<?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: US Supreme Court asks for views of Texas SG</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.scotxblog.com/case-notes/us-supreme-court-asks-for-views-of-texas-sg/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.scotxblog.com/case-notes/us-supreme-court-asks-for-views-of-texas-sg/</link>
	<description>Legal Issues Before the Texas Supreme Court</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Jul 2010 19:11:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: SCOTUS denies review of petition challenging Texas parental-termination system</title>
		<link>http://www.scotxblog.com/case-notes/us-supreme-court-asks-for-views-of-texas-sg/comment-page-1/#comment-2987</link>
		<dc:creator>SCOTUS denies review of petition challenging Texas parental-termination system</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 21:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scotxblog.com/case-notes/us-supreme-court-asks-for-views-of-texas-sg/#comment-2987</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;[...] case became notable when the US Supreme Court formally called for the views of the Texas state solicitor general, believed to be the first such request. The Texas SG did file that invitation brief, recommending [...]&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] case became notable when the US Supreme Court formally called for the views of the Texas state solicitor general, believed to be the first such request. The Texas SG did file that invitation brief, recommending [...]</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don Cruse</title>
		<link>http://www.scotxblog.com/case-notes/us-supreme-court-asks-for-views-of-texas-sg/comment-page-1/#comment-1832</link>
		<dc:creator>Don Cruse</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 00:51:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scotxblog.com/case-notes/us-supreme-court-asks-for-views-of-texas-sg/#comment-1832</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Actually, Abbott takes some pride in the accomplishments of the SG&#039;s office during his tenure.  This seems more like a feather in his cap than a personal slight.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;As I understand it, the U.S. Supreme Court has not requested the views of a state attorney general in several decades.  During that time, several states (including Texas) have established robust SG&#039;s offices on the federal model.  With that in mind, directing a request to the state SG seems perfectly natural to me.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, Abbott takes some pride in the accomplishments of the SG&#8217;s office during his tenure.  This seems more like a feather in his cap than a personal slight.</p>

<p>As I understand it, the U.S. Supreme Court has not requested the views of a state attorney general in several decades.  During that time, several states (including Texas) have established robust SG&#8217;s offices on the federal model.  With that in mind, directing a request to the state SG seems perfectly natural to me.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JC</title>
		<link>http://www.scotxblog.com/case-notes/us-supreme-court-asks-for-views-of-texas-sg/comment-page-1/#comment-1830</link>
		<dc:creator>JC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 18:17:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scotxblog.com/case-notes/us-supreme-court-asks-for-views-of-texas-sg/#comment-1830</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Seems curious that SCOTUS would request a statement of Texas&#039; official position from an office whose existence is recognized by neither the Texas Legislature nor the Texas Constitution.   No doubt the SG would ultimately provide this statement anyway, but it&#039;s a little funny that they bypassed Mr. Abbott.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Seems curious that SCOTUS would request a statement of Texas&#8217; official position from an office whose existence is recognized by neither the Texas Legislature nor the Texas Constitution.   No doubt the SG would ultimately provide this statement anyway, but it&#8217;s a little funny that they bypassed Mr. Abbott.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
