<?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>Articles Of Law &#187; obama</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.articlesoflaw.com/tag/obama/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.articlesoflaw.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2010 08:18:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>$1000 ObamaCare Tax</title>
		<link>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/07/06/1000-obamacare-tax/</link>
		<comments>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/07/06/1000-obamacare-tax/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 06:34:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>HenryBates</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[alarming-news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cfg-on-facebook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cfg-on-twitter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cfg-on-youtube]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[facebook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[friends-of-atr]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mobile]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[one-mans-trash]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[periodic-tablet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[poor-and-stupid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[press]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rossputin-com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[whos-your-nanny]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/07/06/1000-obamacare-tax/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If ObamaCare becomes law, you could be on the hook for at least $1,000 a year if you refuse to buy health insurance.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If ObamaCare becomes law, you could be on the hook for at least $1,000 a year if you refuse to buy health insurance.</p>
<p>View post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2009/07/1000_obamacare_tax.php" title="$1000 ObamaCare Tax" rel="nofollow">$1000 ObamaCare Tax</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/07/06/1000-obamacare-tax/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Jude Law: Post-Show Dinner Date</title>
		<link>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/07/03/jude-law-post-show-dinner-date/</link>
		<comments>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/07/03/jude-law-post-show-dinner-date/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2009 10:12:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>AdamRoth</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brad-pitt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[celeb-news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disclaimer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[entertainment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lindsay-lohan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[media-articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[music]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[theory]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/07/03/jude-law-post-show-dinner-date/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Continuing along with his stage duties, Jude Law was spotted leaving Wyndhamâ€™s Theatre in London after offering up another â€œHamletâ€ performance on Thursday night (July 2). Swamped by a gathering of fans wanting his picture and autograph, the â€œCold Mountainâ€ hunk kindly obliged before continuing about with his evening.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Continuing along with his stage duties, Jude Law was spotted leaving Wyndhamâ€™s Theatre in London after offering up another â€œHamletâ€ performance on Thursday night (July 2). Swamped by a gathering of fans wanting his picture and autograph, the â€œCold Mountainâ€ hunk kindly obliged before continuing about with his evening.</p>
<p>Go here to see the original:Â <br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://madihost.com/jude-law-post-show-dinner-date/" title="Post-Show Dinner Date" rel="nofollow">Jude Law: Post-Show Dinner Date</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/07/03/jude-law-post-show-dinner-date/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Stonewall Anniversary Â« Law Dork, 2.0</title>
		<link>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/28/the-stonewall-anniversary-%c2%ab-law-dork-20/</link>
		<comments>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/28/the-stonewall-anniversary-%c2%ab-law-dork-20/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Jun 2009 08:25:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>PrestonWood</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[first-amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lgbt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[related]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[virginia]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/28/the-stonewall-anniversary-%c2%ab-law-dork-20/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[They are Americans who are actively discriminated against by federal laws . If the president is to properly honor the memory of Stonewall, he should get up to speed on what happened there 40 years ago, when courageous kids who had ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>They are Americans who are actively discriminated against by federal laws . If the president is to properly honor the memory of Stonewall, he should get up to speed on what happened there 40 years ago, when courageous kids who had &#8230;</p>
<p>Read the rest here:Â <br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://lawdork.wordpress.com/2009/06/28/the-stonewall-anniversary/" title="The Stonewall Anniversary Â« Law Dork, 2.0" rel="nofollow">The Stonewall Anniversary Â« Law Dork, 2.0</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/28/the-stonewall-anniversary-%c2%ab-law-dork-20/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Election Law: Initial Thoughts on &lt;i&gt;NAMUDNO&lt;/i&gt;: Chief Justice &#8230;</title>
		<link>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/22/election-law-initial-thoughts-on-inamudnoi-chief-justice/</link>
