<?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: No second-guess on Kelo</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.scotusblog.com/2005/08/no-second-guess-on-kelo/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.scotusblog.com/2005/08/no-second-guess-on-kelo/</link>
	<description>The Supreme Court of the United States blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 22:38:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve M</title>
		<link>http://www.scotusblog.com/2005/08/no-second-guess-on-kelo/#comment-7875</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve M</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2005 17:44:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/no-second-guess-on-kelo/#comment-7875</guid>
		<description>There is no &quot;news&quot; in the denial of rehearing; but then again, there is no real &quot;news&quot; in the upholding of the 50-year old &lt;i&gt;Berman v. Parker&lt;/i&gt; precedent either, and yet we read endlessly about &lt;i&gt;Kelo&lt;/i&gt;.  It&#039;s news because the public is interested, not because the Supreme Court has done anything bizarre or unexpected.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is no &#8220;news&#8221; in the denial of rehearing; but then again, there is no real &#8220;news&#8221; in the upholding of the 50-year old <i>Berman v. Parker</i> precedent either, and yet we read endlessly about <i>Kelo</i>.  It&#8217;s news because the public is interested, not because the Supreme Court has done anything bizarre or unexpected.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kent Scheidegger</title>
		<link>http://www.scotusblog.com/2005/08/no-second-guess-on-kelo/#comment-7874</link>
		<dc:creator>Kent Scheidegger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Aug 2005 19:31:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/no-second-guess-on-kelo/#comment-7874</guid>
		<description>I was surprised by the amount of press coverage given to the denial of rehearing in this case.  When was the last time the Supreme Court actually granted rehearing in a fully briefed, argued, and decided case?  I can&#039;t remember a single one in the 19 years I have been doing Supreme Court work.  In the wake of Booker they granted rehearing on some cert. denied cases, but for cases fully decided on the merits, I don&#039;t believe it has happened in modern history.  So, the Court denied rehearing, the sun rose in the East, and Generalissimo Franco is still dead, all equally newsworthy.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was surprised by the amount of press coverage given to the denial of rehearing in this case.  When was the last time the Supreme Court actually granted rehearing in a fully briefed, argued, and decided case?  I can&#8217;t remember a single one in the 19 years I have been doing Supreme Court work.  In the wake of Booker they granted rehearing on some cert. denied cases, but for cases fully decided on the merits, I don&#8217;t believe it has happened in modern history.  So, the Court denied rehearing, the sun rose in the East, and Generalissimo Franco is still dead, all equally newsworthy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

