<?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: Wasserman-Schultz: Voting Section at DOJ probing voter ID laws</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.electionlawcenter.com/uncategorized/wasserman-schultz-voting-section-at-doj-probing-voter-id-laws/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.electionlawcenter.com/uncategorized/wasserman-schultz-voting-section-at-doj-probing-voter-id-laws/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2014 14:18:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.37</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Federale</title>
		<link>http://www.electionlawcenter.com/uncategorized/wasserman-schultz-voting-section-at-doj-probing-voter-id-laws/#comment-716</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Federale]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2011 22:17:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.electionlawcenter.com/uncategorized/wasserman-schultz-voting-section-at-doj-probing-voter-id-laws/#comment-716</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Any predictions for the outcome of any new challenges?
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Any predictions for the outcome of any new challenges?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Federale</title>
		<link>http://www.electionlawcenter.com/uncategorized/wasserman-schultz-voting-section-at-doj-probing-voter-id-laws/#comment-715</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Federale]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jul 2011 20:30:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.electionlawcenter.com/uncategorized/wasserman-schultz-voting-section-at-doj-probing-voter-id-laws/#comment-715</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Since the SC has ruled such laws are constitutional, what will the the CRD tactic to attack them?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Editor Comment:&#160; The Supreme Court hasn&#039;t ruled that such laws are constitutional.&#160; It only ruled that Indiana&#039;s did not violate the law.&#160; There is a great deal of daylight in between those positions.
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Since the SC has ruled such laws are constitutional, what will the the CRD tactic to attack them?</p>
<p>Editor Comment:&nbsp; The Supreme Court hasn&#8217;t ruled that such laws are constitutional.&nbsp; It only ruled that Indiana&#8217;s did not violate the law.&nbsp; There is a great deal of daylight in between those positions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
