<?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>Salon.com > Constitutional Law</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salon.com/topic/constitutional_law/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 02:24:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Antonin Scalia, civil libertarian?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/02/what_do_drug_sniffing_dogs_have_to_do_with_the_18th_century_justice_system_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/02/what_do_drug_sniffing_dogs_have_to_do_with_the_18th_century_justice_system_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2013 20:18:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Crime Report]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Supreme Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitutional Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Drug laws]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's Picks]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13258921</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Supreme Court justice has forged an unlikely alliance with Sonia Sotomayor on matters of criminal procedure]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Last week, in <em>Florida v. <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnvillasenor/2013/03/27/supreme-court-finds-the-use-of-a-drug-sniffing-dog-to-investigate-a-home-unconstitutional/" target="_blank">Jardines</a></em>, the Supreme Court held that the Constitution requires police to get a warrant before they bring a drug dog to the front door of a house to sniff around.<br /> <a href="http://www.thecrimereport.org/"><img align="left" style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2013/04/crime-report-logo-e1364939200977.png" alt="The Crime Report" /></a><br /> To understand what the Supreme Court did in <em>Jardines</em>, it helps to start with the oral argument the Court held that same day in <em>Hollingsworth v. <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/26/hollingsworth-v-perry_n_2952605.html" target="_blank">Perry</a></em>—the California gay marriage case—specifically, with an exchange between Justice Antonin Scalia (the author of <em>Jardines</em>) and attorney Ted Olson, who was arguing in support of the right of gay people to marry.</p><p><em>Justice Scalia: Ok, so I want to know how long it has been unconstitutional…</em></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/04/02/what_do_drug_sniffing_dogs_have_to_do_with_the_18th_century_justice_system_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/02/what_do_drug_sniffing_dogs_have_to_do_with_the_18th_century_justice_system_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>21</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Go to church, or go to jail!</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/12/03/go_to_church_or_go_to_jail/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/12/03/go_to_church_or_go_to_jail/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Dec 2012 23:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Fix]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Alcohol]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitutional Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oklahoma]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ACLU]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13113921</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A drunk-driving teen in Oklahoma is sentenced to a decade's worth of sermons. Is that even constitutional? ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.thefix.com/"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 0pt 0pt;" src="http://www.thefix.com/sites/all/themes/thefix/images/logo.png" alt="the fix" align="left" /></a>  A year ago, two buzzed Oklahoma teens lost control of their pickup truck, drove off the road and smashed into a tree, ejecting and killing the passenger. The driver, <strong>Tyler Alred,</strong> confessed to drinking earlier in the evening, and blew a 0.07 on the breathalyzer, above the legal limit for a minor. In August, Alred pled guilty to first-degree manslaughter, and was sentenced to four years to life, with parole. But a judge named <strong>Mike Norman</strong> changed Alred's sentence to 10 years deferred—meaning no jail time—provided he graduates from high school, passes regular drug and alcohol tests, performs community service … and goes to church every Sunday for a decade. If that seems constitutionally dicey—well, the Oklahoma ACLU and the US Supreme Court agree.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/12/03/go_to_church_or_go_to_jail/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/12/03/go_to_church_or_go_to_jail/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>19</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
