<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	<channel>
	<title>MetaFilter posts tagged with ACLU and law</title>
	<link>http://www.metafilter.com/tags/ACLU+law</link>
	<description>Posts tagged with 'ACLU' and 'law' at MetaFilter.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2007 21:43:50 -0800</pubDate> <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2007 21:43:50 -0800</lastBuildDate>

	<language>en-us</language>
	<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
	<ttl>60</ttl>
	<item>
		<title>Catherine Roraback</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/65854/Catherine%2DRoraback</link>
		<description> Catherine Roraback was the only woman in her class at Yale Law School. She was a founder of the Connecticut ACLU, and a president of the &lt;a href=&apos;http://www.nlg.org/&apos;&gt;National Lawyers Guild&lt;/a&gt;. During her long career she defended labor organizers, immigrants, civil rights organizers, Black Panthers, and maybe most famously, Estelle Griswold before the United States Supreme Court in the case that legalized the distribution of birth control. &lt;a href=&apos;http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/hc-curry1021.artoct21,0,6781397.column&apos;&gt;She died this week at age 87.&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&apos;http://www.cwhf.org/hall/roraback/roraback.htm&apos;&gt;One more bio&lt;/a&gt; and the &lt;a href=&apos;http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/20/nyregion/20roraback.html&apos;&gt;NYT obit&lt;/a&gt;. </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2007:site.65854</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2007 21:43:50 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>aclu</category>
		<category>feminist</category>
		<category>law</category>
		<category>lawyer</category>
		<category>nlg</category>
		<category>obit</category>
		<category>obituary</category>
		<category>roraback</category>
		<category>supremecourt</category>
		<dc:creator>serazin</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>The Limits of Free Speech in Schools</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/54305/The%2DLimits%2Dof%2DFree%2DSpeech%2Din%2DSchools</link>
		<description> From the &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Starr&quot;&gt;guy&lt;/a&gt; who brought you the Whitewater scandal and the &lt;a href=&quot;http://mediamatters.org/items/200412030011&quot;&gt;impeachment of President Clinton&lt;/a&gt; for lying about oval antics in the Oral Office, a legal push to make the Supreme Court &lt;a href=&quot;http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2006/08/27/from-cigars-to-bongs/&quot;&gt;just say no to &quot;Bong Hits 4 Jesus.&quot;&lt;/a&gt; Ken Starr&apos;s &lt;a href=&quot;http://wsj.com/public/resources/documents/JuneauSchoolBoardCertPetitionFINAL20060828.pdf&quot;&gt;petition to the Court [PDF]&lt;/a&gt; makes clear that Starr believes this is no laughing matter, but a chance for the Court to make a landmark ruling that will give school adminstrators the power to limit student speech: &quot;This case presents the Court with a much-needed  opportunity to resolve a sharp conflict among federal courts 
(and to eliminate confusion on the part of school boards, 
administrators, teachers, and students) over whether the First 
Amendment permits regulation of student speech when such 
speech is advocating or making light of illegal substances.&quot;  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2006:site.54305</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Aug 2006 09:46:40 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>ACLU</category>
		<category>bong</category>
		<category>civilliberties</category>
		<category>Clinton</category>
		<category>drugs</category>
		<category>FirstAmendment</category>
		<category>freespeech</category>
		<category>GOP</category>
		<category>law</category>
		<category>marijuana</category>
		<category>pot</category>
		<category>school</category>
		<category>Starr</category>
		<category>SupremeCourt</category>
		<category>Tinker</category>
		<category>Whitewater</category>
		<dc:creator>digaman</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>Using Big Laws to Catch Little Terrorists</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/50726/Using%2DBig%2DLaws%2Dto%2DCatch%2DLittle%2DTerrorists</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.dailyrecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060406/UPDATES01/604060359/1005/NEWS01"&gt;The terrorists in New Jersey have been captured.&lt;/a&gt; &lt;small&gt;They&apos;re, uhm, like 15 years old&lt;/small&gt;.  A fine example of how anti-terror laws like the Patriot Act can be subject to &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/09/28/MN25356.DTL&quot;&gt;mission&lt;/a&gt;   &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.infowars.com/articles/ps/patriot_act_email_searches_apply_non_terrorists.htm&quot;&gt;creep&lt;/a&gt;. (The &quot;terrorists&quot; at the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aclu.org/safefree/spyfiles/24790prs20060328.html&quot;&gt;Thomas Merton Center for Peace and Justice in Pittsburgh&lt;/a&gt; seem to be still at large.)  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2006:site.50726</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Apr 2006 14:44:27 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>911</category>
		<category>ACLU</category>
		<category>antiwar</category>
		<category>civilliberties</category>
		<category>Constitution</category>
		<category>FBI</category>
		<category>HomelandSecurity</category>
		<category>law</category>
		<category>Merton</category>
		<category>PatriotAct</category>
		<category>protest</category>
		<category>terror</category>
		<dc:creator>digaman</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>Kitzmiller v. DASD</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/45669/Kitzmiller%2Dv%2DDASD</link>
