<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: civil</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'civil'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22civil%22&t=%22civil%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 01:50:39 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>California’s Water-Liu</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5181754&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FiE-w4yBV7BI%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroOver the last year and a half, I&amp;#8217;ve blogged many times about Berkeley law professor Goodwin Liu, the controversial nominee to the Ninth Circuit, the federal appellate court with jurisdiction over the western states and territories.  Here&amp;#8217;s an op-ed I published in the wake of that nomination &amp;#8212; which happened to coincide with Obamacare&amp;#8217;s enactment.  And here&amp;#8217;s a taste of what I wrote when Republicans filibustered Liu, which ultimately led him to withdraw:
I’m not going to weigh in here on the issue of whether judicial nominees ought to be filibustered in general . . . but if ever there were an “extraordinary circumstance” fitting into the Gang of 14agreement that broke the judicial logjam under President Bush, this is it.
As I blog...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5181754</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 02 Sep 2011 12:42:28 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5181754</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Removing Melson Will Not Fix the ATF</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5181765&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fr0cNjxl2pWc%2F</link>
            <description>By David RittgersThe controversy over the ATF’s ill-conceived scheme to “walk” guns across the border with Mexico finally resulted in the removal of one high-ranking official: Acting Director Kenneth Melson. The U.S. Attorney for Minnesota, Todd Jones, will fill the position for now.
A quick review:  ATF supervisors ordered agents to facilitate firearm sales to known or suspected “straw buyers” that intended to move the guns across the border and give them to drug cartels. Gun dealers in the U.S. reported the suspicious transactions to the ATF, expecting to cooperate in apprehending the gunrunners. As it turns out, the suspect buyers had disqualifying conditions that should have shown up in federally mandated instant background checks…but didn’t. The firearms trafficked acro...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5181765</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2011 16:24:18 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5181765</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Stop the Madness, President Calderon</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5174595&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FEHOVxW4xrnU%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazThe Wall Street Journal covers a single day in Mexico&amp;#8217;s drug war, a day on which 25 people died in separate incidents. The summary paragraphs tell a story of failure:
Since President Felipe Calderón took office in December 2006, declaring war on traffickers, roughly 43,000 people have been killed in drug-related homicides here, according to government figures and newspaper estimates. The pace of killings is escalating. More than half the dead, 22,000, were killed in the past 18 months, a rate of one every 35 minutes&amp;#8230;.
Mexico&amp;#8217;s murder rate has more than doubled, to 22 deaths per 100,000 residents in 2010, in just four years, a period that parallels the drug war. Before that, it had been falling steadily. In the U.S. the murder rate is about 5 per 100,000.
Thi...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5174595</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2011 15:54:17 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5174595</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Constitutional Structure Matters: A Response to Larry Tribe</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5174599&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F1CUaz70JSQk%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroSCOTUSblog&amp;#8217;s symposium on the constitutionality of Obamacare &amp;#8212; to which I contributed, as did Bob Levy &amp;#8211; provides a glimpse at the astonishing views of the law&amp;#8217;s supporters.  It particularly shows how divorced the legal academy&amp;#8217;s leading lights are not only from basic constitutional text and structure, but from jurisprudential reality.
Most prominently, in responding to the Eleventh Circuit’s decision striking down the individual mandate (and to Richard Epstein&amp;#8217;s symposium essay), storied Harvard professor Laurence H. Tribe criticizes the court for “reflecting what appears to be a widely held public sentiment” that Congress cannot “mandate that individuals enter into contracts with private insurance companies for the purchase o...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5174599</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2011 12:45:41 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5174599</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>First Circuit Affirms Right to Record the Police</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5169521&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FfipML0MCLcM%2F</link>
            <description>By David RittgersRight to Record, a website devoted to the legal aspects of recording police officers, has the scoop. A panel of the First Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the right of citizens to openly record police officers.
Gathering information about government officials in a form that can readily be disseminated to others serves a cardinal First Amendment interest in protecting and promoting “the free discussion of governmental affairs.” Moreover, as the Court has noted, “[f]reedom of expression has particular significance with respect to government because ‘[i]t is here that the state has a special incentive to repress opposition and often wields a more effective power of suppression.’” This is particularly true of law enforcement officials, who are granted substantial ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5169521</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 27 Aug 2011 15:21:17 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5169521</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Nat Hentoff on Perry, Obama</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5169525&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fl2kOXrzr-Q4%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchThere has been increasing attention this week on Texas governor and Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry, as well as his book Fed Up! and his record in Texas.  With respect to criminal justice, most of the talk concerns the number of executions on Perry&amp;#8217;s watch. 
In a recent column, Cato senior fellow Nat Hentoff notes that Perry has brought  enlightening reforms to the juvenile justice system in that state — the gist being more focus on concentrated rehabilitation instead of prison isolation — and that this aspect of Perry&amp;#8217;s  record ought to be part of the conversation.
And where is Nat Hentoff on Mr. Obama and his record? 
I don&amp;#8217;t ask President Barack Obama for any change I can believe in, except to clear out his office and make room in t...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5169525</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2011 18:51:27 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5169525</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>What’s Next in the Obamacare Litigation?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5158936&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FzFTVxpvSy4g%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroMy colleagues and I have covered the substance of the Eleventh Circuit ruling that two weeks ago struck down the individual mandate, but where do we go from here?  Why hasn&amp;#8217;t the Supreme Court yet resolved the conflict between that ruling and the Sixth Circuit&amp;#8217;s from earlier in the summer?  When will it do so?  A few points:

The government is now likely to seek en banc review, meaning that they want the entire 10-judge court to review the 3-judge panel&amp;#8217;s ruling.  It&amp;#8217;s extremely unlikely that the Eleventh Circuit would grant such a motion because the panel is already 2-1 against and the members of the court not on the panel are a 4-3 Republican-appointed majority.  You need a majority (6 of 10) to get en banc review, which means the dissenting J...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5158936</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 25 Aug 2011 21:50:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5158936</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Lawyers and Their Licenses</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5158947&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FdM4C-RzZfvA%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchWhat do the New York Times, the Brookings Institution, and the Cato Institute have in common?  Turns out we agree on deregulating the legal profession. 
From a Times editorial:  &amp;#8220;Another step is to allow nonlawyers into the mix. The American Bar Association has insisted that only lawyers can provide legal services, but there are many things nonlawyers should be able to handle, like processing uncontested divorces. &amp;#8221;
From a Brookings op-ed: &amp;#8220;It would be better to deregulate the provision of legal services. This would lower prices for clients and lead to more jobs.&amp;#8221;
From a Cato paper: &amp;#8220;Every state except Arizona prohibits the unauthorized practice of law (UPL); a person must possess an attorney&amp;#8217;s license to hold himself out as a lawyer. UPL ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5158947</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 24 Aug 2011 17:03:52 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5158947</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Fed Up with Phony Federalism</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5158954&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FEHThyrS5C9w%2F</link>
            <description>By Gene HealyMy Washington Examiner column this week is on Rick Perry&amp;#8217;s 2010 book Fed Up! Stylistically, if Conscience of a Conservative is Merle Haggard, Perry&amp;#8217;s manifesto is Lee Greenwood. Still, like Goldwater&amp;#8217;s book, it contains some fairly radical ideas, coming from a top-tier candidate. As Ezra Klein puts it, the book&amp;#8217;s big idea is that &amp;#8220;most everything the federal government does is unconstitutional.&amp;#8221;
And, indeed, most of what it does is unconstitutional &amp;#8212; no surprise to those familiar with Cato&amp;#8217;s constitutional work. Still, it&amp;#8217;s surprising to hear a major national candidate indict the New Deal, call Social Security &amp;#8220;a Ponzi scheme,&amp;#8221; and identify &amp;#8212; correctly, I think &amp;#8212; the combination of the 16th and 17th ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5158954</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2011 18:59:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5158954</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>When the State Takes the Children</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5139686&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FbnZJRxaxutE%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchThe New York Times has an article today about how city officials take children away from parents because of marijuana use.  Here is an excerpt:
Hundreds of New Yorkers who have been caught with small amounts of marijuana, or who have simply admitted to using it, have become ensnared in civil child neglect cases in recent years, though they did not face even the least of criminal charges, according to city records and defense lawyers. A small number of parents in these cases have even lost custody of their children.
The article explains that even if a child is not immediately removed a &amp;#8220;neglect finding&amp;#8221; can kill prospects for certain jobs involving kids, such as a daycare assistant, and will make it easier for judges to order a removal down the road.  Even though m...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5139686</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 18 Aug 2011 18:26:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5139686</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Supreme Court Should Review Obamacare Case Now</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5139689&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FsxIfq6yuuwg%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroI&amp;#8217;m glad Trevor Burrus took the laboring oar in pointing out highlights from an Eleventh Circuit opinion that, as he put it, &amp;#8220;is not only exhaustive, it is convincing.&amp;#8221;  I&amp;#8217;ve been swamped with editing the Cato Supreme Court Review and preparing for our Constitution Day conference, so have had little time to put words on paper (or even on screen) after my initial statement.
I did put together one op-ed, however, that ran today in Politico.  Here&amp;#8217;s an excerpt:
By [striking down the individual mandate], the court — including, for the first time, a judge appointed by a Democratic president — reaffirmed that the Constitution places principled limits on federal power. It rejected the government’s argument for a situational limit on Congress...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5139689</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 18 Aug 2011 12:42:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5139689</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>‘The Constitution Requires Judicial Engagement, Not Judicial Abdication,’ Writes the 11th Circuit, and Then Leads by Example</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5139696&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FySYnjbBACN4%2F</link>
            <description>By Trevor BurrusOn Friday, when the 11th Circuit struck down the individual mandate portion of ObamaCare, a trip to the Supreme Court became all but assured. Previously, although Supreme Court review was highly probable even if a circuit split didn’t develop, there was still an outside chance that the Court would deny review if all circuit courts upheld the law. Now, the Court is essentially obliged to take the case. This is reason enough to be happy about the decision.
As I work my way through the opinion, I become even happier. The opinion is not only exhaustive, it is convincing. If Congress oversteps the outer limits of its power, the court explains, then “the Constitution requires judicial engagement, not judicial abdication.” Thus, we are given over 200 pages of “judicial en...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5139696</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 16 Aug 2011 20:00:57 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5139696</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>More on Waivers and the Rule of Law</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5130729&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FWFqHs1F_CRs%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazIn my weekly Britannica column, I respond to the charge that I am dumb and expand the discussion of sweeping legislation, the apparently increasing use of waivers by Cabinet officials, and how that comports with the rule of law:
We’ve been reminded in the past few weeks that we live in a world where Congress passes vast, expansive laws that make grand promises and that few if any members of Congress actually read, and then inserts into them the power for the president or his appointees to waive sections of them when they become unworkable or bump up against the interests of the well connected. &amp;#8230;
Over the past decade Congress has passed many such expansive and aspirational laws—the Patriot Act, the No Child Left Behind Act, TARP, the stimulus bill (“the Democrats’...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5130729</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 15 Aug 2011 18:06:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5130729</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>11th Circuit Finds ObamaCare’s Individual Mandate Unconstitutional</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5125713&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FFA7J41kQ6F0%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonHere&amp;#8217;s the meat of the majority opinion:
We first conclude that the Act’s Medicaid expansion is constitutional. Existing Supreme Court precedent does not establish that Congress’s inducements are unconstitutionally coercive, especially when the federal government will bear nearly all the costs of the program’s amplified enrollments.
Next, the individual mandate was enacted as a regulatory penalty, not a revenue-raising tax, and cannot be sustained as an exercise of Congress’s power under the Taxing and Spending Clause. The mandate is denominated as a penalty in the Act itself, and the legislative history and relevant case law confirm this reading of its function.
Further, the individual mandate exceeds Congress’s enumerated commerce power and is ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5125713</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2011 19:02:34 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5125713</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>In Obamacare Case, Constitution Is Victor</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5125714&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FbgTalQD13HY%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroToday is a great day for liberty.  By striking down the individual mandate, the Eleventh Circuit has reaffirmed that the Constitution places limits on the federal government’s power.  Congress can do a great many things under modern constitutional jurisprudence, but, as the court concludes, “what Congress cannot do under the Commerce Clause is mandate that individuals enter into contracts with private insurance companies for the purchase of an expensive product from the time they are born until the time they die.”  Indeed, just because Congress can regulate the health insurance industry does not mean it can also require people to buy that industry’s products.
One of the striking things about today’s ruling is that, for the first time in one of these cases, a Dem...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5125714</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:56:04 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5125714</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>‘Corporations Are [Made of] People’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5125717&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F1PB3a5VQALI%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroMitt Romney&amp;#8217;s explanation of why he&amp;#8217;s against raising taxes on corporations — indeed, America already has some of the highest corporate tax rates in the developed world — at the Iowa State Fair was a bit awkward but not wholly incorrect.  Reason&amp;#8216;s Katherine Mangu-Ward has a good post with video and transcript, but here&amp;#8217;s the salient bit:
ROMNEY: We have to make sure that the promises we make — and Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare — are promises we can keep. And there are various ways of doing that. One is, we could raise taxes on people.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Corporations!
ROMNEY: Corporations are people, my friend. We can raise taxes on—
AUDIENCE MEMBER: No, they’re not!
ROMNEY: Of course they are. Everything corporations earn also g...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5125717</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2011 16:12:32 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5125717</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>English Riots, Moral Relativism, Gun Control, and the Welfare State</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5118610&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Ffr7x6uGcJwg%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellI wrote earlier this year about the connection between a morally corrupt welfare state and the riots in the United Kingdom.
But what’s happening now is not just some left-wing punks engaging in political street theater. Instead, the UK is dealing with a bigger problem of societal decay caused in part by a government’s failure to fulfill one of its few legitimate functions: protection of property.
To make matters worse, the political class has disarmed law-abiding people, thus exacerbating the risks. These two photos are a pretty good summary of what this means. On the left, we have Korean entrepreneurs using guns to defend themselves from murdering thugs during the 1992 LA riots. On the right, we have Turkish entrepreneurs reduced to using their fists (and some hid...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5118610</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:31:49 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5118610</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Disgraceful Soundbite from the London Riots</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5118614&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FSySMAOLX3OM%2F</link>
            <description>By Sallie JamesI don&amp;#8217;t know which part of this truly dismaying interview is more upsetting: the joy in their voices as these girls describe the &amp;#8220;fun&amp;#8221; they are having at the riots and their hope that they continue the next day, the class-warfare-based justification they feel for the looting and burning of shops, or their almost comic ignorance of which party holds control of the government (&amp;#8220;Conservatives. Yeah. Whatever who it is. I dunno&amp;#8230;&amp;#8221;).
Listen and Weep, courtesy of the Beeb.
Disgraceful Soundbite from the London Riots is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5118614</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2011 16:53:24 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5118614</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>International Law and the Founding Era</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5107491&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fmx0vXh-4rQU%2F</link>
            <description>By Walter OlsonIn an Atlantic series on supposed &amp;#8220;constitutional myths,&amp;#8221; former Washington Post reporter Garrett Epps has been dispensing his opinions on such matters as why the Supreme Court misunderstood the First Amendment most terribly in the Citizens United case, and why the shooting spree of Tucson madman Jared Loughner proves the need for a Second Amendment that accommodates gun control. The series as a whole is marred by a tone of misplaced condescension in which Epps lectures his opponents as though they were all know-nothing newcomers to the field of constitutional debate. 
