<?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/"
		xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Following up on the SCOTUS Habeus Decision</title>
	<atom:link href="http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/06/following-up-on-the-scotus-habeus-decision/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/06/following-up-on-the-scotus-habeus-decision</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 16:39:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Your analysis is bogus</title>
		<link>http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/06/following-up-on-the-scotus-habeus-decision/comment-page-1#comment-38406</link>
		<dc:creator>Your analysis is bogus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2008 08:25:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://commentsfromleftfield.com/?p=4415#comment-38406</guid>
		<description>The &quot;far right&quot; happens to be correct. You clearly haven&#039;t read Chief Justice Roberts&#039; dissent -- ignore Scalia -- because it totaly eviscerates the LOGIC of Justice Kennedy&#039;s opinion, which is nonsensical. Kennedy even admits that he had NO PRECEDENT to hang his opinion on when he writes, &quot;Under these circumstances the lack of a precedent on point is no barrier to our holding. We hold that Art. I, §9, cl. 2, of the Constitution has full effect at Guantanamo Bay&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The &#8220;far right&#8221; happens to be correct. You clearly haven&#8217;t read Chief Justice Roberts&#8217; dissent &#8212; ignore Scalia &#8212; because it totaly eviscerates the LOGIC of Justice Kennedy&#8217;s opinion, which is nonsensical. Kennedy even admits that he had NO PRECEDENT to hang his opinion on when he writes, &#8220;Under these circumstances the lack of a precedent on point is no barrier to our holding. We hold that Art. I, §9, cl. 2, of the Constitution has full effect at Guantanamo Bay&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chief</title>
		<link>http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/06/following-up-on-the-scotus-habeus-decision/comment-page-1#comment-38398</link>
		<dc:creator>Chief</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2008 04:28:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://commentsfromleftfield.com/?p=4415#comment-38398</guid>
		<description>Kathy, 

Another great post.  I love reading what you write.  You tie it up in a coherent package.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kathy, </p>
<p>Another great post.  I love reading what you write.  You tie it up in a coherent package.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Following Up on the SCOTUS Habeus Decision &#171; Liberty Street</title>
		<link>http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/06/following-up-on-the-scotus-habeus-decision/comment-page-1#comment-38392</link>
		<dc:creator>Following Up on the SCOTUS Habeus Decision &#171; Liberty Street</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2008 01:44:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://commentsfromleftfield.com/?p=4415#comment-38392</guid>
		<description>[...] More at Comments from Left Field. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] More at Comments from Left Field. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

