<?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; Topic: Pornography</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/tag/topic-pornography/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>Texas Court of Criminal Appeals refuses to hear ban on photographing people without their consent for sexual purposes</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2012/03/29/texas-court-of-criminal-appeals-refuses-to-hear-ban-on-photographing-people-without-their-consent-for-sexual-purposes/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2012/03/29/texas-court-of-criminal-appeals-refuses-to-hear-ban-on-photographing-people-without-their-consent-for-sexual-purposes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2012 18:11:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Texas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Pornography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Ex parte Nyabwa]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=2680</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/txstatutes/PE/5/21/21.15">Texas Penal Code § 21.15(b)(1)</a> makes it a crime to photograph someone “without the person’s consent” and “with intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.” . . .  a Texas appellate court upheld the statute . . . Today, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals refused to review . . . ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2012/03/29/texas-court-of-criminal-appeals-refuses-to-hear-ban-on-photographing-people-without-their-consent-for-sexual-purposes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>11th Circuit asked to reinstate $19.6 million award against Hustler</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2012/01/26/11th-circuit-asked-to-reinstate-19-6-million-award-against-hustler/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2012/01/26/11th-circuit-asked-to-reinstate-19-6-million-award-against-hustler/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 22:42:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: 11th Circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Pornography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Toffoloni v. LFP Publishing Group]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=2667</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/11th-circuit-asked-to-reinstate-19-6-million-award-against-hustler">First Amendment Center</a>: The <a href="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200816148.pdf" target="_blank">11<sup>th</sup> U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled</a> in June 2009 that a notorious death doesn’t give publishers a blank check to publish any images they wish. The case went to trial, and a jury in June 2011 voted to slap <em>Hustler Magazine</em> with $19.6 million in punitive damages for running the photos.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2012/01/26/11th-circuit-asked-to-reinstate-19-6-million-award-against-hustler/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>E.D. Penn. refuses to stop Catholic Group from protesting sex superstore</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/11/01/e-d-penn-refuses-to-stop-catholic-group-from-protesting-sex-superstore/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/11/01/e-d-penn-refuses-to-stop-catholic-group-from-protesting-sex-superstore/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Nov 2011 20:27:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Pennsylvania]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Pornography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Routes 202 and 306 and Novelities and Gifts v. The Kings Men]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=2635</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/10/31/41078.htm">CourtHouse News</a>:  A sex superstore in southeastern Pennsylvania can't enjoin a Catholic group from protesting outside its business, a federal judge ruled. &#124; <em>Routes 202 and 306 and Novelties and Gifts v. The Kings Men</em>, No. 2:11-cv-05822-PBT (E.D. Pa.)]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/11/01/e-d-penn-refuses-to-stop-catholic-group-from-protesting-sex-superstore/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Texas Supreme Court upholds so-called “pole tax”</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/08/26/texas-supreme-court-upholds-so-called-%e2%80%9cpole-tax%e2%80%9d/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/08/26/texas-supreme-court-upholds-so-called-%e2%80%9cpole-tax%e2%80%9d/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2011 20:38:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Texas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Pornography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Taxation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Combs v. Texas Entertainment Association]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=2607</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lower courts had called the so-called "pole tax" an improper burden on the free expression of nude dancing and a violation of the First Amendment.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/08/26/texas-supreme-court-upholds-so-called-%e2%80%9cpole-tax%e2%80%9d/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Federal Judge Blocks Alaskan Anti-Child-Porn Law</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/07/06/federal-judge-blocks-alaskan-anti-child-porn-law/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/07/06/federal-judge-blocks-alaskan-anti-child-porn-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Jul 2011 17:44:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Group: ACLU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Alaska]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Child Pornography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Pornography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression v. Sullivan]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=2588</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ A federal judge has blocked a state law meant to prevent the spread of child pornography, saying it violates the First Amendment and is too broad in its scope. U.S. District Court Judge Ralph Beistline permanently barred enforcement of Senate Bill 22 . . .  &#124; <a href="http://www.akclu.org/InTheCourts/AmBooksell.Order.GrantMSJ.2010.06.30.pdf">Order: <em>American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression v. Sullivan</em>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2011/07/06/federal-judge-blocks-alaskan-anti-child-porn-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

