<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>anthony kennedy | The Love Network</title><link>http://anthony-kennedy.love.com</link><language>en-us</language><docs>http://anthony-kennedy.love.com/rss.xml</docs><description>A Blog with news about anthony kennedy</description><copyright>AOL LLC. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright><generator>Blogsmith | Relegence | AOL LLC.</generator><item><title>Mat Hentoff: Citizens still excluded from U.S. Supreme Court</title><link>http://t.love.com/310564773</link><description><![CDATA[For years, Tony Mauro of Legal Times and I have been unsuccessfully trying to convince the Supreme Court to let America see, on television, these justices at work, during oral arguments on cases that, when decided, can have a considerable impact on us — sometimes for decades. 
A strong majority of the justices have adamantly refused to let the cameras into their august courtroom with its limited seating space. 


As I have previously reported, most of them prize their anonymity. ]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 2:33:00</pubDate></item><item><title>The Pro-Corporate Legacy of Justice John Paul Stevens</title><link>http://t.love.com/310446082</link><description><![CDATA[Kelo v. 
City of New London , the 2005 decision where Stevens and his most liberal colleagues (plus the "modestly libertarian" Justice Anthony Kennedy) upheld the government's ability to seize private property via eminent domain and then hand the land over to another private party in order to widen the tax base. 
I've heard a lot recently about how Stevens stood up for "We the People" against the evil corporations in Citizens United , but what about the people who were literally forced out of their homes in]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 17:29:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Should Opponents Of Health Care Bill Hope The Democrats Use The Slaughter Solution? ADDED: Two More Yes Votes</title><link>http://t.love.com/310437716</link><description><![CDATA[I'm not optimistic that if the House uses Slaughter that it will be knocked down by the courts but others seem to think it might be . 
It would be awful to have to hope all of this rides on which side of the bed Anthony Kennedy gets up one day but it's better than nothing. 


If it's going to pass, and at the moment I fear it will, then at least we'd have another bite at the apple. ]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 17:08:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Obama, Cowen exchange shamrock gifts</title><link>http://t.love.com/310136139</link><description><![CDATA[<img src="http://photos.upi.com/story/t/4c5f27db079ca1377c8fe203f10a2532/Obama-Cowen-exchange-shamrock-gifts.jpg"><br>U.S. President Barack Obama welcomed Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen to the annual St. Patrick's Day Reception at the White House Wednesday. 


Vice President Joe Biden addressed the audience, saying "if you are lucky enough to be Irish you are lucky enough." 


Obama presented Cowen with the traditional gift of a bowl of shamrocks and Cowen reciprocated. 

]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 1:02:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Obama: Immigration reform 'unwavering'</title><link>http://t.love.com/310111660</link><description><![CDATA[A day of celebrating all that is Irish-American about America ended at the White House this evening with President Barack Obama publicly reaffirming his commitment to immigration reform. 


"I am pleased that there is bipartisan progress being made," Obama told guests filling the East Room of the White House. 
"My own commitment to comprehensive immigration reform remains unwavering." 

]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 22:49:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Oklahoma Senate panel OKs death penalty for child rapists</title><link>http://t.love.com/310028164</link><description><![CDATA[Repeat child rapists who target young children could be sentenced to death under a bill approved Wednesday by a Senate committee, despite a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that restricts the death penalty to murder and crimes against the state. 


The bill approved by an appropriations subcommittee allows for punishment of life in prison without parole or death for anyone convicted of a second offense of raping a child 6 or younger. 


"It is something that we want to send a clear message to these type of ]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 16:55:00</pubDate></item><item><title>The San Francisco Marriage Case, Part Two: The Supreme Court</title><link>http://t.love.com/309275015</link><description><![CDATA[There's generally no right to appeal to the Supreme Court. 
You can ask the court to review your case , and, most of the time, it can take it if the justices want to. 
It takes votes from four justices for the court to take a case, five to win it if it does. 

