<?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/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Bring back federal common law	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2012/03/bring-back-federal-common-law/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2012/03/bring-back-federal-common-law/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Mar 2012 02:45:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Interested student		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2012/03/bring-back-federal-common-law/comment-page-1/#comment-146430</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Interested student]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Mar 2012 02:45:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=28449#comment-146430</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I&#039;ve heard from various individuals that upending federal common law through Erie was a bad move (from the standpoint of maintaining limited government.) In all honesty, I&#039;m not sure if I understand why. At face value, it would seem that the federal courts deferring to state law would be a good thing, as it restricts the law-making power of the federal government relative to the states. Liberty-favoring individuals however tend to support the system prior to Erie though.

Is the reasoning, that federal courts deferring to state laws implies that U.S. citizenship subjugates &quot;citizens&quot; of one state to the laws of another, thereby reducing the actual meaning of state citizenship?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve heard from various individuals that upending federal common law through Erie was a bad move (from the standpoint of maintaining limited government.) In all honesty, I&#8217;m not sure if I understand why. At face value, it would seem that the federal courts deferring to state law would be a good thing, as it restricts the law-making power of the federal government relative to the states. Liberty-favoring individuals however tend to support the system prior to Erie though.</p>
<p>Is the reasoning, that federal courts deferring to state laws implies that U.S. citizenship subjugates &#8220;citizens&#8221; of one state to the laws of another, thereby reducing the actual meaning of state citizenship?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Ron Miler		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2012/03/bring-back-federal-common-law/comment-page-1/#comment-146031</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ron Miler]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2012 14:36:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=28449#comment-146031</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[It is cool to question established legal principles that we now take for granted.  But the chances of Erie getting overturned now are the same as Ron Paul being elected president.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is cool to question established legal principles that we now take for granted.  But the chances of Erie getting overturned now are the same as Ron Paul being elected president.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Paul McKaskle		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2012/03/bring-back-federal-common-law/comment-page-1/#comment-145891</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Paul McKaskle]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2012 19:29:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=28449#comment-145891</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I agree--and the intellectual basis for doing so is well stated in the dissent of Justices Murphy and Rutledge in Guaranty Trust of New York v. York!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree&#8211;and the intellectual basis for doing so is well stated in the dissent of Justices Murphy and Rutledge in Guaranty Trust of New York v. York!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