He&amp;#8217;s at it again with a new post on international law and the Constitution. Epps might have been on solid ground had he confined himself to criticizing a badly wrongheaded ballot measure enac...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5107491</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 08 Aug 2011 17:40:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5107491</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>What Should People Receiving Health Care Be Called? Empowered Patient Vs. Health Care Consumer</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5103342&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fwhat-should-people-receiving-health-care-be-called-empowered-patient-vs-health-care-consumer%2F2011.08.05</link>
            <description>“There is a better way – structural reforms that empower patients with greater choices and increase the role of competition in the health-care marketplace.” Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) August 3, 2011
The highly charged political debates about reforming American health care have provided tempting opportunities to rename the people who receive health services.  But because the impetus for this change has been prompted by cost and quality concerns of health care payers, researchers and policy experts rather than emanating from us out of our own needs, some odd words have been called into service.  Two phrases commonly used to describe us convey meanings that mischaracterize our experiences and undervalue our needs: “empowered patient” and “health care consumer.”
As one who has done ...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5103342</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2011 21:00:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5103342</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Kelly Thomas Killing</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5096161&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FEL_NSX_O87w%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchThe New York Times reports on the protests that are underway as a result of the beating and killing of one Kelly Thomas.  Several witnesses reportedly saw several cops savagely beat Thomas after he was already in handcuffs and subdued.  Here&amp;#8217;s an excerpt from the Orange County Weekly on the incident.
On a beautiful Southern California Saturday more than 250 outraged local citizens ignored the chance to spend a sunny day at the beach, swim in their pools, shop at the mall or sip Mimosas on their porches.
Instead, for six hours a diverse group of citizens&amp;#8211;grandmothers, little kids, lawyers, college students, businessmen and women, housewives, ex-cops, young parents, a mechanic, a dentist, a construction worker, a guy who looked like he&amp;#8217;d just left a gay leathe...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5096161</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 04 Aug 2011 17:26:39 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5096161</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Anoka-Hennepin “Battleground” is Government Schooling in Microcosm</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5096162&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fr6pkiG78r5Q%2F</link>
            <description>By Neal McCluskeyThe Star-Tribune has a telling article about the Anoka-Hennepin school district, Minnesota&amp;#8217;s largest and, after a recent string of suicides, the subject of a lawsuit and federal investigation over its handling of sexual orientation-based bullying. What led to the suicides and how the district dealt with bullying remain open questions, but in the absence of concrete evidence on those matters, perhaps nothing nails Anoka-Hennepin&amp;#8217;s root problem as squarely as this article subhead: &amp;#8220;Diverse and large.&amp;#8221; 
Anoka-Hennepin, in other words, appears to be the nation in microcosm, and the firestorm enveloping it sadly but starkly illustrates the destructiveness of forcing diverse people to support a single system of government schools.
Beyond its su...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5096162</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 04 Aug 2011 16:04:45 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5096162</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>An Unprecedented Expansion of Federal Power</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5096163&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FAOgPxXQoppA%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroThat&amp;#8217;s how I describe the individual mandate in my contribution to SCOTUSblog&amp;#8216;s online symposium on Obamacare, which Trevor Burrus has already highlighted.  Here&amp;#8217;s an excerpt:
All the Obamacare legal challenges boil down to Congress’s authority – or lack thereof – to require people to buy private insurance.  Although unfortunately not dispositive of modern judicial decisions, the text of the Constitution demands that the Supreme Court strike down the individual mandate as an unconstitutional exercise of Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce.  Finding the mandate constitutional would be the first interpretation of the Commerce Clause to permit the regulation of inactivity – in effect requiring an individual to engage in an economi...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5096163</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 04 Aug 2011 16:00:47 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5096163</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>SCOTUSblog Tackles Obamacare</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5096171&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F5oSRBwAI67U%2F</link>
            <description>By Trevor BurrusCato’s Center for Constitutional Studies has been involved in the ongoing Obamacare litigation since the beginning. Befitting the magnitude of the law and its negative effects on our economy, our health, and our Constitution, for the first time Cato filed amicus briefs at every level of litigation.
Cato Chairman Robert A. Levy signed and contributed to every brief we’ve filed. Today, as part of a symposium on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act hosted by the indispensable SCOTUSblog, Levy has posted an essay clearly and convincingly explaining why the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional. One passage that particularly caught my eye:
The Commerce Power is expansive. But PPACA’s mandate stretches beyond dictating how a product may be produced, distribute...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5096171</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2011 21:36:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5096171</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Saving a Baby Woodpecker: The Legal Consequences</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5096174&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FSqbuFaYaUb4%2F</link>
            <description>By Walter OlsonFederal law makes it illegal to &amp;#8220;take,&amp;#8221; &amp;#8220;possess,&amp;#8221; or &amp;#8220;transport&amp;#8221; a migratory bird except under permit. If you worry that this sweeping language might give the federal government too much enforcement power, perhaps you are one of those horrid House Republicans who, according to Bryan Walsh in Time magazine, are in the grip of &amp;#8220;antigreen ideology&amp;#8221; and want to &amp;#8220;essentially prevent&amp;#8221; agencies like the Department of the Interior &amp;#8220;from doing their jobs.&amp;#8221; Who else would object to laws meant to protect Nature?
It&amp;#8217;s a pretty safe bet that Walsh hasn&amp;#8217;t met the Capo family of Fredericksburg, Virginia. According to a report on broadcast station WUSA, and now being picked up far and wide by other news out...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5096174</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2011 18:08:30 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5096174</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Privacy Is Security</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5086143&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F7oNeZQh_R50%2F</link>
            <description>By Julian SanchezHere&amp;#8217;s a point that ought to seem obvious: &amp;#8220;Security&amp;#8221;—whether physical or electronic—is always a function of the thing you&amp;#8217;re trying to secure. If I were to tell you that my Washington apartment has barred windows, an outer front gate, a deadbolt on the inner door, and an alarm system to boot, you&amp;#8217;d probably say my home sounds highly secure. If I told you that the precise same measures were the complete security system for a bank, you&amp;#8217;d laugh. The reason is obvious: Unless I finally push the NSA over the line, my apartment only needs to withstand attacks from local thugs. A bank&amp;#8217;s security must be able to withstand assaults from seasoned teams of professional criminals who — with millions as a potential jackpot — may be wil...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5086143</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 01 Aug 2011 16:55:20 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5086143</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>‘Madder Than Mosquitoes In a Mannequin Factory’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5077652&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FdrLaCF5XWv8%2F</link>
            <description>By Walter OlsonJust for fun, and because it&amp;#8217;s a summer Friday afternoon, here&amp;#8217;s the text of a court order handed down July 19 by Kentucky judge Martin Sheehan in the case of Kissel v. Schwartz &amp; Maines &amp; Ruby Co. (ScribD, h/t Nicole Black and Daniel Schwartz):
ORDER&amp;#8230;the parties having informed the Court that the herein matter has been settled amicably and that there is no need for a Court ruling on the remaining motions and also that there is no need for a trial;
And such news of an amicable settlement having made this Court happier than a tick on a fat dog because it is otherwise busier than a one legged cat in a sand box and, quite frankly, would have rather jumped off of a twelve foot step ladder into a five gallon bucket of porcupines than have presided over a...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5077652</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2011 19:01:54 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5077652</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Surgeons Must Overcome A Bad Reputation</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5077687&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fsurgeons-have-a-bad-reputation%2F2011.07.29</link>
            <description>This article is meant to raise the awareness of the costs—both in dollars and in human misery—of incivility in the practice of medicine by looking in particular at the case of surgeons.
Uncivil behavior brings misery wherever it occurs.  If the individual tends to behave in an uncivil fashion prior to medical school and prior to residency, (more&amp;#8230;)

			
			*This blog post was originally published at Suture for a Living* (Source: Better Health)</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5077687</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2011 14:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5077687</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Monks Successfully Defend Their Right to Earn an Honest Living</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5077661&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FWp3y4aV9HqI%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroLast week, a federal court in Louisiana ruled that a state law prohibiting sales of caskets by non-licensed merchants was unconstitutional.  A monastery that has made caskets for over a century sued the state to protect their modest casket business. It should come as no surprise that our friends at the Institute for Justice were leading the charge against the law:
Under Louisiana law, it was a crime for anyone but a government-licensed funeral director to sell “funeral merchandise,” which includes caskets.  To sell caskets legally, the monks would have had to abandon their calling for one full year to apprentice at a licensed funeral home and convert their monastery into a “funeral establishment” by, among other things, installing equipment for embalming.
The Honor...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5077661</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2011 15:22:32 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5077661</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Commerce Clause Abuse, Non-Obamacare Division</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5077663&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FFMK7vuFbtV0%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroThe federal government is currently engaged in a misguided attempt to use a noneconomic statute &amp;#8212; the Endangered Species Act &amp;#8212; to regulate under its Commerce Clause authority a noneconomic activity, the potential “take” of the noncommercial, wholly intrastate delta smelt.  Acting under this purported authority, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued an opinion in 2008 that requires a reduction of critical water deliveries in California for the alleged benefit of the threatened delta smelt species.  The delta smelt-based water cutbacks have resulted in substantial hardship to farmers and other water users in Southern California and the San Joaquin Valley.  
In 2009, the Pacific Legal Foundation filed a lawsuit contending that regulation of the delta smel...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5077663</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2011 12:43:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5077663</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Cuccinelli Corrects an Injustice</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5069431&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Ftk7OhKZcrTQ%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchVirginia Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli reviewed the evidence and concluded that one Thomas Haynesworth had been wrongly imprisoned&amp;#8211;so he persuaded Governor Robert McDonnell to grant him parole.  Not a full vindication, because Haynesworth still has a felony record, but freedom.  Remarkably, Cuccinelli went still further and added Haynesworth to his staff while promising to work to clear his name and wipe his record clean.   David Keene has the full story here.
Cuccinelli Corrects an Injustice is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5069431</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jul 2011 19:53:21 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5069431</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Wyden Pressing Intel Officials on Domestic Location Tracking</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5069442&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fce8sbIDKoeA%2F</link>
            <description>By Julian SanchezBack in May, during the debates over reauthorization of the Patriot Act, Sens. Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Mark Udall (D-CO) began raising a fuss about a secret interpretation of the law&amp;#8217;s so-called &amp;#8220;business records&amp;#8221; authority, known to wonks as Section 215, arguing that intelligence agencies had twisted the statute to give themselves domestic surveillance powers Congress had not anticipated or intended. At the time, I marshaled a fair amount of circumstantial evidence that, I thought, suggested that the &amp;#8220;secret authority&amp;#8221; involved location tracking of cell phones. Wyden backed off after being promised a secret hearing to address his concerns—but indicated he&amp;#8217;d be returning to the issue if he remained unsatisfied. The hearing occurred early ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5069442</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jul 2011 21:36:26 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5069442</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Texas Court Rules For Eminent-Domain Critic</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5069443&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FybAzPiSy7zI%2F</link>
            <description>By Walter OlsonGood news from Texas, where a state appeals court has handed a major win to investigative journalist Carla Main, whose book Bulldozed: &amp;#8216;Kelo,&amp;#8217; Eminent Domain, and the American Lust for Land took a critical look at the seizure of private land under eminent domain laws for purposes of urban redevelopment. Dallas developer H. Walker Royall didn&amp;#8217;t like what Main wrote about his involvement in a Freeport, Texas marina project and proceeded to sue her, publisher Encounter Books (which I should note is also my own publisher on Schools for Misrule), and even liberty-minded law professor Richard Epstein over a dust jacket blurb Epstein had given for the book. (Earlier coverage of the suit here and here.)
A trial court had declined to dismiss Royall&amp;#8217;s claims on...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5069443</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jul 2011 20:41:26 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5069443</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Minefield of American Criminal Law</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5069448&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FL4v1dpVS2L8%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchOver the weekend, the Wall Street Journal ran an excellent article about the problem of overcriminalization—the proliferation of criminal laws and how more and more people can find themselves on the wrong side the law without even realizing it. Here&amp;#8217;s an excerpt:
In 2009, Mr. Anderson loaned his son some tools to dig for arrowheads near a favorite campground of theirs. Unfortunately, they were on federal land. Authorities &amp;#8220;notified me to get a lawyer and a damn good one,&amp;#8221; Mr. Anderson recalls.
There is no evidence the Andersons intended to break the law, or even knew the law existed, according to court records and interviews. But the law, the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979, doesn&amp;#8217;t require criminal intent and makes it a felony punishab...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5069448</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jul 2011 17:39:14 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5069448</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>From Hell to Heaven</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5062222&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FdqYS8cogEZY%2F</link>
            <description>Cory Maye was in his home one evening minding his own business when his front door came crashing down.  Frightened that criminals were going to harm him and his child, Maye quickly retrieved a gun.  When his bedroom door came crashing down next, Maye fired.  When the lights came on, it turned out that the intruders were police officers and that Maye had killed one of them.  The nightmare had only just begun for Maye.  Police and prosecutors twisted a case of self-defense into a &amp;#8220;murder&amp;#8221; charge and they sought the death penalty.  Cato fellow Radley Balko read about the case when he was researching a paper concerning the militarization of police tactics and no-knock raids.  Radley then wrote about the injustice of Maye&amp;#8217;s situation and word spread via the internet....</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5062222</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jul 2011 19:20:16 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5062222</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>An Intended Consequence</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5062223&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F0lOqIPCKq-k%2F</link>
            <description>The New Republic has an interesting article explaining &amp;#8220;How Campaign Finance Laws Made the British Press so Powerful.&amp;#8221; Basically, only British newspapers are free of regulations that suppress political speech. The author suggests adding more controls (including content restrictions) on the British newspapers to enforce &amp;#8220;impartial&amp;#8221; coverage. In other words, the media should be just as repressed as everyone else, and political leaders should be free of criticism.
Like many others, I have long thought that U.S. newspapers editorialize in favor of campaign finance restrictions to control competing speech and thereby become more powerful. After Citizens United, other organizations now enjoy the same First Amendment protections as media corporations like The New York Time...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5062223</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jul 2011 17:23:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5062223</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Guns in D.C.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5050528&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FA2jMgd6qwKA%2F</link>
            <description>Three years after the Supreme Court&amp;#8217;s  landmark Heller ruling, which declared Washington, D.C.&amp;#8217;s gun control laws unconstitutional, city officials keep fighting.  Under pressure from another lawsuit concerning a de facto ban, the city says that guns may now be purchased at the police station.  No details yet on whether residents will have to change into orange jump suits and wait in the holding cells while the police process the paperwork.
More here.
Guns in D.C. is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5050528</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2011 18:45:36 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5050528</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Risks of Playground Safety</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5050530&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FbSd4cQMJ62c%2F</link>
            <description>New York Times science writer (and longtime libertarian favorite) John Tierney had a great piece yesterday under the headline, &amp;#8220;Can a Playground Be Too Safe?&amp;#8221; As Tierney observes:
The old tall jungle gyms and slides disappeared from most American playgrounds across the country in recent decades because of parental concerns, federal guidelines, new safety standards set by manufacturers and — the most frequently cited factor — fear of lawsuits.
