<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Newspaper in New York Suggest Lopez Torres May Yet Win Her U.S. Supreme Court Case</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/14/newspaper-in-new-york-suggest-lopez-torres-may-yet-win-her-us-supreme-court-case/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/14/newspaper-in-new-york-suggest-lopez-torres-may-yet-win-her-us-supreme-court-case/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 14:15:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3442</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anon</title>
		<link>http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/14/newspaper-in-new-york-suggest-lopez-torres-may-yet-win-her-us-supreme-court-case/comment-page-1/#comment-143699</link>
		<dc:creator>Anon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2007 14:24:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/14/newspaper-in-new-york-suggest-lopez-torres-may-yet-win-her-us-supreme-court-case/#comment-143699</guid>
		<description>The articleâ€™s drafter clearly did not attend oral argument.  I would not be shocked if the vote for reversal of the remedy included every single justice on the high court.  As things stand, the Brennan Center clearly lost 8 of the 9 judges (assuming Thomas votes with the other conservative justices).  The reasoning is simple.  While a worthy policy choice, the Brennan Center wants different roles (as stated by the petitioners) for the voters then provided by New York.  Further, most, if not all, of the problems identified by the Brennan Center do not relate to the law, but to the constitutionally-protected associational rights of the other participants in the process, such a party leaders supporting candidates.  Perhaps the Brennan Center and its supporters have points, but that is â€“ as Justice Stevens noted â€“ policy arguments not constitutional ones and that is a big difference.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The articleâ€™s drafter clearly did not attend oral argument.  I would not be shocked if the vote for reversal of the remedy included every single justice on the high court.  As things stand, the Brennan Center clearly lost 8 of the 9 judges (assuming Thomas votes with the other conservative justices).  The reasoning is simple.  While a worthy policy choice, the Brennan Center wants different roles (as stated by the petitioners) for the voters then provided by New York.  Further, most, if not all, of the problems identified by the Brennan Center do not relate to the law, but to the constitutionally-protected associational rights of the other participants in the process, such a party leaders supporting candidates.  Perhaps the Brennan Center and its supporters have points, but that is â€“ as Justice Stevens noted â€“ policy arguments not constitutional ones and that is a big difference.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob</title>
		<link>http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/14/newspaper-in-new-york-suggest-lopez-torres-may-yet-win-her-us-supreme-court-case/comment-page-1/#comment-139759</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2007 22:33:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/14/newspaper-in-new-york-suggest-lopez-torres-may-yet-win-her-us-supreme-court-case/#comment-139759</guid>
		<description>Tenuate, http://buytenuate.blogspot.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tenuate, <a href="http://buytenuate.blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">http://buytenuate.blogspot.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