]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:07:00</pubDate></item><item><title>"The Twilight of the Pardon Power"</title><link>http://t.love.com/309116746</link><description><![CDATA[<img src="http://www.lawprofessorblogs.com/sentencing/linkimages/sentencinglp150.gif"><br>Throughout our nation's history, the president's pardon power has been used with generosity and regularity, to correct systemic injustices and to advance the executive's policy goals. 
Since 1980, however, presidential pardoning has fallen on hard times, its benign purposes frustrated by politicians' fear of making a mistake, and subverted by unfairness in the way pardons are granted. 
The diminished role of clemency is unfortunate, since federal law makes almost no provision for shortening a prison term an]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:04:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Obama picks first young appeals court nominee</title><link>http://t.love.com/308956624</link><description><![CDATA[a page from the playbook of recent Republican presidents who nominated conservatives in their 30s and 40s with the expectation they would have enduring influence in setting policy on the federal bench. 


Whether a string of younger, more ideological nominees will follow from the Democratic president is unknown. 
Of the four Obama nominees announced since Liu's selection on Feb. 24, three are their 50s and the other is a 45-year-old career prosecutor. ]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 14 Mar 2010 21:40:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Obama nominee is a true liberal</title><link>http://t.love.com/308803713</link><description><![CDATA[Thirteen months into his presidency, Barack Obama finally gave liberal supporters the kind of judicial nominee they had sought and conservatives feared. 


Goodwin Liu, 39, is an unabashed liberal legal scholar who, if confirmed, could become a force on the federal appeals court for decades. 
There's talk that, in time, the Rhodes Scholar, former high court clerk and current assistant dean and law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, could be the first person of Asian descent chosen for the ]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 14 Mar 2010 5:03:00</pubDate></item><item><title>It's Time to Stand Up to the Supreme Court</title><link>http://t.love.com/308348800</link><description><![CDATA[In January the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that laws limiting corporate political contributions were a violation of constitutional free speech principles. 
"The First Amendment confirms the freedom to think for ourselves," wrote Justice Anthony M. Kennedy in his 5-4 majority opinion, which is sure to unleash a flood of corporate spending on ads for and against political candidates. 


But public companies aren't people. ]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 9:47:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Harry Reid Slams Supreme Court Justices John Roberts, Anthony Kennedy For Campaign Finance Decision</title><link>http://t.love.com/307623422</link><description><![CDATA[<img src="http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/147881/thumbs/s-JUSTICES-large.jpg"><br>The president and his aides aren't the only Democrats throwing unusually sharp and public jabs at the conservative members of the Supreme Court. 


On Wednesday Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said he was "so disappointed" with the Court's swing vote -- Justice Anthony M. Kennedy -- for enabling the court's rightward, corporatist tilt. 
As for Chief Justice John Roberts, the majority leader castigated him as being out of touch and completely detached from political reality. 

]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 14:04:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Higher Corporate Spending on Election Ads Could Be All but Invisible</title><link>http://t.love.com/307522657</link><description><![CDATA[<img src="http://www.propublica.org/images/uploads/mobile/gt_schumer_vanhollen_300x200_100310.jpg"><br>The Supreme Court recently freed corporations to spend more money on aggressive election ads. 
But if businesses take advantage of this new freedom, the public probably won't know it, because it's easy for them to legally hide their political spending. 


Under current disclosure laws for federal elections, it's virtually impossible for the public to track how much a business spends, what it's spending on, or who ultimately benefits. ]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 9:30:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Unequal : A global perspective on women under the law</title><link>http://t.love.com/307427166</link><description><![CDATA[It sounds good. 
But the reality on the ground, in cities and villages, homes and schools, and even in the courts, is quite different. 


Many discriminatory laws still relate to family law, limiting a woman's right to marry, divorce and remarry, and allowing for such marital practices as polygamy. ]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 4:00:00</pubDate></item><item><title>High court looks at reach of Second Amendment</title><link>http://t.love.com/307345155</link><description><![CDATA[The U.S. Supreme Court last week appeared willing to say that the Constitution's right to possess guns limits state and local regulation of firearms. 
But the justices also suggested that some gun control measures might not be affected. 


The court heard arguments in a case that challenges handgun bans in the Chicago area by asking the high court to extend to state and local jurisdictions the sweep of its 2008 decision striking down a gun ban in the federal enclave of Washington, D.C. 

The biggest questio]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 9 Mar 2010 21:46:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Chief Justice Roberts: Obama’s SOTU knock on the Supreme Court “very troubling”; Update: Gibbs responds</title><link>http://t.love.com/307341918</link><description><![CDATA[Tough stuff. 
Although it was kind of him not to remind the student audience that Obama's a liar , too. 


