<?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>Virginia Lawyers Weekly &#187; U.S. Supreme Court</title>
	<atom:link href="http://valawyersweekly.com/tag/us-supreme-court/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://valawyersweekly.com</link>
	<description>VA Lawyers Weekly</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 14:57:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>A trap for p.i. lawyers&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/06/a-trap-for-p-i-lawyers/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/06/a-trap-for-p-i-lawyers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 May 2013 11:09:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Correy E. Stephenson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74115</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Personal injury lawyers whose clients have employee health benefit plans may want to pay attention to a new U.S. Supreme Court ERISA case, in order to protect their clients and themselves. The case creates a “window and a trap,” according to one plaintiff’s p.i. lawyer: Lawyers need to check current cases to protect their attorney’s [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/06/a-trap-for-p-i-lawyers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DUI case could have impact on implied consent&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/29/dui-case-could-have-impact-on-implied-consent/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/29/dui-case-could-have-impact-on-implied-consent/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2013 10:16:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Correy E. Stephenson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitutional]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Criminal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DUI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74054</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A U.S. Supreme Court decision addressing the constitutionality of blood draws from drunken driving suspects may have a limited effect in Virginia – for the time being. In the April 17 decision, which split the justices 5-4, the high court held that the natural breakdown of alcohol in the bloodstream does not automatically justify an [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/29/dui-case-could-have-impact-on-implied-consent/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Defense of employment claims may change&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/03/11/defense-of-employment-claims-may-change/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/03/11/defense-of-employment-claims-may-change/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2013 15:28:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dolan Media Newswires</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73249</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The U.S. Supreme Court is set to decide a case that may have a significant impact on how employers approach defending claims under multiple federal employment laws. The issue is one that may appear technical but nonetheless is significant for employers: The proper application of a recent Supreme Court decision and what an employee-plaintiff must [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/03/11/defense-of-employment-claims-may-change/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>U.S. justices question legality of warrantless DNA collection&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/02/27/supreme-court-questions-legality-of-warrantless-dna-collection/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/02/27/supreme-court-questions-legality-of-warrantless-dna-collection/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2013 14:23:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kimberly Atkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitutional]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Criminal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=72860</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[WASHINGTON – As they grilled the lawyers arguing before them on the issue of whether police can collect DNA samples from unconvicted arrestees without a warrant, the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court acknowledged just how high the stakes are. “I think this is, perhaps, the most important criminal procedure case that this court has [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/02/27/supreme-court-questions-legality-of-warrantless-dna-collection/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>U.S. Supreme Court takes up sentencing factors case&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/01/22/u-s-supreme-court-takes-up-sentencing-factors-case/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/01/22/u-s-supreme-court-takes-up-sentencing-factors-case/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 16:18:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kimberly Atkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Criminal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=72103</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Given the complexity of federal sentencing jurisprudence, it would not be surprising if the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court seem reluctant to shake up a sentencing scheme that Congress and the courts have relied upon for more than a decade. On Jan. 14, the court heard arguments in  Alleyne v. U.S., a Virginia federal [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/01/22/u-s-supreme-court-takes-up-sentencing-factors-case/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Man who killed fellow inmates executed</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/01/18/man-who-killed-fellow-inmates-executed/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/01/18/man-who-killed-fellow-inmates-executed/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 18:05:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>The Associated Press</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Criminal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=72075</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[JARRATT (AP) A man who strangled his prison cellmate and made good on a vow to continue killing if he wasn’t executed was put to death last Wednesday in Virginia’s electric chair. Robert Gleason Jr., 42, was pronounced dead at 9:08 p.m. at Greensville Correctional Center. He became the first inmate executed in the U.S. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/01/18/man-who-killed-fellow-inmates-executed/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Supreme Court ponders who’s a ‘supervisor’ under Title VII&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/03/supreme-court-ponders-whos-a-supervisor-under-title-vii/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/03/supreme-court-ponders-whos-a-supervisor-under-title-vii/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Dec 2012 15:36:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kimberly Atkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=71202</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Employment lawyers across the country have been watching a case that questions whether a person who harasses a coworker can be liable as a “supervisor” under Title VII when the person has some supervisory responsibility, but cannot hire and fire for the position. But the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court who heard argument on [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/03/supreme-court-ponders-whos-a-supervisor-under-title-vii/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Who’s on Obama’s Supreme Court short list?&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/27/whos-on-obamas-supreme-court-short-list/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/27/whos-on-obamas-supreme-court-short-list/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Nov 2012 14:34:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kimberly Atkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judgeships]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=71048</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[President Barack Obama’s reelection – and the fact that four of the current nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court are at or above the age of 74 – means that the president will likely appoint at least one more justice to the high court, perhaps as soon as next year. As with his first [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/27/whos-on-obamas-supreme-court-short-list/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>U.S. high court to decide if states can take defendants’ DNA&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/19/u-s-high-court-to-decide-if-states-can-take-defendants-dna/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/19/u-s-high-court-to-decide-if-states-can-take-defendants-dna/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Nov 2012 18:23:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Virginia Lawyers Weekly</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News In Brief]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=70869</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The U.S. Supreme Court has taken up a closely watched Fourth Amendment case, agreeing to decide whether states can collect and analyze DNA samples from people arrested for serious crimes but not yet convicted. The case stems from the arrest of a Maryland man for assault. The man’s DNA, which was collected, analyzed and entered [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/19/u-s-high-court-to-decide-if-states-can-take-defendants-dna/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Voters to weigh property rights question on Nov. 6</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/01/voters-to-weigh-property-rights-question-on-nov-6/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/01/voters-to-weigh-property-rights-question-on-nov-6/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2012 21:38:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>The Associated Press</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eminent Domain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General Assembly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=70455</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(AP)  Backers of a proposed constitutional amendment to limit the government taking of private property are quick to champion the cause of Bob Wilson, a Norfolk military contractor who is intent on keeping his successful business address within a critical couple miles of the world’s largest navy base. Question 1 on the Nov. 6 ballot [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/01/voters-to-weigh-property-rights-question-on-nov-6/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