Some researchers argue that the safety benefits of the revamped designs have been oversold; kids can break bones falling from not-so-high slides onto relatively soft surfaces, for example. One researcher outlines what sounds like a teeter-totter version of the Peltzman hypothesis: &amp;#8220;If children and parents believe they are in an e...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5050530</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2011 18:16:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5050530</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Clarifying Judicial Understanding of “Stereotyping”</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5050742&amp;cid=t_100671_109_f&amp;fid=36089&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fthesituationist.wordpress.com%2F2011%2F07%2F20%2Fclarifying-judicial-understanding-of-stereotyping%2F</link>
            <description>Kerri Lynn Stone recently posted her article, &amp;#8220;Clarifying Stereotyping&amp;#8221;  (59 Kansas Law Review 2011) on SSRN. Here&amp;#8217;s the abstract.
* * *
People make comments all the time that include or invoke stereotypes. Sometimes those comments are indicative of their belief systems or values. Sometimes they are feeble – or genuine – attempts at humor or wit. Sometimes people speak rashly and in anger. Many times, people are misunderstood, and their true feelings are belied by a clumsy choice of words. Much of the law of employment discrimination necessarily implicates a searching probe into the often undisclosed – sometimes even to oneself – motivations, beliefs, and intentions that underlie an impel acts alleged to have been discriminatorily premised on someone’s race, ge...</description>
            <author>The Situationist</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5050742</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2011 04:01:51 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5050742</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Shocker Reported from Delaware Judiciary</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5050539&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FQ6CBeUKgYYU%2F</link>
            <description>“[The] Delaware [court system] is now almost actively hostile toward cases they think are without merit,” Widener lawprof Larry Hamermesh tells the Wall Street Journal, regarding flimsily based suits in which lawyers seek to block corporate mergers and then collect fees when the target agrees to settle in order to get the deal done. Imagine that &amp;#8212; almost actively hostile. If this keeps up, are lawyers supposed to hold back on unmeritorious cases, and only file the meritorious sort? Wouldn&amp;#8217;t that be, like, monotonous?
Shocker Reported from Delaware Judiciary is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5050539</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jul 2011 16:19:54 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5050539</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Campus Show Trials</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5036218&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F3fD3PuRdzxI%2F</link>
            <description>By Trevor BurrusHarvey Silverglate, co-founder and chairman of the board of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) and a Cato adjunct scholar, has an excellent op-ed in today’s Wall Street Journal highlighting the emerging problem of due process violations on college campuses. As Ilya Shapiro has written about previously, the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights recently sent out a letter outlining new procedural requirements for dealing with claims of sexual harassment and assault. Despite its cordial opening — it begins with the words “Dear Colleague” — the letter carries the de facto force of law: universities that receive public funds (nearly all of them) may have their funding stripped if they don’t follow the new guidelines.
The new guideli...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5036218</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 15 Jul 2011 20:16:03 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5036218</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Why Sugar Is Dangerous To Depression</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5028453&amp;cid=t_100671_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2011%2F07%2F13%2Fwhy-sugar-is-dangerous-to-depression%2F</link>
            <description>You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to appreciate the link between sugar and depression. 
Anyone who doubts the relationship need only to spend a night in our house and see what type of behavior happens when two kids consume 12-ounce cans of Coke or Sprite — and the demonic demonstrations that happen after a 7-11 slurpee, especially if it’s red or blue, or God forbid, a mix.
People who suffer from depression are especially vulnerable to sugar’s evil power. I am so sensitive to white-flour, processed foods that I can practically set an alarm to for three hours after consumption, at which time I will be cursing myself for inhaling the large piece of birthday cake at the party because I am feeling so miserable. That doesn’t stop me from eating dessert at the next gathering, of c...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5028453</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 13 Jul 2011 19:34:30 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5028453</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>SB 1070: Constitutional But Bad Policy</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5028145&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FrvUTZuVihO4%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroThat&amp;#8217;s the title of an essay I wrote for SCOTUSblog as part of their symposium on United States v. Arizona.  This is the big immigration case that will hit the Supreme Court&amp;#8217;s doorstep later this month when Paul Clement, recently hired by Arizona, files his cert petition.
Here&amp;#8217;s an excerpt:
&amp;#8230;state governments, feeling tremendous pressure from their citizens to address the consequences of the federal failure to meet this nation’s immigration needs, are acting for themselves.  Arizona happens to be the “tip of the spear,” but we’ve also seen various other immigration-related laws passed in states as different as Utah, Georgia, and California.  Whether related to enforcement, expanded work permits, sanctuary cities, or other types of policy i...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5028145</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 13 Jul 2011 18:35:55 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5028145</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Relegate Mandatory Data Retention to the Dustbin of History</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5028150&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F7Wve3kASWao%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperGreg Nojeim of the Center for Democracy and Technology reports on yesterday&amp;#8217;s hearing in the House Judiciary Committee on H.R. 1981, the Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act of 2011. (I lamented the bill earlier this week, as did Julian Sanchez last week.)
Rep. Sensenbrenner [(R-Wis.)], Chair of the Crime Subcommittee, opened the hearing with an extraordinarily strong attack on the bill. Saying the Committee should relegate mandatory data retention to the dustbin of history, he attacked the data retention provision on economic and privacy grounds. &amp;#8220;I believe this bill is bad policy and I will do my best to kill it.&amp;#8221; He also said, &amp;#8220;This bill runs roughshod over the privacy rights of people who use the Internet for thousands of lawful purpo...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5028150</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 13 Jul 2011 14:49:13 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5028150</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Casey Anthony Verdict and the Criminal Justice System</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5008141&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FLSGA8jccVgg%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchThe Casey Anthony case is all over the news this week.  I did not follow the case closely, but Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz has a good article about the case and the criminal law in today&amp;#8217;s Wall Street Journal.  One thing I do know is that this highly-publicized trial will reinforce a commonly held view about criminal justice in America&amp;#8211;that juries weigh evidence and decide whether the accused is guilty or not.  As I note in the July issue of Reason magazine, trials are infrequent events in our legal system.
Most Americans are under the mistaken impression that when the government accuses someone of a crime, the case typically  proceeds to trial, where a jury of laypeople hears arguments from the prosecution and the defense, then deliberates over the...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5008141</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jul 2011 15:20:18 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5008141</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>I Guess the ‘You Are All Criminals Act’ Didn’t Have the Same Ring</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5008148&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F1n5uY9AtrMg%2F</link>
            <description>By Julian SanchezIf you thought it was the height of cynicism when legislators dubbed a massive expansion of government surveillance power the &amp;#8220;USA Patriot Act&amp;#8221; (recently extended—really!—under the heading of small business legislation), feast your eyes upon the Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act of 2011, on which the House Judiciary Committee is slated to hold a hearing next Tuesday. What kind of monster would dare be on the record opposing that bill?
As you may have already guessed, the handful of provisions in the bill that really deal specifically with child porn are a fig leaf for its true purpose: A sweeping data retention requirement meant to turn Internet Service Providers and online companies into surrogate snoops for the government&amp;#8217;s conveni...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5008148</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jul 2011 19:55:06 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5008148</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Your Year in Wiretaps, by the Numbers</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5008149&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F-PAiuE7VqFc%2F</link>
            <description>By Julian SanchezLast week—on the Thursday before a major holiday weekend—the annual Wiretap Report was finally released by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, fully two months behind schedule (the first time in over a decade it&amp;#8217;s been so late). While we often focus on the growth of the surveillance state in the context of national security and the War on Terror—such as foreign intelligence wiretaps, which aren&amp;#8217;t counted in this report—it&amp;#8217;s clear that surveillance is on the rise for ordinary law enforcement purposes as well. State and federal investigators obtained 3,194 wiretap orders in 2010, an increase of 34 percent over the previous year, and a whopping 168 percent increase over 2000. Only one wiretap application was denied—which you can choose to...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5008149</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jul 2011 19:00:27 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5008149</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Obama Backtracks on Marijuana Policy</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4992652&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FZIx6gXprQZg%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchPresident Obama is backing away from his campaign pledge to not interfere with the states that choose to adopt medical marijuana reforms.  Here&amp;#8217;s an excerpt from the NORML blog on the new policy memorandum issued by the Department of Justice:
[T]he memorandum states that the recent flurry of intimidating US Attorney letters to state lawmakers are &amp;#8220;entirely consistent&amp;#8221; with the Obama administration’s position. In other words, the administration is now on record in support of claims made by US Attorneys in Rhode Island, Washington, and other states alleging that state employees could be targeted and federally prosecuted for simply registering and licensing medical cannabis patients or providers — a position that is even more extreme than that of the previo...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4992652</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2011 19:59:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4992652</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Stephen Colbert and the FEC</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4992653&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FH3Clc-AJ5EU%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesCampaign finance regulation met celebrity culture for one morning this week. I was not completely bemused.

Stephen Colbert and the FEC is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4992653</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2011 19:54:48 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4992653</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>“Cory Maye Will Soon Be Free”</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4992658&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FyjJ8mYw5q7Y%2F</link>
            <description>By Gene Healy&amp;#8230;that&amp;#8217;s what former Cato policy analyst, Reason senior editor and now Huffington Post reporter Radley Balko reports:
I’m in Monticello, Mississippi, this morning, where Circuit Court Judge Prentiss Harrell has just signed a plea agreement between Cory Maye and the state. Maye has plead guilty to a reduced charged of manslaughter, and has been resentenced to 10 years in prison, time he has already served. He’ll be sent to Rankin County for processing. He should be released and home with his family in a matter of days.
Cory Maye&amp;#8217;s is a story about a paramilitary-style drug raid gone grotesquely wrong, a cautionary tale about the human costs of the War on Drugs, and a lesson in how a dedicated investigative reporter can throw a wrench in the ever-grinding wh...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4992658</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2011 15:42:39 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4992658</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Gay Marriage in New York</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4984419&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FQXF8ynXPiVM%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazIn the Wall Street Journal today, Cato senior fellow Walter Olson praises the New York legislature both for passing a marriage equality bill and for including guarantees of religious freedom in the bill:
For those of us who support same-sex marriage and also consider ourselves to be right of center, there were special reasons to take satisfaction in last Friday&amp;#8217;s vote in Albany. New York expanded its marriage law not under court order but after deliberation by elected lawmakers with the signature of an elected governor. Of the key group of affluent New Yorkers said to have pushed the campaign for the bill, many self-identify as conservative or libertarian. A GOP-run state Senate gave the measure its approval&amp;#8230;.
To their credit, New York lawmakers devoted much attent...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4984419</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 30 Jun 2011 15:28:41 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4984419</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Sixth Circuit Got It Wrong</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4984423&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FQL0YdFRN6Hw%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroToday’s 2-1 Sixth Circuit Obamacare decision was an exercise in unwarranted judicial deference, not by the author of the majority opinion, Judge Boyce Martin, who regularly rubberstamps misuses of federal power, but by concurring Judge Jeffrey Sutton, who avoided the logical implications of this ruling and punted the main issue to the Supreme Court.  Under a document establishing a government of enumerated and therefore limited powers, the burden is on that government to prove that it has the power to do something, not on the plaintiffs to disprove that power.  Never has the Supreme Court ratified the federal power to force someone to buy a product in the marketplace under the guise of regulating commerce.  Indeed, never, not even during the height of the New Deal, h...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4984423</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:18:31 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4984423</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Judge Mark Wolf, Criminal Informants, and the FBI</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4984425&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fdc5odoAUT3A%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchJudge Mark Wolf  gets some well-deserved recognition in a New York Times editorial today for his spectacular effort to bring some accountability to the FBI scandal involving gangster informants.  Here&amp;#8217;s an excerpt:
The judge uncovered that John Connolly Jr., the F.B.I. agent who was their handler, had protected Mr. Bulger, a 15-year informant, and Mr. Flemmi, a 25-year informant, as they committed murder and conspired with the Mafia, in exchange for leads about the Mafia. It was Mr. Connolly who tipped off Mr. Bulger that he was about to be indicted and sent him on the lam. Judge Wolf testified against the F.B.I. agent at a 2002 trial before another judge. Mr. Connolly was sentenced to 10 years for racketeering, obstruction of justice and making false statements to inve...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4984425</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jun 2011 15:43:13 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4984425</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>So What If Corporations Aren’t People?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4984426&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fil0p9jN4s5w%2F</link>
            <description>This article is still being edited &amp;#8212; it won&amp;#8217;t appear in the John Marshall Law Review till the fall &amp;#8211; so comments are welcome.  Thanks to Eugene Volokh for making suggestions on an earlier version.
Update: Larry Solum has &amp;#8220;recommended&amp;#8221; our article on the Legal Theory Blog.  Thanks!
So What If Corporations Aren&amp;#8217;t People? is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4984426</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jun 2011 14:19:41 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4984426</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Interstate Compacts and Do-It-Yourself Federalism</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4984427&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FK5XaJEi5u3E%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroWith the federal government&amp;#8217;s growing assertion of power over the states &amp;#8212; Obamacare is just the highest-profile example &amp;#8211;  state legislators regularly contact me for advice on how to push back while remaining constitutionally faithful.  What can they do in areas like health care, immigration, drug decriminalization, and firearm regulation?
One innovative solution is interstate compacts: states can actually create binding federal law by joining together in a sort of multi-state contract.  Typically they need Congress&amp;#8217;s (but not the president&amp;#8217;s) consent, but the Supreme Court has held that when the compacts don&amp;#8217;t implicate challenges to federal power, they don&amp;#8217;t even need that.
For example, Texas is now considering joining a Medica...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4984427</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jun 2011 14:16:32 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4984427</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Are Corporations People When They Make Video Games?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4975827&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Ffsa2Wum2Vxs%2F</link>
            <description>By Julian SanchezI note that I&amp;#8217;m not hearing many critics of Citizens United decrying yesterday&amp;#8217;s very welcome Supreme Court ruling, in which the majority held unconstitutional a California statute prohibiting the sale or rental of violent video games to minors. Perhaps that&amp;#8217;s just because they&amp;#8217;re concerned with corporate influence on elections as a policy matter, and not so much about Grand Theft Auto, but as a matter of First Amendment interpretation, it seems as though the elements that supposedly made Citizens United a travesty are present here.
As the conservative Justice Alito notes in dissent, for example, the statute at issue here does not prohibit anyone from creating, possessing, freely loaning, or playing violent video games: It regulates only their renta...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4975827</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jun 2011 16:39:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4975827</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Beware the Depends Bomber?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4975832&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F95kWXhww15U%2F</link>
            <description>By Gene HealyMy Washington Examiner column this week is on TSA, the federal agency that&amp;#8217;s its own reductio ad absurdum.
In the latest TSA atrocity, the agency forced a wheelchair-bound, 95-year-old leukemia patient to remove her adult diaper, for fear she might be wired to explode. “It’s something I couldn’t imagine happening on American soil,” her distraught daughter told the press: “Here is my mother, 95 years old, 105 pounds, barely able to stand, and then this.”
My God, what is she on about? Proper procedure was followed!
As I point out in the column:
in a classic case of &amp;#8220;mission creep,&amp;#8221; TSA is taking its show on the road and the rails.
