07/27/north-carolina-laws-are-so-gay/</link>
		<comments>http://xrlq.com/2010/07/27/north-carolina-laws-are-so-gay/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 02:46:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Xrlq</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Non-Liberal Morons]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://xrlq.com/?p=5662</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you are straight, unmarried (or separated) and living in North Carolina, I&#8217;ve got some bad news for you: getting laid is illegal. North Carolina General Statute 14-184 provides that: § 14‑184. Fornication and adultery. If any man and woman, not being married to each other, shall lewdly and lasciviously associate, bed and cohabit together, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://xrlq.com/2010/07/27/north-carolina-laws-are-so-gay/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Partial Defense of Substantive Due Process</title>
		<link>http://xrlq.com/2010/07/07/a-partial-defense-of-substantive-due-process/</link>
		<comments>http://xrlq.com/2010/07/07/a-partial-defense-of-substantive-due-process/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jul 2010 04:30:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Xrlq</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Horses, Dead]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://xrlq.com/?p=5637</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NK asks, I presume rhetorically, if every stupid law is unconstitutional. This brings me to a topic I&#8217;ve been meaning to blog about since the McDonald decision: was the reasoning of the Alito plurality really that bad, or even all that different from Justice Thomas&#8217;s position? In other words, is a law forbidding law-abiding residents [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://xrlq.com/2010/07/07/a-partial-defense-of-substantive-due-process/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waiting Periods</title>
		<link>http://xrlq.com/2010/07/04/waiting-periods/</link>
		<comments>http://xrlq.com/2010/07/04/waiting-periods/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Jul 2010 21:53:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Xrlq</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://xrlq.com/?p=5635</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Gaston County is considering a 30-day waiting period on marriages performed by magistrates, unless the couple can show they&#8217;ve received premarital counseling. That strikes me as a very reasonable idea, particularly if Kinston Free Press&#8217;s editorial against it is the best its opponents can do: The proposal originated from a pro-marriage advocacy group in Gaston [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://xrlq.com/2010/07/04/waiting-periods/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Gun Show Loophole, Defined</title>
		<link>http://xrlq.com/2010/05/20/gun-show-loophole-defined/</link>
		<comments>http://xrlq.com/2010/05/20/gun-show-loophole-defined/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 May 2010 23:55:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Xrlq</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Guns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://xrlq.com/?p=5561</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Me no like gun shows. Gun shows legal. Loophole!]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://xrlq.com/2010/05/20/gun-show-loophole-defined/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>At the Debate</title>
		<link>http://xrlq.com/2010/05/14/at-the-debate/</link>
		<comments>http://xrlq.com/2010/05/14/at-the-debate/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 May 2010 16:12:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Xrlq</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Guns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://xrlq.com/?p=5522</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here are pics of Alan &#8220;Mr. Second Amendment&#8221; Gura and Paul Helmke dba Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, soon to face off at the Federalist Society. More later.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://xrlq.com/2010/05/14/at-the-debate/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Some Crime Victims Are More Equal Than Others</title>
		<link>http://xrlq.com/2010/05/12/some-crime-victims-are-more-equal-than-others/</link>
		<comments>http://xrlq.com/2010/05/12/some-crime-victims-are-more-equal-than-others/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 May 2010 00:57:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Xrlq</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://xrlq.com/?p=5515</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here&#8217;s a capital idea. Since everyone knows that black people are generally stronger than white people, let&#8217;s pass a law making simple assault one thing, and &#8220;assault on a white boy&#8221; another. The statute would read like this: (a) Any person who commits a simple assault or a simple assault and battery or participates in [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://xrlq.com/2010/05/12/some-crime-victims-are-more-equal-than-others/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Just Say No to Kagan Truthers</title>
		<link>http://xrlq.com/2010/05/12/just-say-no-to-kagan-truthers/</link>
		<comments>http://xrlq.com/2010/05/12/just-say-no-to-kagan-truthers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 May 2010 11:49:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Xrlq</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://xrlq.com/?p=5510</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#8217;s a trap, folks. Speculating on Elena Kagan&#8217;s sexuality is a no-win. Attempting to out her, makes it look like you look like a complete douchebag if you turn out to be wrong, and even if you&#8217;re right it makes you look like the Spanish Inquisition for caring &#8211; only this time, they do expect [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://xrlq.com/2010/05/12/just-say-no-to-kagan-truthers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Elena Kagan: The Third Woman on the Court?</title>
		<link>http://xrlq.com/2010/05/09/elena-kagan-the-third-woman-on-the-court/</link>
		<comments>http://xrlq.com/2010/05/09/elena-kagan-the-third-woman-on-the-court/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 May 2010 02:50:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Xrlq</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[People Unclear On The Concept]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://xrlq.com/?p=5499</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Howard Bashman reports that the Obama Administration has unofficially promised to appoint Elena Kagan to replace John Paul Stevens and become the third woman to serve as a Supreme Court Justice. I hereby offer a free gram of cocaine* to the first person who can persuade me as to how Ms. Kagan, if confirmed, would [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://xrlq.com/2010/05/09/elena-kagan-the-third-woman-on-the-court/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>19</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
