<?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: Free speech roundup	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2016/03/free-speech-roundup-55/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2016/03/free-speech-roundup-55/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2016 03:56:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Hugo S Cunningham		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2016/03/free-speech-roundup-55/comment-page-1/#comment-334057</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hugo S Cunningham]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2016 03:56:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=57709#comment-334057</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[If one is not willing to throw out Colorado&#039;s campaign control entirely on First Amendment grounds, one could impose a put-up-or-shut-up test on it:

If Colorado authorities believe it is important to collect all this information from political campaign speakers, then Colorado should be willing to pay the legal and other costs needed to collect it.

Possible example:
For each campaign account, Colorado should pay 100% of legal costs up to  $5,000, and then reduced shares on a sliding scale for legal costs above that, say 99% on $5k-10k, and 50% of legal expenses over $500k.

Political players would have no liability for errors by State legal advisors.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If one is not willing to throw out Colorado&#8217;s campaign control entirely on First Amendment grounds, one could impose a put-up-or-shut-up test on it:</p>
<p>If Colorado authorities believe it is important to collect all this information from political campaign speakers, then Colorado should be willing to pay the legal and other costs needed to collect it.</p>
<p>Possible example:<br />
For each campaign account, Colorado should pay 100% of legal costs up to  $5,000, and then reduced shares on a sliding scale for legal costs above that, say 99% on $5k-10k, and 50% of legal expenses over $500k.</p>
<p>Political players would have no liability for errors by State legal advisors.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Canvasback		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2016/03/free-speech-roundup-55/comment-page-1/#comment-334045</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Canvasback]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2016 20:33:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=57709#comment-334045</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Re: Québécois comedian Mike Ward

    That paragraph where the prosecutrix asks if everyone can hear the TV is comedy gold.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re: Québécois comedian Mike Ward</p>
<p>    That paragraph where the prosecutrix asks if everyone can hear the TV is comedy gold.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