U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts said Tuesday the scene at President Obama's State of the Union address was "very troubling" and the annual speech has "degenerated to a political pep rally.

]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 9 Mar 2010 21:30:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Poll Shows Public Support for Cameras at the High Court</title><link>http://t.love.com/306981064</link><description><![CDATA[A new public opinion poll being released today found that more than 60 percent of voters think that televising U.S. Supreme Court proceedings would be "good for democracy." 


Only 26 percent said televising oral arguments would undermine the Court's "dignity or authority," according to the PublicMind poll. 


Sentiment in favor of cameras in the high court runs the highest among liberals (71 percent) and voters between ages 18 and 29 (69 percent), according to the survey. ]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 9 Mar 2010 0:54:00</pubDate></item><item><title>'I do fear for my life'</title><link>http://t.love.com/306287000</link><description><![CDATA[White House social secretary Desiree Rogers, who came under fire after an embarrassing security breach allowed party crashers into a state dinner, is leaving her post, the White House said on Friday. ]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 6 Mar 2010 12:44:50</pubDate></item><item><title>New voices: Companies as people: Framers would frown</title><link>http://t.love.com/306149471</link><description><![CDATA[There has been much uproar regarding the Citizens United case, in which the Supreme Court blocked the ban on corporate campaign spending, and Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy's questionable finding. 


President Obama has even said, "This ruling gives the special interests and their lobbyists even more power in Washington — while undermining the influence of average Americans who make small contributions to support their preferred candidates." 


One might conclude that Citizens United simply provid]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 5 Mar 2010 21:29:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Opinion: 'We the People' means people, not corporate entities</title><link>http://t.love.com/306085836</link><description><![CDATA[Legislation is currently under consideration in Juneau trying to plug holes punched open by the U.S. Supreme Court with its recent ruling that corporations, unions and other narrow interest groups are now somehow equal to human beings - at least in the arena of politics. 


Lawmakers in other states are doing the same, as are some of our representatives in Congress. 


The court's 5-4 decision in Citizens United v. ]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 5 Mar 2010 16:52:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Laslo Boyd: A Maryland response to the U.S. Supreme Court</title><link>http://t.love.com/305802642</link><description><![CDATA[Under the leadership of Chief Justice John Roberts, the Supreme Court has been a tireless and determined defender of the rich and powerful, the overdogs of American society. 
The recent decision to afford corporations the First Amendment rights of individuals  where's James Madison when we really need him?  and to nullify decades of efforts to keep wealth from dominating our political system is the most recent example. 


With American politics looking increasingly dysfunctional and unable to respond to t]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 5 Mar 2010 0:28:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Editorial: 'Honest services fraud' law is too wide a net</title><link>http://t.love.com/305754305</link><description><![CDATA[In three cases argued this year, members of the Supreme Court have expressed qualms about a law used to convict politicians and corporate executives of fraud. 
The law, which makes it a crime to "deprive another of the intangible right of honest services," is so vague and open-ended that the court should strike it down. 


As is often the case with challenges to over-broad statutes, the attacks on the "honest services fraud" law come from unsympathetic defendants. 

]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 4 Mar 2010 20:16:00</pubDate></item><item><title>'We the People' means people . . .</title><link>http://t.love.com/305373291</link><description><![CDATA[Legislation is currently under consideration in Juneau trying to plug holes punched open by the U.S. Supreme Court with its recent ruling that corporations, unions and other narrow interest groups are now, somehow equal to human beings  at least in the arena of politics. 


Lawmakers in other states are doing the same, as are some of our representatives in Congress. 