		<description> &lt;strong&gt;Intelligent Design on trial!&lt;/strong&gt;  &lt;a href=&quot;http://aclupa.blogspot.com/&quot;&gt;The ACLU of PA is blogging the current trial in Dover, PA&lt;/a&gt; between the parents of students and the local school board which wants to teach students Intelligent Design.  Over at &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pandasthumb.org/&quot;&gt;The Panda&apos;s Thumb&lt;/a&gt;, they&apos;re also &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2005/09/waterloo_in_dov.html&quot;&gt;keeping track&lt;/a&gt; of the goings on.  The main ACLU website &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aclu.org/evolution/profiles.html&quot;&gt;has statements from most of the plaintiff&apos;s experts&lt;/a&gt; in the case, including this &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aclu.org/evolution/statements/forrest.pdf&quot;&gt;long, well-supported pdf&lt;/a&gt; from philsopher Barbara Forrest, whose testimony is being used to dismantle the canard that ID is not Creationism.  Over at the &lt;a href=&quot;http://legalaffairs.org/webexclusive/debateclub_id0905.msp&quot;&gt;Legal Affairs Debate Club&lt;/a&gt; Beckwith and Laylock argued, last week, about whether teaching ID is legal.  For background:  this &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/nhmag.html&quot;&gt;2002 special report&lt;/a&gt; from Natural History Magazine on Intelligent Design Creationism.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2005:site.45669</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Oct 2005 05:46:39 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>aclu</category>
		<category>creationism</category>
		<category>darwin</category>
		<category>evolution</category>
		<category>intelligentdesign</category>
		<category>law</category>
		<category>philosophyofscience</category>
		<category>science</category>
		<dc:creator>OmieWise</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>Yes Virginia, There are Christian ACLU Lawyers</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/38163/Yes%2DVirginia%2DThere%2Dare%2DChristian%2DACLU%2DLawyers</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.scalzi.com/whatever/003093.html"&gt;A call for Christian lawyers&lt;/a&gt; who have worked for the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aclu.org&quot;&gt;ACLU&lt;/a&gt;. The ACLU tries &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=16295&amp;c=142&quot;&gt;to&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=15897&amp;c=141&quot;&gt;be&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://archive.aclu.org/news/2002/n071102b.html&quot;&gt;balanced&lt;/a&gt; , but considering the amount of effort they have put forth to inhibit Christian influence from/to the government, should a Christian lawyer work for them?  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2004:site.38163</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Dec 2004 14:22:55 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>ACLU</category>
		<category>AmericanCivilLibertiesUnion</category>
		<category>brokenlink</category>
		<category>Christian</category>
		<category>civilrights</category>
		<category>conflict</category>
		<category>conflictofinterest</category>
		<category>government</category>
		<category>law</category>
		<category>lawyers</category>
		<category>religion</category>
		<category>USA</category>
		<dc:creator>urlnotfound</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>Big FCC rollback vote this Tuesday.</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/28316/Big%2DFCC%2Drollback%2Dvote%2Dthis%2DTuesday</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.mediareform.net/dorganlott911.htm"&gt;Big FCC rollback vote this Tuesday.&lt;/a&gt; I know a lot of mefites are passionate about this issue and it looks like Senators Byron Dorgan (D&#8211;ND) and Trent Lott (R-MS) are doing something about it.  &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=12720&amp;c=42&quot;&gt;More info, free faxes, etc at the ACLU.&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;a href=&quot;http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:s.j.res.00017:&quot;&gt;Read S.J. res 17 here.&lt;/a&gt;  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2003:site.28316</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2003 13:24:52 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>ACLU</category>
		<category>brokenlink</category>
		<category>FCC</category>
		<category>government</category>
		<category>law</category>
		<category>media</category>
		<category>ownership</category>
		<category>radio</category>
		<category>senate</category>
		<category>USA</category>
		<dc:creator>skallas</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>No more Scarlet Letter!</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/25373/No%2Dmore%2DScarlet%2DLetter</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/04/24/publishing.adoptions.ap/index.html"&gt;Is this your fetus? Are you the one I slept with?&lt;/a&gt; Remember when we discussed &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/19006&quot;&gt;this &lt;/a&gt;before?  Florida has now been forced by 4 plaintiffs and the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aclu.org/ReproductiveRights/ReproductiveRights.cfm?ID=12443&amp;c=30&quot;&gt;ACLU &lt;/a&gt;to repeal the so-called Scarlet Letter law that forces women who are pregnant and giving children up for adoption to take out an ad local papers once a week for 4 weeks, stating her name and her sexual history in the last year, to let men know if they *might* be the father.  &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aclu.org/ReproductiveRights/ReproductiveRights.cfm?ID=11126&amp;c=30&quot;&gt;Here &lt;/a&gt;is the ACLU legal brief.  The details about the decision are in the first link. 

Thank god for the ACLU.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2003:site.25373</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2003 11:41:02 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>ACLU</category>
		<category>adoption</category>
		<category>adoptions</category>
		<category>brokenlink</category>
		<category>Florida</category>
		<category>law</category>
		<category>privacy</category>
		<category>sex</category>
		<category>sexualhistory</category>
		<dc:creator>aacheson</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/20316/</link>
		<description> A bill is currently being pushed through Congress that will give health care providers, including those that are federally funded, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aclu.org/action/refusal107.html&quot;&gt;the right to refuse to perform abortions or administer contraceptive medication for personal moral reasons&lt;/a&gt;.  Next week: firefighters allowed to let houses burn down because they hate the color of the curtains.
 </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2002:site.20316</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Sep 2002 20:41:28 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>abortion</category>
		<category>ACLU</category>
		<category>brokenlink</category>
		<category>contraceptives</category>
		<category>doctors</category>
		<category>health</category>
		<category>law</category>
		<category>morality</category>
		<category>refusal</category>
		<category>religion</category>
		<category>USA</category>
		<dc:creator>XQUZYPHYR</dc:creator>
	</item>
      
	</channel>
</rss>


