<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>National Senior Citizens Law Center &#187; Federal Rights</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/category/federal-rights/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.nsclc.org</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2013 00:32:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Slate: The Temptations of the Court</title>
		<link>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/slate-the-temptations-of-the-court/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=slate-the-temptations-of-the-court</link>
		<comments>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/slate-the-temptations-of-the-court/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 18:15:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>NSCLC Helps</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nsclc.org/?p=4879</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(3/27/2012) Simon Lazarus. By the third day of Supreme Court arguments over the Affordable Care Act, people may be inclined to tune out. They shouldn’t. The final hour may be of far greater consequence than anything else the court hears &#8230; <a class="more-link" href="http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/slate-the-temptations-of-the-court/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/slate-the-temptations-of-the-court/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Court House Door Stays Open, But It’s Not Over Yet</title>
		<link>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/the-court-house-door-stays-open-but-its-not-over-yet/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-court-house-door-stays-open-but-its-not-over-yet</link>
		<comments>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/the-court-house-door-stays-open-but-its-not-over-yet/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2012 23:27:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>NanOak</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court Access]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nsclc.org/?p=4748</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In this blog, Rochelle Bobroff outlines the good, bad and ugly parts of the Douglas v ILC decision on Februrary 22,2012. America Constitution Society Blog]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/the-court-house-door-stays-open-but-its-not-over-yet/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hertz or Avis? Progressives&#8217; Quest to Reclaim the Constitution and the Courts</title>
		<link>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/hertz-or-avis-progressives-quest-to-reclaim-the-constitution-and-the-courts/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=hertz-or-avis-progressives-quest-to-reclaim-the-constitution-and-the-courts</link>
		<comments>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/hertz-or-avis-progressives-quest-to-reclaim-the-constitution-and-the-courts/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2012 16:21:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>NSCLC Helps</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Affordable Care Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Care Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nsclc.org/?p=4505</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In this Ohio State Law Journal article, Simon Lazarus details the challenges posed by the “increasingly reactionary and radical conservative agenda” in relation to the role of the Constitution and the courts.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/hertz-or-avis-progressives-quest-to-reclaim-the-constitution-and-the-courts/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hand Wringing on Health Care</title>
		<link>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/hand-wringing-on-health-care/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=hand-wringing-on-health-care</link>
		<comments>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/hand-wringing-on-health-care/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2012 15:42:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>NSCLC Helps</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Affordable Care Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Care Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nsclc.org/?p=4483</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[SLATE (1/9/2012). By Simon Lazarus. Hand Wringing on Health Care.  Republican appointees have concluded that upholding the ACA mandate is compelled by the text of the Commerce Clause and Supreme Court precedent, that it is no more “coercive” than other measures, &#8230; <a class="more-link" href="http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/hand-wringing-on-health-care/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/hand-wringing-on-health-care/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>11th Cir.: Parts of Alabama anti-immigration law likely violate Constitution</title>
		<link>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/11th-cir-parts-of-alabama-anti-immigration-law-likely-violate-constitution/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=11th-cir-parts-of-alabama-anti-immigration-law-likely-violate-constitution</link>
		<comments>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/11th-cir-parts-of-alabama-anti-immigration-law-likely-violate-constitution/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2011 23:37:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>NanOak</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Analyses]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nsclc.org/?p=4270</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Eleventh Circuit enjoined parts of Alabama&#8217;s anti-immigration law pending a full review of the merits. Though the decision did not bind the merits panel that will soon consider the law&#8217;s constitutionality, it indicates that the panel believes that at &#8230; <a class="more-link" href="http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/11th-cir-parts-of-alabama-anti-immigration-law-likely-violate-constitution/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/11th-cir-parts-of-alabama-anti-immigration-law-likely-violate-constitution/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>N.D.Ind: limit on payment for dental services violates Medicaid law</title>