The court's 5-4 decision in Citizens United v. ]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 3 Mar 2010 22:50:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Analysis: An elusive immunity issue</title><link>http://t.love.com/305253241</link><description><![CDATA[Showing some hesitancy to leave it to the State Department to decide when foreign government officials can be sued in U.S. courts for human rights abuses, the Supreme Court on Wednesday struggled to figure out what Congress wanted courts to do with such lawsuits. 
Not one of three lawyers who argued in Samantar v. 
Yousuf, et al. (08-1555) seemed to make a convincing case, thus leaving the Justices to work out a decision, unaided by much beyond their own perceptions, in coming weeks. ]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 3 Mar 2010 15:26:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Supreme Court My Strike Down State And City Handgun Bans</title><link>http://t.love.com/304960377</link><description><![CDATA[The DC vs. Heller decision from two years ago (has it been that long already?) was monumental in that it recognized the 2nd amendment as an individual right that could not be removed arbitrarily without due process. 
But DC vs. Heller applied to a federal law, because Washington DC is not a state. 
Thus another case, this one originating in Chicago and challenging that cities gun ban, has made its way to the SCOTUS and it appears as though the justices may hold firm in their ruling that states, and their po]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 2 Mar 2010 23:24:00</pubDate></item><item><title>High court wary of suit over detainee medical care</title><link>http://t.love.com/304881489</link><description><![CDATA[Justice Stephen Breyer expressed skepticism about parts of Doyle's arguments. 
In cases like Castaneda's, Congress decided suing the federal government is the exclusive remedy, he said. 


"That's the problem for you in this case," Breyer said. 

]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 2 Mar 2010 17:26:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Justices May Extend Gun Owner Rights Nationwide</title><link>http://t.love.com/304867452</link><description><![CDATA[WASHINGTON (AP) The Supreme Court suggested Tuesday it will strike down U.S. cities' outright bans on handguns, a ruling that could establish a nationwide ownership right fervently sought by gun advocates. 
But the justices indicated less severe limits could survive, continuing disputes over the "right to keep and bear arms." 


Chicago area residents who want handguns for protection in their homes are asking the court to extend its 2008 decision in support of gun rights in Washington, D.C., to state and lo]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 2 Mar 2010 16:46:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Justices may extend gun owner rights nationwide</title><link>http://t.love.com/304853766</link><description><![CDATA[The Supreme Court suggested Tuesday it will strike down U.S. cities' outright bans on handguns, a ruling that could establish a nationwide ownership right fervently sought by gun advocates. 
But the justices indicated less severe limits could survive, continuing disputes over the "right to keep and bear arms." 


Chicago area residents who want handguns for protection in their homes are asking the court to extend its 2008 decision in support of gun rights in Washington, D.C., to state and local laws. 

]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 2 Mar 2010 16:10:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Supreme Court Appears Ready To Overturn Chicago Gun Ban</title><link>http://t.love.com/304840805</link><description><![CDATA[Most of the Supreme Court justices who two years ago said the 2nd Amendment protects individual gun rights signaled during arguments Tuesday they are ready to extend this right nationwide and to use it to strike down some state and local gun regulations. 


Since 1982, Chicago has outlawed hand guns in the city, even for law-abiding residents who sought to keep one at home. 
That ordinance was challenged by several city residents who said it violated their rights "to keep and bear arms " under the Second Am]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 2 Mar 2010 15:21:00</pubDate></item><item><title>High court likely to apply 2nd Amendment rights on firearms to states, cities</title><link>http://t.love.com/304818563</link><description><![CDATA[USA TODAY's Supreme Court correspondent, Joan Biskupic, says an hour of spirited oral arguments indicate the high courts appears ready to rule that the Second Amendment right to bear arms applies to firearms regulation in the states and cities. 


Here are some excerpts from Biskupic's file: 


Several justices, including Anthony Kennedy, signaled by their questions that they believed the right to firearms is sufficiently "fundamental" that it should cover people challenging state and local gun regulation, ]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 2 Mar 2010 14:13:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Supreme Court Appears Ready To Overturn Chicago Gun Ban</title><link>http://t.love.com/304807511</link><description><![CDATA[<img src="http://snsimages.tribune.com/media/alternatethumbnails/story/2010-03/52521092-02093752-400225.jpg"><br>Most of the Supreme Court justices who two years ago said the 2nd Amendment protects individual gun rights signaled during arguments Tuesday they are ready to extend this right nationwide and to use it to strike down some state and local gun regulations. 


Since 1982, Chicago has outlawed hand guns in the city, even for law-abiding residents who sought to keep one at home. 
That ordinance was challenged by several city residents who said it violated their rights "to keep and bear arms" under the Second Ame]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 2 Mar 2010 13:42:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Oral Argument in McDonald</title><link>http://t.love.com/304780225</link><description><![CDATA[The dominant sentiment on the Court was to extend the Amendment beyond the federal level, based on the 14th Amendment's guarantee of "due process," since doing so through another part of the 14th Amendment would raise too many questions about what other rights might emerge. 