Remember when, pushing his bullet-train boondoggle in the 2011 State of the Union, President Obama cracked that it would...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4975832</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jun 2011 13:29:46 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4975832</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>100,000+ Cribs May Be Headed for Dumpsters Today</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4975833&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FFJsb-MgrxMU%2F</link>
            <description>By Walter OlsonLast December the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) adopted new standards for crib design, a step mandated by the famously overreaching Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA). The commission decided to go well beyond a set of voluntary design standards that had been widely adopted the year before; it also chose to make the new rules retroactive, rendering unlawful the sale of many existing cribs whose overall safety record is otherwise acceptable—no one would think of subjecting them to a recall, for instance. Commissioner Nancy Nord:
The day care industry did protest that the rule, as proposed, would result in approximately a $1/2 billion hit to a group that could not immediately absorb costs of such magnitude, especially on the heels of having ju...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4975833</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jun 2011 13:26:01 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4975833</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Conrad Black Ordered Back to Prison</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4975834&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FqV6NneC-OkM%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchOver at NRO, Mark Steyn on last Friday&amp;#8217;s order that Conrad Black report back to federal prison:
With a system that relies on multiple charges and an ability to pressure everybody else in the case to switch sides, you can win (as Conrad did) nineteen-twentieths of the battles and still lose the war. He’s a wealthy businessman, and nobody has any sympathy for those. But it’s even worse if you’re a nobody. A New Hampshire neighbor of mine had the misfortune to attract the attention of federal prosecutors for one of those white-collar “crimes” no one can explain in English. The jury acquitted him in a couple of hours. Great news! The system worked! Not really. By then, the feds had spent a half-decade demolishing his life, exhausting his savings, wrecking his m...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4975834</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 20:07:55 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4975834</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Court Says Punishing Political Speech Violates First Amendment</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4975836&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FSPKxQcM8ajk%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroWith its last opinion on the last day of the term, the Supreme Court brought things back to constitutional basics by striking down a state law that punished political speech. Whatever the motivations behind Arizona’s so-called Clean Elections Act, giving a publicly funded candidate more taxpayer-provided money every time his privately funded opponent—or his supporters—have “spoken too much” clearly chills speech. In elections, where there is no effective speech without spending money, matching funds provisions triggered by speech fail First Amendment scrutiny.
And this result should’ve been obvious to the entire Court, not just a five-justice majority, in the wake of the Davis v. FEC “Millionaires’ Amendment” case from 2008. Davis struck down the part of Mc...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4975836</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 16:54:47 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4975836</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Republicans and the New York Marriage Law</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4975839&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FjqIiiUmeSBM%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazSince New York passed a law extending marriage to same-sex couples, Republican presidential candidates have been mostly silent. But not Rep. Michele Bachmann, who has had a long and strong interest in gay rights issues. In an interview on Fox News Sunday she endorsed both New York&amp;#8217;s Tenth Amendment right to make marriage law and the federal government&amp;#8217;s right to override such laws with a constitutional amendment, confusing host Chris Wallace:
WALLACE: You are a strong opponent of same-marriage. What do you think of the law that was just passed in New York state—making it the biggest state to recognize same-sex marriage?
BACHMANN: Well, I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. And I also believe—in Minnesota, for instance, this year, the legislature...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4975839</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 15:50:06 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4975839</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Epic Win for First Amendment in Violent Videogame Case</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4975840&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FobqD34Uv_fw%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroThe Supreme Court scored an epic win for the First Amendment in striking down California’s prohibition on selling violent videogames to minors. The law was both overly broad—sweeping in a wide variety of games based on no objective standard and no age-based gradations—and underinclusive—with no restrictions on other types of media. With a few strictly drawn exceptions for historically unprotected speech—obscenity, incitement, fighting words—government lacks the power to restrict expression simply because of its content. And a legislature cannot create new types of unprotected speech simply by weighing its purported social costs against its alleged value.
“Reading Dante is unquestionably more cultured and intellectually edifying than playing Mortal Kombat,” Ju...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4975840</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 15:28:28 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4975840</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Court Extends Commercial Speech Protections</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4975845&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FH4gEql8vpE8%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroIn an important but little-noted First Amendment case decided Thursday, Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc., the Supreme Court correctly invalidated a particular regulation of commercial speech but unfortunately left intact the general doctrine that distinguishes and privileges noncommercial speech.  Justice Kennedy authored the 6-3 decision (joined not just by the “conservatives” but also Justice Sotomayor) that struck down a Vermont law prohibiting the sale of information about doctors’ prescription histories as making viewpoint-based speech restrictions in violation of the First Amendment. 
In so ruling, the Court effectively affirmed a Second Circuit decision (involving a similar Connecticut law) I discussed previously.  Cato filed amicus briefs in both the Second Circui...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4975845</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 13:01:36 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4975845</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Two Votes on Libya</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4968455&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FQ_UXIePt7DU%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesThe House of Representatives has taken two votes on the war in Libya. In the first, the House voted 295 to 123 against authorizing the war. 70 Democrats voted or 36 percent of the caucus voted against authorization. That&amp;#8217;s pretty impressive given that the Secretary of State made a personal appeal to her fellow partisans prior to the vote. Eight Republicans said &amp;#8220;yes&amp;#8221; to war in Libya, a smaller number than I would have expected. Partisanship, deficits, and elections do matter, I suppose.
On the other hand, the House also refused to cut off most funding for the war by a vote of 180-238.  Some 36 Democrats voted to cut off most funding; 144 Republicans joined them. This bill was said to be gaining strength but in the end, not nearly enough votes came over. ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4968455</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2011 20:49:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4968455</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Sorrell vs. IMS Health: Not a Privacy Case</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4968464&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FkY82WaVaaUo%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperThe Supreme Court&amp;#8217;s decision in Sorrell vs. IMS Health is being touted in many quarters as a privacy case, and a concerning one at that. Example: Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) released a statement saying &amp;#8220;the Supreme Court has overturned a sensible Vermont law that sought to protect the privacy of the doctor-patient relationship.&amp;#8221; That&amp;#8217;s a stretch.
The Vermont law at issue restricted the sale, disclosure, and use of pharmacy records that revealed the prescribing practices of doctors if that information was to be used in marketing by pharmaceutical manufacturers. Under the law, prescription drug salespeople&amp;#8212;&amp;#8221;detailers&amp;#8221; in industry parlance&amp;#8212;could not access information about doctors&amp;#8217; prescribing to use in focusing their effort...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4968464</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2011 12:37:08 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4968464</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Individualism in Legal Process and the Wal-Mart Case</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4968465&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fhnvycmv5Hts%2F</link>
            <description>By Walter OlsonMonday&amp;#8217;s high court decision in Wal-Mart v. Dukes has predictably drawn a strong reaction from legal academia, much of it critical of the Court. Of particular interest are the comments of Richard Primus (Michigan) at the New York Times&amp;#8216;s &amp;#8220;Room for Debate&amp;#8221; and Alexandra Lahav (Connecticut) at Mass Tort Litigation Blog. According to Primus and Lahav, the decision is the latest sign that the current Supreme Court leans toward a principle of &amp;#8220;individualism&amp;#8221; in applying the rules of civil litigation. Lahav in particular appears to view this as a shame, since &amp;#8220;a more collectivist view&amp;#8221; would carry with it more &amp;#8220;potential for social reform.&amp;#8221; 
What does a term like &amp;#8220;individualism&amp;#8221; mean in the context of litigati...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4968465</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2011 12:35:46 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4968465</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>One Generation of Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. Is Enough</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4968466&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Faq88VmZqfnI%2F</link>
            <description>By Trevor BurrusToday, the Charlotte Observer reports on the ongoing attempts to find restitution for the 3,000 living North Carolinians who were victims of the state’s forced sterilization program. It may surprise many readers, but forced sterilization has a long and shameful history in the United States. In North Carolina, the last forced sterilization was performed as late as 1974.
The most famous case of forced sterilization was the 1927 Supreme Court case of Buck v. Bell. Carrie Buck, a “feeble minded” woman from Virginia who was deemed the “probable potential parent of socially inadequate offspring,” challenged the state’s attempt to forcibly sterilize her. In an opinion that even his colleagues called “brutal,” Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. curtly did away with ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4968466</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 23 Jun 2011 21:03:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4968466</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>More Ground-Breaking Constitutional Theories</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4968471&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FttETJmLgxOo%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroLast year I blogged about a fascinating new approach to constitutional interpretation that Georgetown law professor Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz was developing, in a Stanford Law Review article called &amp;#8220;The Subjects of the Constitution.&amp;#8221;  Now Nick has a sequel, titled, naturally, &amp;#8220;The Objects of the Constitution.&amp;#8221;  Here&amp;#8217;s an excerpt from the abstract:   
In short, this Article and its predecessor, The Subjects of the Constitution, amount to a new model of constitutional review, a new lens through which to read the Constitution. This approach begins with a grammatical exercise: identifying the subjects and objects of the Constitution. But this is hardly linguistic casuistry or grammatical fetishism. The subjects and objects of the Constitution ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4968471</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 23 Jun 2011 12:47:30 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4968471</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>I am not Anonymous - but they have a point.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5057869&amp;cid=t_100671_133_f&amp;fid=35452&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.graphictruth.com%2F2011%2F06%2Fi-am-not-anonomous-but-they-have-point.html</link>
            <description>Our message is simple: Do not lie to the people and you won't have to worry about your lies being exposed. Do not make corrupt deals and you won't have to worry about your corruption being laid bare. Do not break the rules and you won't have to worry about getting in trouble for it.&quot;It goes on to warn, &quot;do not make the mistake of challenging Anonymous. Do not make the mistake of believing you can behead a headless snake. If you slice off one head of Hydra, ten more heads will grow in its place. If you cut down one Anon, ten more will join us purely out of anger at your trampling of dissent.&quot;Read more: http://techland.time.com/2011/06/10/anonymous-warns-nato-this-is-not-your-world/#ixzz1Q1ysqLeNThis is the response of Anonomous to NATO's public musing of how to respond to this widespread ne...</description>
            <author>Graphictruth</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5057869</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2011 22:48:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5057869</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>I am not Anonomous - but they have a point.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4960252&amp;cid=t_100671_133_f&amp;fid=35452&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.graphictruth.com%2F2011%2F06%2Fi-am-not-anonomous-but-they-have-point.html</link>
            <description>Our message is simple: Do not lie to the people and you won't have to worry about your lies being exposed. Do not make corrupt deals and you won't have to worry about your corruption being laid bare. Do not break the rules and you won't have to worry about getting in trouble for it.&quot;It goes on to warn, &quot;do not make the mistake of challenging Anonymous. Do not make the mistake of believing you can behead a headless snake. If you slice off one head of Hydra, ten more heads will grow in its place. If you cut down one Anon, ten more will join us purely out of anger at your trampling of dissent.&quot;Read more: http://techland.time.com/2011/06/10/anonymous-warns-nato-this-is-not-your-world/#ixzz1Q1ysqLeNThis is the response of Anonomous to NATO's public musing of how to respond to this widespread ne...</description>
            <author>Graphictruth</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4960252</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2011 22:48:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4960252</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>‘Marsupial Justice’ Is a Natural Product of Federal Overreach</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4960045&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FM0GW84_LlEY%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroEarlier this month I blogged about the U.S. Department of Education&amp;#8217;s recent push to eliminate free speech and due process on campus.  More and more people are starting to notice this attempt by the department&amp;#8217;s Office of Civil Rights to force colleges — by threatening an investigation and loss of federal funds — to redefine sexual harrassment to include unwelcome flirting and sex jokes and then lower the burden of proof they use when determining whether students or staff are guilty of violating the new code of behavior.
And now we have a characteristically astute article by the Washington Examiner&amp;#8216;s Michael Barone.  Money quote:
Education Secretary Arne Duncan has shown an admirable openness to argument and intellectual debate. Perhaps someone ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4960045</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2011 14:57:44 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4960045</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Obamacare’s Platonic Guardians</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4960048&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FsY-ZhuO_Op8%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroAs followers of this blog recognize, Obamacare has more constitutional defects than just the individual mandate or even the coercive use of Medicaid funds.  One issue that is getting increasing attention (see the Weekly Standard, National Review, and George Will) is this weird new entity called the Independent Payment Advisory Board.
IPAB, which Sarah Palin famously labeled a &amp;#8220;death panel,&amp;#8221; will exercise virtually unchecked power to set Medicare reimbursement rates—without political or legal oversight by any branch of government.  It&amp;#8217;s reminiscent of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, the part of the Sarbanes-Oxley financial regulation law that the Supreme Court found partially unconstitutional last year.  Except it has the power of life ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4960048</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jun 2011 21:43:32 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4960048</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Harold Koh and the Temptations of Power</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4952794&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FII6rtUWA2_4%2F</link>
            <description>By Gene HealySo for three months now, we&amp;#8217;ve been at war in a country that the president&amp;#8217;s own secretary of defense admits is &amp;#8220;not a vital interest for the United States.&amp;#8221; Turns out, it&amp;#8217;s also a war that the president&amp;#8217;s own attorney general believes to be illegal.
That&amp;#8217;s what I get from Charlie Savage&amp;#8217;s recent reporting on how the White House &amp;#8220;forum-shopped&amp;#8221; its way to its current position on the War Powers Resolution, to wit, you&amp;#8217;re not engaged in &amp;#8220;hostilities&amp;#8221; if you&amp;#8217;re hitting someone but they can&amp;#8217;t hit you back.
As the WPR&amp;#8217;s 60-day deadline approached, the Pentagon&amp;#8217;s general counsel and, more importantly, the head of the president&amp;#8217;s Office of Legal Counsel, Caroline D. Krass, advi...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4952794</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jun 2011 15:26:01 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4952794</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Treaty Clause Doesn’t Give Congress Unlimited Power</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4952799&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FczRzl1vXuRE%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroIn 1920, the Supreme Court decided an obscure case concerning the implementation of a treaty between the United States and Canada regarding migratory birds. Tucked into Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes&amp;#8217;s five-page decision in Missouri v. Holland was a sentence that expressed a truly startling idea: that Congress can transcend its enumerated powers via its power to implement treaties.
That is, although Congress has no enumerated power to pass, say, general criminal laws, if a ratified treaty with France demands that we pass such laws, then Congress&amp;#8217;s power expands to allow for such legislation. Thus, foreign nations and the executive branch are given the power to change, almost at will, one of the most hotly debated and carefully crafted sections of the Constitution,...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4952799</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 20:35:51 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4952799</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Wal-Mart v. Dukes: The Court Gets One Right</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4952800&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FofDEWKTgXJc%2F</link>
            <description>By Walter OlsonIn today&amp;#8217;s decision in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, the Supreme Court unanimously found that the Ninth Circuit had jumped the gun in certifying what would have been one of the largest class actions in history, a job-bias action against the giant retailer on behalf of female employees. A five-justice majority led by Justice Scalia found that the plaintiffs had clearly not met the requirements needed to have the case certified for class treatment; four dissenters led by Justice Ginsburg would have sent the case back for more consideration. 