		<link>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/nd-ind-limit-on-payment-for-dental-services-violates-medicaid-law/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=nd-ind-limit-on-payment-for-dental-services-violates-medicaid-law</link>
		<comments>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/nd-ind-limit-on-payment-for-dental-services-violates-medicaid-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 23:33:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>NanOak</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Analyses]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nsclc.org/?p=4267</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A district court issued a preliminary injunction against a state law that places a $1,000 annual limit on Medicaid payments for dental services.  The court concluded that both state and federal Medical laws require states to fully “cover” dental procedures &#8230; <a class="more-link" href="http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/nd-ind-limit-on-payment-for-dental-services-violates-medicaid-law/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/nd-ind-limit-on-payment-for-dental-services-violates-medicaid-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>S.D.Tex.: rejects 11th Am. defense to ADA claim in education</title>
		<link>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/sd-tex-rejects-11th-am-defense-to-ada-claim-in-education/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=sd-tex-rejects-11th-am-defense-to-ada-claim-in-education</link>
		<comments>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/sd-tex-rejects-11th-am-defense-to-ada-claim-in-education/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 23:14:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>NanOak</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Analyses]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nsclc.org/?p=4261</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a lawsuit against Texas A &#38; M University, a district court held that sovereign immunity did not bar a former student’s claim against the University under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The Court also held &#8230; <a class="more-link" href="http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/sd-tex-rejects-11th-am-defense-to-ada-claim-in-education/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/sd-tex-rejects-11th-am-defense-to-ada-claim-in-education/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>5th Cir: Remands case re consideration of race in re-zoning for schools</title>
		<link>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/5th-cir-remands-case-re-consideration-of-race-in-re-zoning-for-schools/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=5th-cir-remands-case-re-consideration-of-race-in-re-zoning-for-schools</link>
		<comments>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/5th-cir-remands-case-re-consideration-of-race-in-re-zoning-for-schools/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Nov 2011 23:12:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>NanOak</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Analyses]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nsclc.org/?p=4258</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[After questioning whether the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Parents Involved required the district court to apply strict scrutiny to a school board’s decision to consider race when making a re-zoning decision, the Fifth Circuit found that there was a &#8230; <a class="more-link" href="http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/5th-cir-remands-case-re-consideration-of-race-in-re-zoning-for-schools/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/5th-cir-remands-case-re-consideration-of-race-in-re-zoning-for-schools/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Medicaid Ambush</title>
		<link>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/the-medicaid-ambush-the-supreme-courts/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-medicaid-ambush-the-supreme-courts</link>
		<comments>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/the-medicaid-ambush-the-supreme-courts/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Nov 2011 16:03:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>NSCLC Helps</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Affordable Care Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Care Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nsclc.org/?p=4028</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[SLATE,  The Medicaid Ambush (11/14/11) The Supreme Court&#8217;s unexpected and astounding reasons for wanting to hear a challenge to Obamacare.  By Simon Lazarus and Dahlia Lithwick. The Supreme Court agreed Monday to hear a challenge to the Affordable Care Act, &#8230; <a class="more-link" href="http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/the-medicaid-ambush-the-supreme-courts/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/the-medicaid-ambush-the-supreme-courts/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Supreme Court Refuses to Shut Courthouse Doors on the Poor</title>
		<link>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/supreme-court-could-shut-courthouse-doors-to-the-poor/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=supreme-court-could-shut-courthouse-doors-to-the-poor</link>
		<comments>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/supreme-court-could-shut-courthouse-doors-to-the-poor/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Nov 2011 09:55:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>NanOak</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Federal Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medicaid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Preemption]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nsclc.org/?p=4042</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On February 22, 2012, the Supreme Court rejected an attempt to eliminate a critical legal tool for protecting the rights of low-income individuals, including many elderly poor. Douglas v Independent Living Center is a significant victory for court access for &#8230; <a class="more-link" href="http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/supreme-court-could-shut-courthouse-doors-to-the-poor/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nsclc.org/index.php/supreme-court-could-shut-courthouse-doors-to-the-poor/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>