		<comments>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/22/election-law-initial-thoughts-on-inamudnoi-chief-justice/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2009 08:02:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>NeilEbsworth</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Leadership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chief-justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conservative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[justice-souter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[question]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/22/election-law-initial-thoughts-on-inamudnoi-chief-justice/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Indeed, in my Slate preview of the case before oral argument, I noted that "Under the leadership of Chief Justice John Roberts, the Supreme Court has not been friendly to voting rights or reasonable campaign finance laws . ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Indeed, in my Slate preview of the case before oral argument, I noted that &#8220;Under the leadership of Chief Justice John Roberts, the Supreme Court has not been friendly to voting rights or reasonable campaign finance laws . &#8230;</p>
<p>Original post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://electionlawblog.org/archives/013903.html" title="Chief Justice ..." rel="nofollow">Election Law: Initial Thoughts on &lt;i&gt;NAMUDNO&lt;/i&gt;: Chief Justice &#8230;</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/22/election-law-initial-thoughts-on-inamudnoi-chief-justice/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>AmeriCrooks Watch: Meddling Michelle Obama to keynote volunteerism conference</title>
		<link>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/20/americrooks-watch-meddling-michelle-obama-to-keynote-volunteerism-conference/</link>
		<comments>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/20/americrooks-watch-meddling-michelle-obama-to-keynote-volunteerism-conference/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Jun 2009 07:47:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>MelissaGordon</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Leadership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[americorps]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gateway-pundit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[michelle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[michelle-malkin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[secretary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[summer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/20/americrooks-watch-meddling-michelle-obama-to-keynote-volunteerism-conference/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Photoshop credit: Leo AlbertiWell, well, well. Michelle, Michelle, Michelle.Guess where the First Lady will be on Monday? ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Photoshop credit: Leo AlbertiWell, well, well. Michelle, Michelle, Michelle.Guess where the First Lady will be on Monday? </p>
<p>Here is the original post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://michellemalkin.com/2009/06/20/americrooks-watch-meddling-michelle-obama-to-keynote-volunteerism-conference/" title="Meddling Michelle Obama to keynote volunteerism conference" rel="nofollow">AmeriCrooks Watch: Meddling Michelle Obama to keynote volunteerism conference</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/20/americrooks-watch-meddling-michelle-obama-to-keynote-volunteerism-conference/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Chairman Frank and Aravosis&#039;s Misstatements Â« Law Dork, 2.0</title>
		<link>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/17/chairman-frank-and-aravosiss-misstatements-%c2%ab-law-dork-20/</link>
		<comments>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/17/chairman-frank-and-aravosiss-misstatements-%c2%ab-law-dork-20/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:26:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>AndrewBowen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chairman-frank]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[language]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lgbt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[virginia]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/17/chairman-frank-and-aravosiss-misstatements-%c2%ab-law-dork-20/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Of course, John cites to none of that in his post, which is very similar to what I've been writing and what Harvard Law School Professor Laurence Tribe and former Clinton Justice Department senior staffer Robert Raben have said as well. ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Of course, John cites to none of that in his post, which is very similar to what I&#8217;ve been writing and what Harvard Law School Professor Laurence Tribe and former Clinton Justice Department senior staffer Robert Raben have said as well. &#8230;</p>
<p>Continued here:Â <br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://lawdork.wordpress.com/2009/06/17/chairman-frank-and-aravosiss-misstatements/" title="Chairman Frank and Aravosis&#39;s Misstatements Â« Law Dork, 2.0" rel="nofollow">Chairman Frank and Aravosis&#39;s Misstatements Â« Law Dork, 2.0</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/17/chairman-frank-and-aravosiss-misstatements-%c2%ab-law-dork-20/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Aravosis Falsely States That DOJ Changed DOMA Suit Statement Â« Law &#8230;</title>
		<link>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/16/aravosis-falsely-states-that-doj-changed-doma-suit-statement-%c2%ab-law/</link>
		<comments>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/16/aravosis-falsely-states-that-doj-changed-doma-suit-statement-%c2%ab-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 08:49:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>JonCaldwell</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[doj]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[house]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[law-dork]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lgbt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[manos-torgo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[virginia]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/16/aravosis-falsely-states-that-doj-changed-doma-suit-statement-%c2%ab-law/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[United States is aware, John Aravosis is of the view that Justice didn't need to file any brief defending the law . My view was that Justice likely had an obligation to do so, but that it â€œdid not have to go this far.â€ ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>United States is aware, John Aravosis is of the view that Justice didn&#8217;t need to file any brief defending the law . My view was that Justice likely had an obligation to do so, but that it â€œdid not have to go this far.â€ &#8230;</p>