While some press commentary simplistically treated this case as a &amp;#8220;Which Side Are You On&amp;#8221; parable of workplace sexism, both the majority and the dissent spend much time grappling with more lawyerly issues specific to class actions a...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4952800</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 16:57:44 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4952800</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>In Global Warming Case, Supreme Court Reaches Correct Result But Leaves Room for Mischievous Litigation</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4952803&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FbC4DuEg6ftg%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroIn the important global warming case decided today, American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut, the Supreme Court unanimously reached the correct result but one that still leaves room for plenty of mischievous litigation.  While it’s clearly true that, as the Court said, the Clean Air Act and the EPA exist to deal with the claims the plaintiffs made here—that the defendants’ carbon dioxide emissions are pollutants that cause global warming—the Court left open the possibility of claims on state common-law grounds such as nuisance.  And it unfortunately said nothing about whether any such disputes, whether challenging EPA action or suing under state law, are properly “cases and controversies” ripe for judicial resolution.
The judiciary was not meant to be the sol...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4952803</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 15:58:18 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4952803</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Non-war War in Libya</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4952811&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F1881FBLk8mY%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesOn Sunday, the Obama administration will have made war in Libya for more than 90 days without authorization from Congress.  This violates both the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution. The administration claims it does not violate the latter because the war in Libya is not actually a war for legal purposes. The non-war war argument is not going over well; even the New York Times editorial page says the administration&amp;#8217;s case &amp;#8220;borders on sophistry.&amp;#8221;
Beyond the headlines and the political struggle, the administration&amp;#8217;s efforts to expand the presidential power to start wars also shifts political authority from the U.S. Congress to the United Nations. For more on the problems of Obama&amp;#8217;s radical moves in foreign policy, see my essay here.
The N...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4952811</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2011 18:22:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4952811</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>White House: ‘We Have Never Been at War in Northafrica!’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4934097&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FQifV1CO3_to%2F</link>
            <description>By Gene HealyPardon the somewhat trite Orwell reference in the title to this post. But sometimes this administration&amp;#8217;s wordgames make it hard to resist invoking our keenest analyst of politics and the English language.
Some months ago, the Obama team began telling us that the Libyan War wasn&amp;#8217;t a war&amp;#8212;it was a &amp;#8220;kinetic military action.&amp;#8221; (Go here to watch Defense Secretary Robert Gates try&amp;#8212;and fail&amp;#8212;to maintain a straight face selling that line to Katie Couric on 60 Minutes).
In April, the president&amp;#8217;s Office of Legal Counsel made the (bogus) argument that the president hadn&amp;#8217;t violated the War Powers Resolution because the WPR recognized his authority to engage in hostilities for at least 60 days without congressional approval.  We&amp;#8217;re...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4934097</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jun 2011 20:40:16 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4934097</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Of Course Defendants Can Challenge the Constitutionality of Laws Under Which They’re Prosecuted</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4934103&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F6DG6V1dfIC0%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroHard cases make bad law, the saying goes.  Well, a bizarre case that the Supreme Court decided unanimously today has set a good precedent for the enforcement of residual Tenth Amendment powers. 
As I described in December when Cato filed a brief in Bond v. United States:
Carol Anne Bond learned that her best friend was having an affair with her husband, so she spread toxic chemicals on the woman’s car and mailbox. Postal inspectors discovered this plot after they caught Bond on film stealing from the woman’s mailbox. Rather than leave this caper to local law enforcement authorities to resolve, however, a federal prosecutor charged Bond with violating a statute that implements U.S. treaty obligations under the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention.
Bond pled guilty and was...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4934103</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jun 2011 15:48:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4934103</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Sorry About Your Burning Village, But You Released the Dragon</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4934106&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FwEhLmNGEDUE%2F</link>
            <description>By Neal McCluskeyThere&amp;#8217;s a lot of consternation over Education Secretary Arne Duncan&amp;#8217;s threat that if Congress doesn&amp;#8217;t quickly create and pass a new No Child Left Behind Act he will do it himself, issuing waivers galore for states that adopt as-yet unspecified, administration-dictated reforms. As Andy Rotherham writes in Time, everyone from AEI&amp;#8217;s Rick Hess, to angry-teachers&amp;#8217; hero Diane Ravitch, seems to be outraged over the notion that the executive branch would simply bypass Congress because it thinks the legislators are moving too slowly.
What did they expect when they ignored the Constitution to begin with, forgetting that it gives Washington just a few, enumerated powers, and that meddling in education (save prohibiting discrimination and c...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4934106</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jun 2011 14:24:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4934106</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Magna Carta Day</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4934111&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FQswTor8YJUA%2F</link>
            <description>By Roger PilonThe liberties we Americans enjoy were hard-won over the centuries. Today we mark a major event in that struggle, the day in 1215 when English barons presented King John with a written list of rights they demanded he recognize. Known ultimately as Magna Carta, the Great Charter, it was a compact between the barons and their king, a political effort by subjects to secure their liberty by placing their ruler under the rule of law, thus limiting arbitrary power.
The charter has gone through several iterations, but it drew in part from the common law rights, especially rights of property, that judges in the king’s courts had been finding from reason and custom as they decided controversies the king’s subjects brought before them. What Magna Carta did was bring those same right...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4934111</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2011 14:05:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4934111</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Justice Thomas and That Which Is Not Seen</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4934112&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fz2LOI3SgWKw%2F</link>
            <description>By Trevor BurrusFeatured prominently on the front page of yesterday’s USA Today is Justice Clarence Thomas’s stony visage. The accompanying article by Joan Biskupic purports to be a “look back” at Thomas’s near two decades on the Court. In reality, the article is a thinly veiled hit piece on Thomas’s principled commitment to originalism, his understanding of the proper role of the judiciary, and his belief in the law.
Keying on Thomas’s “hard line” on criminal defendants, the article spends most of the time listing a rogues gallery of Thomas opinions that have been carefully chosen to pull at the heart strings and incense readers unfamiliar with the principles that stand behind Thomas’s positions. The gallery includes:

denying re-sentencing to a convicted drug dealer w...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4934112</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:21:54 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4934112</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Copyright, Innovation, and Empiricism</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4934114&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FsskDnGcrBaw%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperIf you like innovation, and if you&amp;#8217;re interested in intellectual property, you probably already know about the Committee on the Impact of Copyright Policy on Innovation in the Digital Era. That&amp;#8217;s a group assembled by the National Academies to, well, analyze the impact of copyright policy on innovation in the digital era.
Long-standing consensus holds that copyright, by creating artificial scarcity in information goods, allows creators to enjoy rewards from their creations sufficient to justify creating them. In other words, copyright&amp;#8217;s incentive structure encourages creation and innovation, the end result being more and better information goods for the society to enjoy.
Information technologies such as digitization and the Internet are rejiggering the balance...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4934114</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2011 12:44:22 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4934114</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Wisonsin Supreme Court Upholds State Law Curtailing Collective Bargaining Powers</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4934115&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FwTtef84LYHg%2F</link>
            <description>By Andrew J. CoulsonRuling just a week after hearing oral arguments in the case, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has overturned a lower-court ruling that had struck down the law. Though other challenges are foreseen, the law reining-in collective bargaining powers for public school employees and other state workers is now likely to go into effect &amp;#8212; at least for the time being.
Collective bargaining was always a bad idea for workers employed by a state-run monopoly, because it lacks the checks and balances of the private sector. When UPS went on strike, customers could &amp;#8212; and did in great numbers &amp;#8212; shift their business to FedEx, DHL and others. But taxpayers must keep paying for the public schools despite their rising costs and collapsing productivity.
Still, it is unlikely tha...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4934115</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2011 12:43:31 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4934115</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Shooting for State Sovereignty</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4934117&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FW59jlgyTcno%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroOn October 1, 2009, Montana passed the Montana Firearms Freedom Act, the purpose of which was to regulate guns manufactured and kept within Montana state lines under a less restrictive regulatory regime than federal law provides. That same day, to ensure that Montanans could enjoy the benefits of this less restrictive state regulation, the Montana Shooting Sports Association filed a declaratory judgment claim in federal court.
The lawsuit&amp;#8217;s importance is not limited to Montana, as seven other states have passed laws similar to the MFFA and 20 states have introduced such legislation. The goal here is to reinforce state regulatory authority over commerce that is by definition intrastate, to take back some of the ground occupied by modern Commerce Clause jurisprudence.
Th...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4934117</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jun 2011 20:38:58 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4934117</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>My First Year Battling Obamacare</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4934119&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FzYWU6uQ_uAY%2F</link>
            <description>This article chronicles the (first) year I spent opposing the constitutionality of Obamacare: Between debates, briefs, op-eds, blogging, testimony, and media, I have spent well over half of my time since the legislation’s enactment on attacking Congress’s breathtaking assertion of federal power in this context. Braving transportation snafus, snowstorms, and Eliot Spitzer, it’s been an interesting ride. And so, weaving legal arguments into first-person narrative, I hope to add a unique perspective to an important debate that goes to the heart of this nation’s founding principles. The individual mandate is Obamacare’s highest-profile and perhaps most egregious constitutional violation because the Supreme Court has never allowed – Congress has never claimed – the power to requir...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4934119</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jun 2011 19:06:01 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4934119</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Case that “Should Never Have Been Prosecuted”</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4921382&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FzsnYcj8U9tA%2F</link>
            <description>By Walter OlsonOne of last month&amp;#8217;s notable legal stories drew surprisingly little attention in the general press. In Maryland, U.S. District Court Judge Roger Titus ordered the acquittal of Lauren Stevens, a former in-house lawyer for drugmaker GlaxoSmithKline, who had been charged with obstructing a federal investigation. In strong language, Judge Titus said Stevens &amp;#8220;should never have been prosecuted&amp;#8221; and that allowing the case to go forward to a jury &amp;#8220;would be a miscarriage of justice.&amp;#8221; [White Collar Crime Prof, Main Justice, FDA Law Blog (&quot;stunning... Black Tuesday for the government&quot;)].
The prosecution was part of a wider trend in which the federal government has been more aggressively asserting civil and even criminal claims against lawyers and company em...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4921382</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2011 20:52:45 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4921382</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>‘Repetition of Constitutional Error Does Not Produce Constitutional Truth’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4921384&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FAjVifZaanSg%2F</link>
            <description>By Trevor BurrusWhile we await the big Supreme Court decisions that will come down in the next few weeks, some of the smaller decisions can provide interesting moments. In Sykes v. United States, issued Thursday, the Court interprets the meaning of the “residual clause” of the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA). This is the fourth time in four years that the Court has tried to clarify the ACCA, specifically the terms “violent felony” and “serious” drug crime. As Justice Scalia sarcastically says in his scathing dissent, “We try to include an ACCA residual-clause case in about every second or third volume of the United States Reports.” This time, the issue was whether Indiana’s crime of “felony vehicle flight” qualifies as a “violent felony.”
The ACCA shouldn’t eve...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4921384</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2011 20:30:37 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4921384</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Defending Anonymous Speech</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4921387&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F53tWId1h4xQ%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesFor some time now, the U.S. Supreme Court has placed little weight on the value of anonymous speech, especially in the campaign finance context. True, in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission (1995), the Court struck down a state law prohibiting distributing anonymous campaign literature. But from Buckley v. Valeo (1976) onward, the Court has looked favorably on disclosure of campaign spending. Even Citizens United saw only one justice, Clarence Thomas, speak out in favor of anonymous speech.
Long-time First Amendment advocate Nat Hentoff raises some questions about limiting anonymous speech in this video. He praises Justice Thomas and recalls the importance of anonymous speech during the founding era.

Defending Anonymous Speech is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institut...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4921387</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2011 17:23:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4921387</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Happy Birthday Nat Hentoff</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4921389&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FVCGzljbsd4E%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchHappy Birthday to my friend and Cato senior fellow Nat Hentoff.  He&amp;#8217;s 86, but he continues to crank out columns and books on everything from censorship, torture, and the Fourth Amendment&amp;#8217;s ban on unreasonable searches, to his passionate love of jazz. 
He sat down for a taped interview last month where he offered his views on current threats to free speech and his personal encounters with John Yoo and, way back in the 1950s, with Che Guevara.
Check out his books here.
Happy Birthday Nat Hentoff is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4921389</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2011 13:17:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4921389</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>When Che Guevara Met Nat Hentoff</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4921391&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FYUiUK96sPQI%2F</link>
            <description>By Ian VasquezIn the new video below, renowned civil libertarian and Cato senior fellow Nat Hentoff talks about his meeting with Che Guevara when Hentoff wrote for the Village Voice. (See it also here with Spanish subtitles.) El Che is romanticized by college kids and those on the left as a champion of the oppressed, but he was in fact a main architect of Cuban totalitarianism, a cold-blooded murderer whose defining characteristic was sheer intolerance of those with differing views. The best essay on Che, “The Killing Machine,” was written by Alvaro Vargas Llosa for the New Republic some years ago. 

It is hard to imagine a symbol in popular culture in which the represented ideal is more far apart from the historical reality than in the case with Che. Surely that gap helps explain ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4921391</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2011 18:54:03 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4921391</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Time Running Out in Libya?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4921394&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FgVc8IeTIlco%2F</link>
            <description>The objective has changed from protecting civilians to regime change. The war itself has gone on now for as long as the unauthorized war in Kosovo in 1999. Jack Goldsmith concludes: &amp;#8220;as the days drag on, and as our deep involvement persists, it becomes harder and harder to represent that this mission is limited in nature, duration, and scope.&amp;#8221;
Time Running Out in Libya? is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4921394</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2011 15:41:38 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4921394</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Obamacare Lawsuit: From the Courtroom in Atlanta</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4911448&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FcoS8mNzb_mg%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroATLANTA &amp;#8212; In the most important appeal of the Obamacare constitutional saga, today was the best day yet for individual freedom.  The government&amp;#8217;s lawyer, Neal Katyal, spent most of the hearing on the ropes, with the judicial panel extremely cautious not to extend federal power beyond its present outer limits of regulating economic activity that has a substantial aggregate effect on interstate commerce.
As the lawyer representing 26 states against the federal government said, &amp;#8220;The whole reason we do this is to protect liberty.&amp;#8221; With those words, former solicitor general Paul Clement reached the essence of the Obamacare lawsuits. With apologies to Joe Biden, this is a big deal not because we&amp;#8217;re dealing with a huge reorganization of the health car...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4911448</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jun 2011 18:34:39 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4911448</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>When Cops Go Commando, It’s No Laughing Matter</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4911449&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FCQ43vnA9tJg%2F</link>
            <description>By David RittgersI received a response to my recent blog post on the Department of Education serving a warrant and dragging Kenneth Wright of Stockton, California from his home at six in the morning (incident added to the Raidmap, and here’s an updated link to the story). Here is the word from Department of Education Press Secretary Justin Hamilton:
“Yesterday, the Depart of Education’s office of inspector general executed a search warrant at Stockton California residence with the presence of local law enforcement authorities.
While it was reported in local media that the search was related to a defaulted student loan, that is incorrect. This is related to a criminal investigation. The Inspector General’s Office does not execute search warrants for late loan payments.
Because this ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4911449</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jun 2011 18:28:45 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4911449</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Department of Education SWAT Raid for Unpaid Student Loans</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4911451&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FD5RpmLJrNPA%2F</link>
            <description>By David RittgersDepartment of Education officers employed a SWAT team because of unpaid student loans. I am not making this up:
Kenneth Wright does not have a criminal record and he had no reason to believe a S.W.A.T team would be breaking down his door at 6 a.m. on Tuesday…
As it turned out, the person law enforcement was looking for was not there &amp;#8211; Wright&amp;#8217;s estranged wife.
