<?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>Community Defense Counsel &#187; State: New Jersey</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/tag/state-new-jersey/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress</link>
	<description>Protecting Children and Their Neighborhoods</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 17:30:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>N.J. Supreme Court: Towns can reject sexually oriented businesses, citing locations in other states</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2012/01/20/n-j-supreme-court-towns-can-reject-sexually-oriented-businesses-citing-locations-in-other-states/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2012/01/20/n-j-supreme-court-towns-can-reject-sexually-oriented-businesses-citing-locations-in-other-states/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 19:32:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB): Alternative Sites]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: New Jersey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Borough of Sayreville v. 35 Club]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=2663</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[HELD:  In evaluating the adequacy of alternative channels of communication when deciding an as-applied  constitutional challenge to the State’s statute limiting the places where sexually-oriented businesses may operate, trial courts are not precluded from considering the existence of sites that are located outside of New Jersey but that are found within the relevant market area as defined by the parties’ experts.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2012/01/20/n-j-supreme-court-towns-can-reject-sexually-oriented-businesses-citing-locations-in-other-states/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NJ appeals court upholds topless woman&#8217;s arrest to uphold important public moral sensibilities</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/09/14/nj-appeals-court-upholds-topless-womans-arrest-to-uphold-important-public-moral-sensibilities/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/09/14/nj-appeals-court-upholds-topless-womans-arrest-to-uphold-important-public-moral-sensibilities/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2011 23:12:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: New Jersey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Nudity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: New Jersey v. Feeley]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=2625</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/AP94cb6dd437504ea5824636434f1ea833.html">WSJ.com</a>: The court dismissed her argument that the town's public nudity ordinance discriminated against women because men are permitted to appear topless. The court says "restrictions on the exposure of the female breast are supported by the important governmental interest in safeguarding the public's moral sensibilities." &#124; <a href="http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/opinions/a0115-10.pdf"><em>New Jersey v. Feeley</em></a>, A-0115-10T3 (N.J. App. Sept. 14, 2011)]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/09/14/nj-appeals-court-upholds-topless-womans-arrest-to-uphold-important-public-moral-sensibilities/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NJ Superior Court reverses injunction against sexually oriented business, holds internet is not sufficient “alternative forum”</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/09/17/nj-superior-court-reverses-injunction-against-sexually-oriented-business-holds-internet-is-not-sufficient-%e2%80%9calternative-forum%e2%80%9d/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/09/17/nj-superior-court-reverses-injunction-against-sexually-oriented-business-holds-internet-is-not-sufficient-%e2%80%9calternative-forum%e2%80%9d/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2010 21:27:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB): Alternative Sites]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB): Licensing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: New Jersey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Internet]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=2431</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/appellate/a3537-08.opn.html"><em>Borough of Sayreville v. Club 35, LLC</em></a>, No. A-3537-08T1 (N.J. Super. App. Div. Sept. 17, 2010)]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/09/17/nj-superior-court-reverses-injunction-against-sexually-oriented-business-holds-internet-is-not-sufficient-%e2%80%9calternative-forum%e2%80%9d/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NJ: Federal court calls for further factual inquiry to determine whether SOB qualifies as non-conforming use where it makes operational changes</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/08/12/nj-federal-court-calls-for-further-factual-inquiry-to-determine-whether-sob-qualifies-as-non-conforming-use-where-it-makes-operational-changes/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/08/12/nj-federal-court-calls-for-further-factual-inquiry-to-determine-whether-sob-qualifies-as-non-conforming-use-where-it-makes-operational-changes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 21:51:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB): Alcohol]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: New Jersey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: MAG Realty v. City of Gloucester City]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=2411</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.communitydefense.org/cases/20100812.pdf"><em>MAG Realty, LLC v. City of Gloucester City</em></a>, 2010 WL 3210441 (D.N.J. Aug. 12, 2010)]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/08/12/nj-federal-court-calls-for-further-factual-inquiry-to-determine-whether-sob-qualifies-as-non-conforming-use-where-it-makes-operational-changes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NJ: Non-identical images/videos of child porn properly form separate counts of possession</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/10/20/new-jersey-v-roth/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/10/20/new-jersey-v-roth/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:22:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: New Jersey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Child Pornography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Double Jeopardy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=1620</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/decisions/appellate/a1371-07.opn.html"><em>State v. Roth</em></a>, No. 06-03-1076, 2009 WL 3460759 (N.J. Super. App. Div. Oct. 20, 2009)]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/10/20/new-jersey-v-roth/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NJ: Cherry Hill &#8220;ambushed&#8221; by 600k SOB settlement</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/10/06/nj-cherry-hill-ambushed-by-600k-sob-settlement/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/10/06/nj-cherry-hill-ambushed-by-600k-sob-settlement/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 16:49:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB): Zoning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: New Jersey]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=1321</guid>
		<description><![CDATA["Moving forward we've revised our zoning laws so this type of ambush never happens in Cherry Hill again."]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/10/06/nj-cherry-hill-ambushed-by-600k-sob-settlement/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NJ court rules that &#8220;common sense&#8221; rationale is insufficient to establish gov&#8217;t interest in SOB case</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/03/01/nj-court-rules-that-common-sense-rationale-is-insufficient-to-establish-govt-interest-in-sob-case/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/03/01/nj-court-rules-that-common-sense-rationale-is-insufficient-to-establish-govt-interest-in-sob-case/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Mar 2009 21:28:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Ordinances]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects (SOB)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB): Zoning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: New Jersey]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=1074</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In Township of Cinnaminson v. Robert Bertino, No. A-2074-07T12074-07T1 (N.J. Super. App. Div. March 2009), a New Jersey appellate court reversed a trial court ruling upholding a Cinnaminson zoning ordinance restricting “the location where commercial establishments that sell adult videos and novelty items can operate.”]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/03/01/nj-court-rules-that-common-sense-rationale-is-insufficient-to-establish-govt-interest-in-sob-case/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