<p>View original here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://lawdork.wordpress.com/2009/06/16/aravosis-falsely-states-that-doj-changed-doma-suit-statement/" title="Aravosis Falsely States That DOJ Changed DOMA Suit Statement Â« Law ..." rel="nofollow">Aravosis Falsely States That DOJ Changed DOMA Suit Statement Â« Law &#8230;</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/16/aravosis-falsely-states-that-doj-changed-doma-suit-statement-%c2%ab-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Um artigo interessante sobre os colonatos</title>
		<link>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/14/um-artigo-interessante-sobre-os-colonatos/</link>
		<comments>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/14/um-artigo-interessante-sobre-os-colonatos/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Jun 2009 19:00:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>AbloggerKK</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Activism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[14-junho-09]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ana-matos-pires]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bola-de-cristal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[humor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[israeli]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[maria-joo-pires]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[noite-americana]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obama-e-israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[paulo-pinto]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[west]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/14/um-artigo-interessante-sobre-os-colonatos/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(...)Israel has never annexed the West Bank and Israeli law does not consider the West Bank to be part of Israel. For an example of how Israeli lfaw views the West Bank, a 2004 Israeli High Court of Justice ruling on the legality of land seizures related to the construction of Israel's separation barrier opened by stating as a given that "Since 1967, Israel has been holding the areas of Judea and Samariaâ€¦in belligerent occupation.." As a corollary, Israeli law recognizes that all Israeli p]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(&#8230;)Israel has never annexed the West Bank and Israeli law does not consider the West Bank to be part of Israel. For an example of how Israeli lfaw views the West Bank, a 2004 Israeli High Court of Justice ruling on the legality of land seizures related to the construction of Israel&#8217;s separation barrier opened by stating as a given that &#8220;Since 1967, Israel has been holding the areas of Judea and Samariaâ€¦in belligerent occupation..&#8221; As a corollary, Israeli law recognizes that all Israeli p</p>
<p>See more here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://jugular.blogs.sapo.pt/973086.html" title="Um artigo interessante sobre os colonatos" rel="nofollow">Um artigo interessante sobre os colonatos</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/14/um-artigo-interessante-sobre-os-colonatos/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama&#039;s DOJ Did Not Have To Go This Far Â« Law Dork, 2.0</title>
		<link>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/12/obamas-doj-did-not-have-to-go-this-far-%c2%ab-law-dork-20/</link>
		<comments>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/12/obamas-doj-did-not-have-to-go-this-far-%c2%ab-law-dork-20/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:02:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>DragoMarxx</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Leadership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[case]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chris-june]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[doj]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[doma]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[law-dork]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[virginia]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/12/obamas-doj-did-not-have-to-go-this-far-%c2%ab-law-dork-20/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Even if one argues, as I often have, that a government lawyer â€” from the Department of Justice to state attorneys general â€” must defend even those laws with which one disagrees*, such a lawyer needn't overstate his or her case. ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Even if one argues, as I often have, that a government lawyer â€” from the Department of Justice to state attorneys general â€” must defend even those laws with which one disagrees*, such a lawyer needn&#8217;t overstate his or her case. &#8230;</p>
<p>See the original post here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://lawdork.wordpress.com/2009/06/12/obamas-doj-did-not-have-to-go-this-far/" title="Obama&#39;s DOJ Did Not Have To Go This Far Â« Law Dork, 2.0" rel="nofollow">Obama&#39;s DOJ Did Not Have To Go This Far Â« Law Dork, 2.0</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/12/obamas-doj-did-not-have-to-go-this-far-%c2%ab-law-dork-20/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama on religious freedom</title>
		<link>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/07/obama-on-religious-freedom/</link>
		<comments>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/07/obama-on-religious-freedom/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Jun 2009 15:45:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>SterlingWong</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[military-personnel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public-diplomacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[restrict-religious]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shall-make]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/07/obama-on-religious-freedom/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[... f diplomatic and military personnel, counterterrorism strategy, public diplomacy, international law, and more....Congress shall make no law: Obama to restrict religious freedoms of non-profits...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8230; f diplomatic and military personnel, counterterrorism strategy, public diplomacy, international law, and more&#8230;.Congress shall make no law: Obama to restrict religious freedoms of non-profits&#8230;</p>
<p>See the original post:Â <br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.halfwaytoconcord.com/obama-on-religious-freedom" title="Obama on religious freedom" rel="nofollow">Obama on religious freedom</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.articlesoflaw.com/2009/06/07/obama-on-religious-freedom/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