&amp;#8220;They put me in handcuffs in that hot patrol car for six hours, traumatizing my kids,&amp;#8221; Wright said.
Wright said he later went to the mayor and Stockton Police Department, but the City of Stockton had nothing to do with Wright&amp;#8217;s search warrant.
The U.S. Department of Education issued the search and called in the S.W.A.T for his wife&amp;#8217;s defaulted student loans.
This, along with the J...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4911451</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jun 2011 15:48:13 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4911451</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Operator Disconnect</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4911452&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FSZnlhd5tQ5A%2F</link>
            <description>By David RittgersMy latest op-ed, now available at Politico, highlights the continued militarization of American police forces. I focus on the statements of officers involved in the fatal shooting of Marine combat veteran Jose Guerena.
After the SWAT team entered Guerena’s home, the supervisor left one or two “operators” with the body while the rest searched the house.
What did he mean by operator? Well, a police officer. But the term connotes something entirely different.
“Operator” is a term of art in the special operations community. Green Berets, SEALs and other special operations personnel often refer to themselves as operators. It’s a recognition of both the elite standards of their units and the hybrid nature of their duties — part soldier, part spy, part diplomat. But...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4911452</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jun 2011 15:17:43 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4911452</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Constitutional Case for Marriage Equality</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4911455&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FKqSbv2XRftU%2F</link>
            <description>By Caleb O. Brown
On June 12, 1967, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down bans on interracial marriage in more than a dozen states in the case of Loving v. Virginia. Today, the highest court in the United States may soon take on the issue of marriage equality for gay and lesbian relationships. Attorneys David Boies and Theodore B. Olson are hoping the case of Perry v. Schwarzenegger will further establish marriage as a fundamental right of citizenship. Also featured are John Podesta, President of the Center for American Progress, Cato Institute Chairman Robert A. Levy and Cato Executive Vice President David Boaz.
Watch the full event from which many clips were pulled here and Robert A. Levy&amp;#8217;s presentation here.
The Constitutional Case for Marriage Equality is a post from Cato @ Liberty ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4911455</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jun 2011 12:52:04 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4911455</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>June 2011 Cato Unbound: Targeted Killing and the Rule of Law</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4911462&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FoNZh6Abkf4E%2F</link>
            <description>By Jason KuznickiWhen can the executive lawfully kill?
The rule of law itself depends on getting the answer right. Clearly that answer can’t be “never,” because then even defensive wars would be impossible. And it can’t be “whenever,” because that would be the very antithesis of lawful government. As F. A. Hayek wrote, “if a law gave the government unlimited power to act as it pleased, all its actions would be legal, but it would certainly not be under the rule of law” (p. 205).
The answer must be “sometimes”—but which times are those? In wartime? In peacetime? Against aliens? What about citizens? What role do the courts play? And what about the legislature?
In answer to these questions, Cato Unbound lead essayist Ryan Alford draws on the Anglo-American constitutional...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4911462</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jun 2011 15:12:38 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4911462</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The War on Cameras Continues</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4911463&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F0PcEnxSQ3rI%2F</link>
            <description>By David RittgersHigh drama in Miami. Carlos Miller provides a good summary (H/T Radley):
Miami Beach police did their best to destroy a citizen video that shows them shooting a man to death in a hail of bullets Memorial Day.
First, police pointed their guns at the man who shot the video, according to a Miami Herald interview with the videographer.
Then they ordered the man and his girlfriend out the car and threw them down to the ground, yelling “you want to be f.ing paparazzi?”
Then they snatched the cell phone from his hand and slammed it to the ground before stomping on it. Then they placed the smashed phone in the videographer&amp;#8217;s back pocket as he was laying down on the ground.
And finally, they took him to a mobile command center where they snapped his photo and demanded the...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4911463</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jun 2011 14:36:31 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4911463</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Government Control of Language and Other Protocols</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4902405&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FI8niYC-xAnE%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperIt might be tempting to laugh at France&amp;#8217;s ban on words like &amp;#8220;Facebook&amp;#8221; and Twitter&amp;#8221; in the media. France’s Conseil Supérieur de l&amp;#8217;Audiovisuel recently ruled that specific references to these sites (in stories not about them) would violate a 1992 law banning &amp;#8220;secret&amp;#8221; advertising. The council was created in 1989 to ensure fairness in French audiovisual communications, such as in allocation of television time to political candidates, and to protect children from some types of programming.
Sure, laugh at the French. But not for too long. The United States has similarly busy-bodied regulators, who, for example, have primly regulated such advertising themselves. American regulators carefully oversee non-secret advertising, too. Our govern...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4902405</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2011 16:35:53 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4902405</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Former Prosecutor: DOJ Keeps Pharma In The Dark</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4902692&amp;cid=t_100671_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F-n8abnKML2w%2F</link>
            <description>In a recent memo to clients, former US Attorney and healthcare fraud prosecutor Michael Loucks argues that qui tam, or whistleblower lawsuits should be unsealed after 60 days. Why? The average suit remains under seal for about 13 months which, he maintains, is unfair to drug and device makers that remain unaware of the allegations.
&amp;#8220;Very few companies have sought to force the government at an early stage to disclose the False Claims Act suit. Thus, companies have defended investigations without the benefit of the discovery and litigation rights accorded litigants in federal civil suits and without the ability to correct any misconduct identified in the (False Claims Act) complaint, and have typically allowed the matter to be resolved on the government’s timetable,&amp;#8221; he writes,...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4902692</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2011 16:20:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4902692</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Unanimous Supreme Court Vindicates Market-Based Fees for Civil Rights Claims</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4902406&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F6ndcmZQKaWo%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroIt hasn&amp;#8217;t happened that much under my watch, but it&amp;#8217;s gratifying when the Supreme Court overwhelmingly endorses Cato&amp;#8217;s position in a given case.  Not a 5-4 split dependent on what Justice Kennedy had for breakfast or some narrow &amp;#8220;win&amp;#8221; that doesn&amp;#8217;t reach the issues we care most about, but a solid across-the-board victory for our first principles.
But such was the case in Justice Kagan&amp;#8217;s (!) opinion for a unanimous Court in Fox v. Vice, in which Cato filed a brief last December that I discussed here:
Private lawsuits challenging government violation of civil rights are notoriously difficult and expensive to bring and win. To address such impediments to the vindication of civil rights, Congress passed a law that, among other thi...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4902406</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2011 15:21:59 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4902406</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Cash Rewards For Failing Schools, the Lawsuit Way</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4893403&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FiK60lDYB1B0%2F</link>
            <description>By Walter OlsonI see the editorialists of the New York Times have rhapsodically hailed last week&amp;#8217;s 3-2 New Jersey Supreme Court opinion striking down the budget-trimming plans of Gov. Chris Christie. As the press reported, the court ordered instead that an extra $500 million in state funds be allocated to some of the state&amp;#8217;s poorest-performing school districts &amp;#8212; the so-called Abbott districts, named after the three-decade-running New Jersey school finance litigation, Abbott v. Burke. 
It&amp;#8217;s too bad the editorial said nothing about the report five years ago in which one leading newspaper surveyed the wreckage done by the then-25-year-old litigation, which it called an &amp;#8220;ambitious court-ordered social experiment.&amp;#8221; (At that point, $35 billion in state tax mon...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4893403</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jun 2011 19:40:14 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4893403</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Due Process Stops at the Campus Gates?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4893405&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FBGwwH_nACTM%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroPeople in the D.C. area maye be familiar with the tragic tale of Fairfax teacher Sean Lanigan, who was falsely accused of sexual molestation, resulting in termination and a destroyed reputation.  As pointed out by friend of Cato and Cato Supreme Court Review contributor Hans Bader, however, the Department of Education is pushing a policy that would allow for more Sean Lanigans, even in cases not involving anything close to rape or molestation:
If the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights has its way, more teachers like him will end up being fired even if they are acquitted by a jury of any wrongdoing.  It sent a letter to school officials on April 4 ordering them to lower the burden of proof they use when determining whether students or staff are guilt...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4893405</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jun 2011 19:22:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4893405</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Report: ‘The Global War on Drugs Has Failed’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4893410&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FxkW1ceqwI50%2F</link>
            <description>This report is certainly going to receive a lot of media coverage in the upcoming days. It is, until now, the highest profile endorsement of drug policy reform that we have seen at a global level. And, by having Prime Minister Papandreou as one of the signatories, it offers the hope that other top office holders will also call for an end to the failed war on drugs.
Report: &amp;#8216;The Global War on Drugs Has Failed&amp;#8217; is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4893410</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jun 2011 15:27:54 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4893410</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>“But He’s Our Imperial President”</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4893413&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FrydOQNq3g4U%2F</link>
            <description>By Gene HealyMy Washington Examiner column today closes out a three-part series this week on &amp;#8220;Obama&amp;#8217;s Imperial Presidency&amp;#8221; (also running at Reason.com). Tuesday&amp;#8217;s column covered Obama&amp;#8217;s expansion of executive power abroad, and Wednesday&amp;#8217;s looked at the ways in which Obama has turned the Imperial Presidency inward against the private sector.
Today&amp;#8217;s column begins with a recap of the powers 44 holds:
Abroad, Obama claims the power to start wars at will; scoop up your email and phone records without answering to a judge; assassinate you via drone strike far from any battlefield, and &amp;#8212; should your relatives complain &amp;#8212; keep the whole thing secret in the name of national security.
At home, Obama has summarily fired the CEO of General Motors, ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4893413</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jun 2011 14:11:38 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4893413</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Herman Cain and Individualism</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4893418&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FDZAFkJTEtHQ%2F</link>
            <description>By Emily EkinsMany political pundits have dismissed presidential hopeful Herman Cain as a long shot. However, coinciding with a Washington Post exclusive of the recently announced presidential candidate, a new IBOPE Zogby Interactive Poll shows Herman Cain, businessman and radio talk show host, edging out other leading GOP presidential candidates among Republican primary voters. Cain garnered 19% of vote, the plurality response, finally surpassing Governor Chris Christie who received 16% of the vote. A new Gallup poll shows Herman Cain with the leading Positive Intensity Score among potential GOP contenders at 25%, among those who recognize him. His name recognition has jumped from 21% in March to 37% in May.
Cain began receiving substantial media attention due to his popularity with the T...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4893418</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2011 21:10:44 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4893418</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Plaintiffs Should Be Cautiously Optimistic about Latest Obamacare Appeal</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4893419&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FnXbjPkLiTjY%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroCINCINNATI &amp;#8212; Now for something completely different, and not just because the spirited Sixth Circuit judges were much more skeptical of the government&amp;#8217;s position than the Fourth Circuit was last month. Unlike the panel in Richmond &amp;#8212; Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli probably started outlining his cert petition as soon as court adjourned &amp;#8212; here there will be at least one vote to strike down the individual mandate, and maybe even all three. And this panel should produce one or more opinions in which there will be much for the Supreme Court to grapple with.
The appellate argument didn&amp;#8217;t even begin until after a skirmish over standing provoked by the motion to dismiss the government filed last week. That mini-argument &amp;#8212; what Judge Marti...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4893419</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2011 20:19:32 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4893419</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Abandoned Minds: Social Justice, Civil Rights and Mental Health: Part 2</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4893559&amp;cid=t_100671_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2011%2F06%2F01%2Fabandoned-minds-social-justice-civil-rights-and-mental-health-part-2%2F</link>
            <description>The first duty of love is to listen. 
&amp;#8211; Paul Tillich
Love is no assignment for cowards.
 &amp;#8212; Ovid
In part 1 of this piece I described the atrocities at Willowbrook State School as the cause for changes in the delivery of mental health services in the U.S.  Elsewhere I have described some of the changes in state and federal law surrounding terminology used to describe disabled individuals, and a comparison between the U.S. and the delivery of mental health services in New Zealand. But these descriptions are only the macro version of the movement.  There is another side to this story, a personal side.
In preparation for a forthcoming book I arranged to talk to a very unique couple. On December 15th, 2010 I got to meet two extraordinary people, Michael and Amy (not their real name...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4893559</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2011 18:50:34 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4893559</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Waterboarding, Again</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4883554&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fsi7L_NQ6gjc%2F</link>
            <description>By David RittgersI have an article in today’s Los Angeles Times pointing out that waterboarding is dead as a tool for U.S. interrogators. So get over it. I also make the point that it died under Bush’s watch, so the next time Dick Cheney trots out a proposal to bring back waterboarding, he’s quarreling mostly with his old boss and not the current commander-in-chief. Over at the Washington Post, Allen McDuffee thinks this is unfair:
It may well be the case that Cheney has unfinished business with Bush over dropping the so-called enhanced interrogation techniques, but it is at least a selective reading for Rittgers to suggest that Cheney’s words are not directed at Obama with the hope that they carry political consequences for the administration. It is unlikely that even Cheney himse...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4883554</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 31 May 2011 20:39:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4883554</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Presidents Should Obey the Law</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4883560&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fab1C-zrG_-0%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazIn Star Wars III: Revenge of the Sith, when Chancellor Palpatine transforms the republic into an empire, Senator Amidala remarks:
So this is how liberty dies . . . with thunderous applause.
But it can also happen in silent acquiescence. For decades now, successive Congresses have evaded their responsibility to make decisions about the deployment of U.S. armed forces abroad. I write about the latest instance of this, in Libya, in today&amp;#8217;s Britannica column:
Presidents have an obligation to obey the Constitution and the law. But one of the ways that separation of powers works is that each branch of government is supposed to jealously guard its prerogatives from usurpation by the other branches. Too often Congress ducks that responsibility, preferring to let presidents make ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4883560</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 31 May 2011 14:30:57 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4883560</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Remembering Those Who Died for Us, 2011</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4883677&amp;cid=t_100671_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2011%2F05%2F30%2Fremembering-those-who-died-for-us-2011%2F</link>
            <description>It&amp;#8217;s hard to repay the debt of a human life. Yet today in the United States, we remember those who died for us, fighting in wars to keep our freedoms safe from those who would take them away from us.
War still rages around us, soldiers still fight today. And every month, soldiers die fighting for us. For our democracy. For our country.
I&amp;#8217;m not sure how to repay that debt. All I can do is remember and give thanks to those who fell in battle, because without their sacrifice, I&amp;#8217;m not sure I&amp;#8217;d be here living in one of the world&amp;#8217;s greatest democracies.
Memorial Day&amp;#8217;s roots can be traced back to the Civil War, when people who honor those who fought in that bloody war by decorating the graves of the dead. After WWI, it was expanded to recognize the sacrifices g...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4883677</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 30 May 2011 12:26:30 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4883677</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>“If He Approve, He Shall Sign It…”</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4872059&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FWnb5aAt27lM%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperThe Patriot Act extension passed by Congress this week did not become the law of the land. It is void and without effect.
So may argue some future defendant whose conviction rests on evidence gotten under Patriot Act powers during the extended period Congress sought to establish in the bill it passed this week.
President Obama is at a meeting in Europe, so he had the bill signed by auto-pen. Representative Tom Graves (R-GA) has written a letter inquiring of the president whether he was presented the bill and truly intended to sign it.
Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution says:
Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4872059</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 27 May 2011 19:50:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4872059</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Atlas Bugged: Why the “Secret Law” of the Patriot Act Is Probably About Location Tracking</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4872060&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FT5PxUyB1Bis%2F</link>
            <description>By Julian SanchezBarack Obama&amp;#8217;s AutoPen has signed another four-year extension of three Patriot Act powers, but one silver lining of this week&amp;#8217;s lopsided battle over the law is that mainstream papers like The New York Times have finally started to take note of the growing number of senators who have raised an alarm over a &amp;#8220;secret interpretation&amp;#8221; of Patriot&amp;#8217;s &amp;#8220;business records&amp;#8221; authority (aka Section 215). It would appear to be linked to a &amp;#8220;sensitive collection program&amp;#8221; referenced by a Justice Department official at hearings during the previous reauthorization debate—one that would be disrupted if 215 orders were restricted to the records of suspected terrorists, their associates, or their &amp;#8220;activities&amp;#8221; (e.g., large purchase...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4872060</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 27 May 2011 17:25:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4872060</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>‘Wait and Hurry Up’ in Debate over Patriot Act</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4872062&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FUybl8BQy8rI%2F</link>
            <description>By Caleb O. Brown
If Senate leaders believed that expiring portions of the Patriot Act constituted an immediate increase in the risk of terrorism, it&amp;#8217;s amazing that they waited until now to even nod toward debating the law&amp;#8217;s renewal. A few thoughts from Cato Research Fellow Julian Sanchez on the current Patriot Act debate ripped from today&amp;#8217;s podcast:
&amp;#8230; Democrats have had no interest in pointing out how closely President Obama has followed the playbook written by George (W.) Bush. And of course Republicans are the ones who helped write that playbook, so they don&amp;#8217;t have much interest in revisiting it.
On Section 215 of the Patriot Act:
It seems extremely likely from what we know so far that this business records authority has been transformed into a large-scale ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4872062</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 26 May 2011 21:32:50 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4872062</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Manufactured Panic over Patriot Act</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4872066&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fb0SjQG99-84%2F</link>
            <description>By Julian SanchezTo judge by the hysterical statements issuing from elected officials—not to mention the breathless press coverage—you&amp;#8217;d think the three little-used Patriot Act provisions set to expire unless reauthorized today are like the doomsday timer from the TV show Lost: Fail just once to keep pushing the reset button and some unspecified catastrophe is sure to result!  Under the headline &amp;#8220;Patriot Act Battle Could Hinder Investigators,&amp;#8221; the New York Times quotes an alarmed anonymous official calling it &amp;#8220;unprecedented&amp;#8221; and warning that &amp;#8220;no one could predict what the consequences of a temporary lapse might be.&amp;#8221; The Washington Post agrees with the need for reform, but editorializes that &amp;#8220;[at] this late hour, it is most important to e...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4872066</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 26 May 2011 18:26:08 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4872066</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Notice of Court Orders Is Important in Death Penalty Cases</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4862503&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FuZCuZ559vDU%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroThe representation of prisoners accused of capital crimes is unique in its difficulty &amp;#8212; and in the consequences &amp;#8212; when that representation is inadequate. Maples v. Thomas, which will be argued before the Supreme Court this fall, exposes some of the serious cracks in the system charged with representing indigent defendants in such cases.   
Cato takes no position on the merits of the death penalty other than that the Constitution does not prohibit it and that our justice system is responsible for, at the very least, ensuring that prisoners receive fair notice of orders on which their lives depend.  Both the courts and counsel failed Cory Maples here. 
Maples was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death for killing two companions.  After a ser...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4862503</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 25 May 2011 20:38:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4862503</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Federalism and Med-Mal Reform</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4862513&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FmGTytT7-JcU%2F</link>
            <description>By Walter OlsonThanks to star libertarian lawprof and Cato senior fellow Randy Barnett for pointing out something that has needed saying for a while: most proposals in the U.S. Congress to address medical malpractice law run into serious federalism problems.
Most medical malpractice suits go forward in state courts under state law. If the U.S. Congress wishes to impose a nationwide rule on these suits, such as by limiting damages for pain and suffering, it first needs to answer the question: under which of the federal government&amp;#8217;s constitutionally prescribed powers is it acting? Even if it can identify such authority, it should also ask: is it a wise idea—consistent with what one might call a prudential federalism—to gather yet more power in Washington at the expense of the state...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4862513</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 24 May 2011 19:43:47 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4862513</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Once More Into the Obamacare Breach</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4862517&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FnTdj5fmNkq8%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroToday we filed Cato’s sixth brief supporting the various legal challenges to Obamacare, this time in the D.C. Circuit.  Like Tom Joad, wherever the fight has been, we’ve been there, and now it’s in our backyard.
In February, Judge Gladys Kessler of the D.C. district court granted Congress the power to regulate “mental activity” in a decision that flippantly disregarded the core distinction between action and inaction: “Making a choice is an affirmative action, whether one decides to do something or not do something.”  The frightening scope of that opinion has proven more harmful than helpful to the government, which has shifted its focus away from Kessler’s sweeping language by describing the mandate as merely a requirement that people pre-pay for the healt...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4862517</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 23 May 2011 21:07:18 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4862517</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Supreme Court and the California Prison System</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4852839&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fr-54cWzkD4s%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchThis morning the Supreme Court issued a remarkable ruling [pdf] concerning California&amp;#8217;s prison system.   Because of years of pervasive overcrowding, there have been systemic violations of the Constitution&amp;#8217;s ban on Cruel and Unusual Punishments.  To remedy those violations, the Court affirmed a lower court order to reduce the prison population.  I was not surprised to learn that Justice Anthony Kennedy authored the majority opinion in this case, Brown v. Plata. In a 2003 speech to the American Bar Association (reprinted in my book In the Name of Justice), Kennedy tried to raise more awareness about America&amp;#8217;s prison system.  He made the point that every citizen ought to take an interest in the prison system&amp;#8211;it is not just the realm of correctional...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4852839</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 23 May 2011 19:01:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4852839</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Abandoned Minds: Social Justice, Civil Rights and Mental Health – Part 1</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4852936&amp;cid=t_100671_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2011%2F05%2F23%2Fabandoned-minds-social-justice-civil-rights-and-mental-health-part-1%2F</link>
            <description>“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” &amp;#8212; Edmund Burke
“What conditions?&amp;#8221; asked Rivera.
“In my building,” responded Wilkins, “there are sixty retarded kids with only one attendant to take care of them.  Most are naked and they lie in their own sh*t.&amp;#8221;
This exchange was from a telephone call from Dr. Wilkins, who had been fired from Willowbrook State School in Staten Island, New York. He and a coworker were fired for their concern for the welfare of the inhabitants.  The person they were talking to was a young television reporter: Geraldo Rivera.
On January 6th, 1972, Wilkins and Rivera met at a diner.  Wilkins still had the keys to many buildings, and the plan was set to bring in a camera crew to (illegally) film the...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4852936</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 23 May 2011 18:34:41 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4852936</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The End of the War Powers Resolution</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4847941&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FgJU0el81jTQ%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesToday is the 60th day since President Barack Obama notified Congress &amp;#8220;U.S. military forces commenced operations to assist an international effort authorized by the United Nations (U.N.) Security Council and undertaken with the support of European allies and Arab partners, to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe and address the threat posed to international peace and security by the crisis in Libya.&amp;#8221;
The War Powers Resolution of 1973 said that within 60 days of notifying the Congress of the use of force &amp;#8220;the President shall terminate the use of United States Armed Forces&amp;#8221; unless Congress has declared war or authorized the use of force, extended the 60 day period, or is physically unable to meet because the nation has been attacked.
President Obama has a...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4847941</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2011 20:32:46 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4847941</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Progress toward Marriage Equality</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4847942&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FAyfgsRw6vA0%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazThe Gallup Poll reports today, &amp;#8220;For the first time in Gallup&amp;#8217;s tracking of the issue, a majority of Americans (53%) believe same-sex marriage should be recognized by the law as valid, with the same rights as traditional marriages.&amp;#8221;
Here&amp;#8217;s the history of Gallup&amp;#8217;s polling on the issue:

Gallup notes that the shift results from a substantial increase in support among Democrats and independents in the past year, but support among Republicans didn&amp;#8217;t budge from 28 percent. The most striking number, though, is that support among young people 18-34 soared from 54 to 70 percent, mostly reflecting a shift among men, who are now almost as supportive as women.
The new poll comes just two days after Cato&amp;#8217;s forum, &amp;#8220;The Case for Marriage Equali...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4847942</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2011 18:51:38 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4847942</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>UPDATE: Liu Cloture Fails</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4841429&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FdPEE57zMGPY%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroThis morning I outlined the stakes of today&amp;#8217;s seminal cloture vote on Goodwin&amp;#8217;s Liu&amp;#8217;s nomination to the Ninth Circuit.  Well, now we have a result: cloture failed 52-43, with Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE) joining all voting Republicans except Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) against cloture. Three Republicans plus Max Baucus (D-MT) were absent, while Orrin Hatch (R-UT) voted present because of his previous strong position against filibusters.
This is the first judicial nominee filibustered since the Gang of 14 brokered an agreement on President Bush&amp;#8217;s nominees in 2005, forestalling then-Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist&amp;#8217;s use of the so-called nuclear option (changing Senate rules to eliminate the judicial filibuster).  That agreement, to the extent it&amp;#821...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4841429</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 19 May 2011 19:21:57 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4841429</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>What Did Orwell Say?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4841431&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FmJzoGRuj-4U%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesSteve Simpson and Paul Sherman of the Institute for Justice have written an excellent short essay about Stephen Colbert&amp;#8217;s effort to undermine the Citizens United decision. But the joke is on Colbert:
Campaign-finance laws are so complicated that few can navigate them successfully and speak during elections—which is what the First Amendment is supposed to protect. As the Supreme Court noted in Citizens United, federal laws have created &amp;#8220;71 distinct entities&amp;#8221; that &amp;#8220;are subject to different rules for 33 different types of political speech.&amp;#8221; The FEC has adopted 568 pages of regulations and thousands of pages of explanations and opinions on what the laws mean. &amp;#8220;Legalese&amp;#8221; doesn&amp;#8217;t begin to describe this mess.
So what is someone who...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4841431</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 19 May 2011 18:33:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4841431</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>If You Liked Obamacare, You’ll Love Goodwin Liu</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4841434&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FiDmHMIWnrtg%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroLater today the Senate is set for a &amp;#8220;cloture&amp;#8221; vote &amp;#8212; the vote to end debate, for which you need 60 votes &amp;#8212; on the nomination of Berkeley law professor Goodwin Liu to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.  I&amp;#8217;m not going to weigh in here on the issue of whether judicial nominees ought to be filibustered in general &amp;#8212; or if the Republicans ought to be the first to foreswear the tactic even without a guarantee that Democrats would do likewise in the future &amp;#8212; but if ever there were an &amp;#8220;extraordinary circumstance&amp;#8221; fitting into the Gang of 14 agreement that broke the judicial logjam under President Bush, this is it.
As I blogged last year, Liu is, without exaggeration, the most radical nominee to any position tha...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4841434</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 19 May 2011 13:05:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4841434</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>President Obama’s ‘War on Fun’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4841442&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FFZ_BziKOzgc%2F</link>
            <description>By Gene HealyMy DC Examiner column this week focuses on Barack Obama&amp;#8217;s transformation into our National Noodge, nudging, shoving, poking and prodding Americans into healthier lifestyles via the powers of the federal government. 
A year ago, the New York Times got all excited about the &amp;#8220;new age of regulation&amp;#8221; the administration was busy ushering in. The president had elevated “a new breed of regulators&amp;#8221;: folks like regulatory czar Cass Sunstein, who wants to “nudge” Americans toward healthier consumption choices, and CDC head Thomas Frieden, who, as NYC health commissioner, proclaimed ”when anyone dies at an early age from a preventable cause in New York City, it&amp;#8217;s my fault.”
Today&amp;#8217;s column tracks how this killjoy crusade is playing out: 
Quitti...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4841442</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2011 17:56:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4841442</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>This Time They Said, ‘We’re Going’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4841448&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FnlYx76dXyj8%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazTwo weeks ago I wrote about the documentary &amp;#8220;Stonewall Uprising&amp;#8221; and the line from a police official that caught my attention:
“This time they said, ‘We’re not going.’”
That’s how Seymour Pine of the New York Police Department’s Morals Division described the raid he led on the Stonewall Inn in New York’s Greenwich Village on June 28, 1969, and the unprecedented refusal of the gay men in the bar to hang their heads in shame and go silently into the paddy wagons. The “Stonewall riots” that resulted are generally regarded as the beginning of the gay rights movement in the United States.
Last night on PBS&amp;#8217;s &amp;#8220;American Experience,&amp;#8221; I saw another excellent documentary, &amp;#8220;Freedom Riders,&amp;#8221; about the white and black civil rig...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4841448</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2011 13:46:59 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4841448</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Top NSA Mathematician: ‘I should apologize to the American people. It’s violated everyone’s rights.’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4828847&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FMRNpqSh8qcs%2F</link>
            <description>By Julian SanchezIf you&amp;#8217;re a telecommunications firm that helped the National Security Agency illegally spy on your customers without a court order, Sen. Barack Obama will happily vote for legislation he once promised to filibuster in order to secure retroactive immunity. If you&amp;#8217;re implicated in the use of torture as an interrogation tactic, you can breathe easy knowing President Barack Obama thinks it&amp;#8217;s in the country&amp;#8217;s best interests to &amp;#8220;look forward, not back.&amp;#8221;  But if you were a government official spurred by conscience to blow the whistle on government malfeasance or ineptitude in the war on terror?  As Jane Mayer details in a must-read New Yorker article, you&amp;#8217;d better watch out! This administration is shattering records for highly selective...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4828847</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 16 May 2011 22:17:42 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4828847</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Ron Paul on the General Welfare Clause</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4828849&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FqX-jd6IVntY%2F</link>
            <description>By Roger PilonNow that Rep. Ron Paul is again a presidential candidate, his constitutional views will come under increasing scrutiny, as happened yesterday when he was interviewed by Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday. Not surprisingly, critics immediately leapt on Paul’s “crankish view” that Social Security, Medicare, and other such programs are unconstitutional. Even Wallace seemed taken aback, citing the document’s General Welfare Clause:
The Congress shall have the Power to lay and collect Taxes … to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United  States.
“Doesn’t Social Security come under promoting the general welfare of the United States?” Wallace asked, incredulously.
One does not have to agree with everything Paul has said or stood...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4828849</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 16 May 2011 20:06:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4828849</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Kentucky v. King</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4828851&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FEGhpVChcOhQ%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchAwful ruling handed down by the Supreme Court this morning in a case called Kentucky v. King [pdf].  The case concerns the power to break into a person&amp;#8217;s home without the occupant&amp;#8217;s consent and without a warrant.  Our homes are supposed to be our castles&amp;#8211;so the general rule is that the police must get an independent judge to approve a warrant application before the door can be forced open.  There are a few common sense exceptions to the general rule.  For example, if someone is screaming for help, the police can enter.  Also if the police are in hot pursuit, they can follow the suspect on to private property and into a home under such circumstances.  Today&amp;#8217;s ruling expands the exceptions to situations where the police suspect that the occupants o...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4828851</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 16 May 2011 19:14:24 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4828851</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>What the Tea Party Hath Wrought?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4828856&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FRs9Wy_iJqXs%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesThe Internal Revenue Service is investigating campaign donations to groups incorporated under 501(c)(4) of the tax code. Some in the IRS apparently hope to apply gift taxes to the contributions.