And from Greg Stohr and Kristin Jensen on Bloomberg : Hearing arguments in Washington today, several justices said a 2008 ruling suggested that the right to bear arms was so fundamental it should restrict states and cities as well as ]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 2 Mar 2010 12:19:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Tant: It's time to rewrite the Pledge of Allegiance</title><link>http://t.love.com/303790115</link><description><![CDATA[]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 27 Feb 2010 0:31:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Missing the Tea Party</title><link>http://t.love.com/303393382</link><description><![CDATA[The real surprise of the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. 
Federal Election Commission , which magnified the ability of corporations to spend money in political campaigns, is how widely disliked the ruling is across the ideological spectrum. 
After more than a month, the storm set off by the Citizens United ruling is still raging. 

]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 23:29:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Chief Justice Roberts to speak at UA School of Law</title><link>http://t.love.com/303294663</link><description><![CDATA[Since 1996, Roberts is the ninth justice to speak in the Albritton Lecture Series at the UA School of Law. 

"The law school has built a reputation for providing students with unique access to the world's leading legal minds," said Aaron Latham, spokesman for the school. 
"We're proud of that, but we're even more proud to be able to offer that to our students because they will get the opportunity to ask the highest ranking judicial officer in the country his thoughts. Students get a lot out of that." 


His]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 16:28:00</pubDate></item><item><title>On Orphans, Lawyers, and “Material Support” to Designated Terrorist Organizations in Humanitarian Law Project v. Holder</title><link>http://t.love.com/303252027</link><description><![CDATA[<img src="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef0115720320d7970b-500wi"><br>The Supreme Court heard argument earlier this week in Humanitarian Law Project v. 
Holder , an extremely im portant First Amendment case involving the criminal prohibition on so-called "material support" to designated terrorist organizations. 
Although plaintiffs' attorney Professor David Cole did a superb job of focusing the Court's attention on how the law prohibits pure political speech, lurking not far in the background was the law's effect on humanitarian assistance. ]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 14:28:00</pubDate></item><item><title>U.S. anti-terrorist laws and their challenges</title><link>http://t.love.com/303215936</link><description><![CDATA[<img src="http://image3.examiner.com/images/blog/EXID7095/images/SupremeCourtCharlesDharapak(2).jpg"><br>U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy pointed out that giving tsunami money to the Tamil Tigers, terrorists of Sri Lanka, might spare them funds they then would spend on terrorism. 
Solicitor General Elena Kagan backed up that example with another, the Hamas builds both houses and bombs. 


Justice Sonia Sotomayor stated that such an interpretation would forbid teaching terrorists to play the harmonic (Jess Bravin, Wall St. J., 2/24, A3). 

]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 12:52:00</pubDate></item><item><title>Feb: 25: Brutal murder in Derry</title><link>http://t.love.com/303056481</link><description><![CDATA[The body of a man, thought to be in his late 30s, was found on the outskirts of Derry late last night. ]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 5:04:43</pubDate></item><item><title>Supreme Court weighs free speech against aid to terrorists</title><link>http://t.love.com/302969036</link><description><![CDATA[<img src="http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2010/02/23/PH2010022305037.jpg"><br>The case stems from a challenge to an antiterrorism act by American advocates who say they want to support only the peaceful efforts of groups that the State Department has deemed to be terrorist organizations. 


"This is a difficult case for me," allowed Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, whose vote often is the one that decides closely divided cases. 


Georgetown law professor David D. Cole, who represents the Humanitarian Law Project, said his clients do not want to provide material support to the groups, but]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2010 23:10:00</pubDate></item><item><title>online legal columnist</title><link>http://t.love.com/302963762</link><description><![CDATA[Though barely a month old, the Supreme Court's opinion in Citizens United v. 
Federal Election Commission has generated substantial commentary and been greeted with alarm in some quarters. 
Its critics fear that the decision opens the way for poisoning of the electoral system by corporate money. 

]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2010 22:37:00</pubDate></item></channel></rss>