<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Ninth Justice @ The National Journal</title>
	<atom:link href="http://press.princeton.edu/blog/2009/06/18/the-ninth-justice-the-national-journal/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://press.princeton.edu/blog/2009/06/18/the-ninth-justice-the-national-journal/</link>
	<description>Commentary and Insight from Princeton University Press's Authors and Staff</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 00:38:41 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: mauritus</title>
		<link>http://press.princeton.edu/blog/2009/06/18/the-ninth-justice-the-national-journal/#comment-1678</link>
		<dc:creator>mauritus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:17:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://press.princeton.edu/blog/?p=1947#comment-1678</guid>
		<description>Thanks for sharing that Jessica. I totally agree with this excerpt:Questioning nominees is not a good way to identify their judicial philosophy. Senators should investigate a nominee's judicial philosophy in the same way that presidents do.

I also think that if they don't there bound to be trouble and it will be a nonfactual solution.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for sharing that Jessica. I totally agree with this excerpt:Questioning nominees is not a good way to identify their judicial philosophy. Senators should investigate a nominee&#8217;s judicial philosophy in the same way that presidents do.</p>
<p>I also think that if they don&#8217;t there bound to be trouble and it will be a nonfactual solution.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