Higher taxes on an activity would generally lead to less of that activity, especially if a good substitute exists that is not taxed. In this case, donors could give money to 527 groups. Such donations are exempt from taxation. But 527 groups are subject to disclosure of donors.
The IRS investigations involve tax provisions &amp;#8220;that had rarely, if ever, been enforced.&amp;#8221; Why now? We do not know. But 501(c)(4) groups played in a important part in the 2010 campaign. As you know, the party in power lost control of the House of Representatives in 2010.  With the president&amp;#8217;...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4828856</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 16 May 2011 14:53:51 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4828856</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Gerson Gets It Wrong Again</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4828857&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FhzHPoibVVBQ%2F</link>
            <description>By Edward H. CraneMichael Gerson’s predictable, reflexive attack on Rep. Ron Paul in his May 10 op-ed in the WaPo for Paul’s sensible stand in favor of ending the futile crusade called the War on Drugs, makes a curious argument.  He asserts that there is a “de facto decriminalization of drugs” in Washington, D.C.  Curious, because there are few places in the nation where the drug war is waged more vigorously.  Doesn’t seem to be working, does it?
Yet Gerson would expand the effort.  Never mind that the social pathologies in the District for which Gerson’s compassionate conservative heart bleeds are mainly a result of making drugs illegal:  Turf wars with innocents caught in the crossfire; children quitting school to sell drugs because of the artificially high prices prohib...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4828857</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 16 May 2011 14:46:31 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4828857</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>House Approps Strips TSA of Strip-Search Funds</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4820809&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FwNPlaBvH9Rs%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperThe fiscal 2012 Department of Homeland Security spending bill is starting to make its way through the process, and the House Appropriations Committee said in a release today that &amp;#8220;the bill does not provide $76 million requested by the President for 275 additional advanced inspection technology (AIT) scanners nor the 535 staff requested to operate them.&amp;#8221;
If the House committee&amp;#8217;s approach carries the day, there won&amp;#8217;t be 275 more strip-search machines in our nation&amp;#8217;s airports. No word on whether the committee will defund the operations of existing strip-search machines.
Saving money and reducing privacy invasion? Sounds like a win-win.
House Approps Strips TSA of Strip-Search Funds is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4820809</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 13 May 2011 19:04:39 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4820809</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Life of One’s Own</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4820815&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fy8gddXuGRv8%2F</link>
            <description>By Trevor BurrusSince Tuesday’s oral arguments in Virginia v. Sebelius—the first Obamacare challenge to reach the circuit court level, and one in which Cato also filed an amicus brief—the legal blogosphere has been discussing the Fourth Circuit panel’s incredulity concerning the activity/inactivity distinction at the heart of our arguments against Obamacare. As Ilya Shapiro explains, we contend that if Congress’s power to regulate “interstate commerce” reaches the inactivity of not buying health insurance, then there is nothing it does not reach. The Supreme Court will eventually have to grapple with this question and decide whether the distinction is constitutionally meaningful.
As Volokh conspirator Jonathan Adler points out, the activity/inactivity distinction is long-stan...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4820815</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 13 May 2011 16:25:57 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4820815</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Righting the Balance</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4820820&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FSjfmZ01Qsro%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperIn 1913, the Seventeenth Amendment cut an important tie in the Constitution between state legislatures and the Congress. In the original Constitution, states were empowered to choose the senators who would represent them in Congress. The result? Senators had an allegiance to the state government as much as the people of the state they represented.
Why does this matter? Well, today&amp;#8212;with direct, popular election of senators&amp;#8212;there isn&amp;#8217;t much of anyone looking after state legislatures in Congress. Accordingly, the federal government continually tries to turn states into administrative outposts of the federal government rather than respecting them as the independent political powers they&amp;#8217;re supposed to be.
In program after program, remote federal officials s...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4820820</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 13 May 2011 14:40:11 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4820820</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Defense Authorization Bill Is Awful</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4820821&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FQ-ymWDORPMA%2F</link>
            <description>By Benjamin H. FriedmanIf you like bloated nuclear arsenals, executive discretion to wage endless war, large checks to countries that aid our enemies, and institutionalizing hostility toward gays in the military, you will love the defense authorization bill passed yesterday by the House Armed Services Committee. Below are the lowlights. For slightly better news from the Appropriations Committee on homeland security spending, skip to the end.

The bill contains a provision replacing the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force against the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks and their hosts. The Committee evidently found that legislation, which the last two administrations have used to justify all manner of power grabs, insufficiently open-ended. They add groups “affiliated” with al Qae...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4820821</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 13 May 2011 11:14:55 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4820821</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Activity vs. Inactivity</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4820825&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FswyzFX-ekUk%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroThe challenge to the constitutionality of the individual mandate &amp;#8212; Obamacare&amp;#8217;s central feature, without which the whole regulatory scheme collapses (practically speaking, though I agree with Judge Vinson that it also can&amp;#8217;t be severed as a matter of law) &amp;#8211; boils down to whether, under modern constitutional doctrine regarding what Congress can do under the guise of regulating interstate commerce, the government can force &amp;#8220;inactive&amp;#8221; people into a particular action, namely buying health insurance.
That is, while cases like Wickard  (Congress can force farmer to meet quota and bring crops to market) and Raich (Congress can stop wholly intrastate growth and consumption of marijuana) &amp;#8212; moving from wheat to weed &amp;#8212; are disconcertin...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4820825</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 12 May 2011 19:46:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4820825</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Cato’s Latest Obamacare Brief</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4813240&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F79MDcj0AWYs%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroAs I noted yesterday, Obamacare is moving towards its inevitable date with the Supreme Court.  Although the pace may be aggravating, attorneys on both sides are strengthening their arguments and clarifying the issues presented.
Cato&amp;#8217;s latest brief, filed today in the Eleventh Circuit in support of 26 states and the National Federation of Independent Business, sharpens the position we already expressed in briefs filed in the Fourth Circuit and the Sixth Circuit.  Our focus remains the question of whether the Constitution authorizes Congress to mandate that individuals purchase health insurance or suffer a fine.
The government has subtly shifted its thinking at this stage, however, to argue that the individual mandate does not so much compel &amp;#8220;inactive&amp;#8221; cit...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4813240</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 11 May 2011 21:07:25 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4813240</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Ban on Farm-Filming?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4813244&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F3iJmsTK7tXA%2F</link>
            <description>By Walter OlsonAnimal-welfare activists have scored much publicity success by releasing hidden-camera videos that they say document the mistreatment of animals at farms and slaughterhouses. Now, at the behest of farm interests, lawmakers in Iowa, Florida, and Minnesota are proposing laws seeking to criminalize the making and even possession of such videos. According to the New York Times, the Iowa bill, which has passed the lower house of the legislature in Des Moines:
would make it a crime to produce, distribute or possess photos and video taken without permission at an agricultural facility. It would also criminalize lying on an application to work at an agriculture facility “with an intent to commit an act not authorized by the owner.&amp;#8221;
From a libertarian perspective, there&amp;#8217...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4813244</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 11 May 2011 18:48:40 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4813244</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Law Professors against “Tyrannophobia”</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4813248&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FjvfxlWlE_Rw%2F</link>
            <description>By Gene HealyOver at the American Conservative, I have a review of Eric Posner and Adrian Vermuele&amp;#8217;s new book Executive Unbound: After the Madisonian Republic. Funny enough, the working title for my book on presidential power was &amp;#8220;Executive Unbound,&amp;#8221; but P&amp;V have a very different take on the dangers of concentrating power in the executive (they coin the term &amp;#8220;tyrannophobia,&amp;#8221; for irrational fear of executive abuse).
From the review&amp;#8217;s intro:
The New York Times book editors assigned their review to the Straussian political philosopher Harvey Mansfield, the self-styled expert on “manliness” who’s as rabid a supporter of the imperial presidency as you’re likely to find. In the late Bush era, Mansfield wrote a 3,000-word Wall Street Journal op-ed, ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4813248</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 11 May 2011 16:30:24 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4813248</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Want Privacy? Nevermind. We Want to Censor!</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4813258&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FBZvbCdFqdd0%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperSenator Chuck Schumer rounds out a trifecta of bloggable moments from the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law&amp;#8217;s hearing this morning.
Ignoring the subject of the &amp;#8220;mobile privacy&amp;#8221; hearing, Schumer queried the witnesses from both Google and Apple on whether they will accede to his demand that they reject certain &amp;#8220;apps&amp;#8221; on Android phones and iPhones. The applications Senator Schumer dislikes alert people on their mobile phones to the locations of DUI checkpoints.
Senator Schumer says these apps &amp;#8220;allow drunk drivers to evade police checkpoints,&amp;#8221; but that statement fails to include other parties who might rightly wish to avoid police checkpoints—such as law-abiding citizens who wish to live free in this count...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4813258</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 10 May 2011 19:23:55 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4813258</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Yes, Says Virginia, There Are Limits on Federal Power</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4813260&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FTRqxGl4BsSo%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroToday, the Fourth Circuit became the first appellate court in the nation to enter the Obamacare fray.  It heard two very similar cases back-to-back, Liberty University’s, in which the government won in the district court, and the Commonwealth of Virginia’s, in which Judge Henry Hudson struck down the individual mandate back in December.  Going into the hearing, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli’s legal team had done a wonderful job setting out the reasons why Hudson was correct and why Congress went too far in asserting the unprecedented power to compel people to enter into contracts with private insurance companies.  I was proud to sign Cato’s brief supporting that position and continue to maintain that the federal government cannot require people to buy g...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4813260</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 10 May 2011 17:57:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4813260</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Domestic Military Detention Isn’t Necessary</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4813264&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FcjyuOJ8FHdw%2F</link>
            <description>By David RittgersI make the case that domestic military detention for all terrorism suspects isn’t necessary in this piece over at the Huffington Post. Legislative proposals by Rep. Buck McKeon (R-CA) and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) would mandate military detention instead of criminal prosecution for all those suspected of international terrorism. I oppose this policy change for reasons both principled and practical:
If the civil rule of law handles terrorist threats adequately, then invoking military jurisdiction is a counterproductive overreaction.
That was the case with one of the handful of domestically detained enemy combatants, Ali al-Marri. Al-Marri was an honest-to-goodness Al Qaeda sleeper agent masquerading as an exchange student. The FBI indicted him on charges that could have car...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4813264</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 10 May 2011 16:42:55 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4813264</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>What Immigration Reform Would Look Like</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4803043&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FSwr6hChLi_g%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroUtah&amp;#8217;s done it (great editorial in the WSJ):
Passed by the state&amp;#8217;s GOP legislature and signed by Republican Governor Gary Herbert in March, Utah&amp;#8217;s plan is notable because it&amp;#8217;s the first in the country that would allow undocumented immigrants to get a permit and work legally, after paying a fine of up to $2500 and meeting other conditions. The program is part of a larger package that includes increased scrutiny of immigrants who break the law. The compromise allows the state to address the economy&amp;#8217;s demand for workers—thus reducing the incentive for illegal immigration—while satisfying voters who don&amp;#8217;t want to reward those who arrived illegally.
Of course, states can&amp;#8217;t just announce their own guest-worker programs &amp;#8212; the fed...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4803043</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 09 May 2011 12:51:13 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4803043</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>When Fighting ObamaCare, the Pen is Mightier…</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4794838&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FMRTzWIEbjcU%2F</link>
            <description>By Trevor BurrusOn Wednesday, the opening brief for the 26 states challenging ObamaCare was filed in the Eleventh Circuit. Also filed was the brief for the co-plaintiff, the National Federation of Independent Business. (Ilya Shapiro previously blogged about the filings here.) The government is appealing from Judge Roger Vinson’s stirring decision striking down all of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). (An edited version of that decision is available here.)
Because the challenge to Obamacare is the most important constitutional question in many decades, and because the case will have substantial ramifications for the health of our citizens as well as the health of our system of supposedly limited government, Cato is breaking protocol (we usually just get involved at the Supreme Court level) a...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4794838</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 06 May 2011 21:33:51 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4794838</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Record Number of Americans Targeted by National Security Letters</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4794839&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FhDdAvmI6-T8%2F</link>
            <description>By Julian SanchezThe latest report to Congress on the Justice Department&amp;#8217;s use of foreign intelligence surveillance powers has just been released, and it shows a truly stunning increase in the number of Americans whose sensitive phone, Internet, and banking records were obtained by the FBI — without judicial oversight — pursuant to National Security Letters. In 2009, a total of 14,788 NSL requests were issued targeting U.S. persons — a number that excludes requests for &amp;#8220;basic subscriber information&amp;#8221; as opposed to phone or e-mail logs — and 6,114 different Americans were affected by those demands for information. In 2010, the number of NSL requests targeting Americans rose to 24,287.
What&amp;#8217;s really shocking, however, is the number of people affected. A whoppin...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4794839</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 06 May 2011 21:15:24 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4794839</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Boundless Executive State: From Global Warming to Sexual Harassment</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4794842&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FJ6syOWF1POU%2F</link>
            <description>By Roger PilonTwo days ago Cato held a book forum to mark the publication of an excellent new book, Climate Coup: Global Warming’s Invasion of Our Government and Our Lives, edited by Pat Michaels. I coauthored chapter one, which shows how the modern executive state arose over the 20th century such that today the Environmental Protection Agency is able to regulate vast areas of life without ever having to go to Congress for authority to do so. It’s a remarkable inversion of the Founders’ vision. With emphasis added, the very first sentence of the Constitution, after the Preamble, reads as follows: “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress …” — not in the executive branch, not in the courts, but in Congress. Yet today we are governed mainly by over 30...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4794842</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 06 May 2011 18:33:20 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4794842</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>On Prisoner Treatment and Interrogation</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4794846&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FtXrB8-L_WSI%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchMatthew Alexander, former senior military interrogator in Iraq, says the abuse and torture of prisoners hurt the U.S. by giving up the moral high ground.  He says the policy also helped al-Qaeda recruit and very likely slowed the effort to find bin Laden.

More here, here, and here.
On Prisoner Treatment and Interrogation is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4794846</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 06 May 2011 15:15:31 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4794846</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Drinking Away Your Constitutional Problems</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4789204&amp;cid=t_100671_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Ff29M-n7ufqw%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroSanta Clara law professor Brad Joondeph, who runs the very helpful &amp;#8212; as a primary document aggregator for all the Obamacare cases &amp;#8211;  ACA Litigation Blog, thinks he&amp;#8217;s stumbled onto something :
So after reading my roughly 500th ACA-litigation-related brief, motion, or filing of some sort, I think I have gotten a little punchy. But it occurs to me that a a great new drinking game for those ACA litigation buffs who sit around on Friday nights drinking beers &amp;#8212; a huge cohort, I am sure &amp;#8212; would be to read aloud briefs filed by the challengers, and take turns drinking when the word &amp;#8220;unprecedented&amp;#8221; is used.
Indeed, the argument that there is no Supreme Court precedent sanctioning the assertion of power the government claims  &amp;#8211; th...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4789204</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 06 May 2011 01:37:16 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4789204</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

