<?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: Sex Toys</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/tag/topic-sex-toys/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress</link>
	<description>Protecting Children and Their Neighborhoods</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 16:58:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Law Review: Why the 5th Circuit is Correct About Lawrence</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/01/29/law-review-why-the-5th-circuit-is-correct-about-lawrence/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/01/29/law-review-why-the-5th-circuit-is-correct-about-lawrence/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2010 18:02:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Periodicals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Legal Periodicals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: 11th Circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: 5th Circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Sex Toys]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Lawrence v Texas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Reliable Consultants v Earle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Williams v Morgan]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=1928</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu/issues/43-2_Iguchi.pdf"><em>Satisfying Lawrence: The Fifth Circuit Strikes Ban on Sex Toy Sales</em></a>
Jamie Iguchi, 43 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 655 (2009)

"At its core, the disagreement between the circuits turns on the scope of the right announced in Lawrence and the standard of review it requires."]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/01/29/law-review-why-the-5th-circuit-is-correct-about-lawrence/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Law Review: Should Texas&#8217;s Former Ban on Obscene Device Promotion Pass Constitutional Muster Under a Murky Lawrence?</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/01/06/law-review-should-texass-former-ban-on-obscene-device-promotion-pass-constitutional-muster-under-a-murky-lawrence/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/01/06/law-review-should-texass-former-ban-on-obscene-device-promotion-pass-constitutional-muster-under-a-murky-lawrence/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Jan 2010 22:43:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Periodicals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Legal Periodicals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Texas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Obscenity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Sex Toys]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Lawrence v Texas]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=1785</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Laura M. Clark, 41 St. Mary's L.J. 177 (2009)

"Part IV will analyze relevant U.S. Supreme Court holdings and Texas cases, apply Lawrence to the Texas and Alabama statutes, and examine whether the Texas statute might be changed to pass constitutional muster."]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/01/06/law-review-should-texass-former-ban-on-obscene-device-promotion-pass-constitutional-muster-under-a-murky-lawrence/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Rabbit&#8221; Hunting in the Supreme Court: The Constitutionality of State Prohibitions of Sex Toy Sales Following Lawrence v. Texas</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/12/15/rabbit-hunting-in-the-supreme-court-the-constitutionality-of-state-prohibitions-of-sex-toy-sales-following-lawrence-v-texas/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/12/15/rabbit-hunting-in-the-supreme-court-the-constitutionality-of-state-prohibitions-of-sex-toy-sales-following-lawrence-v-texas/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:13:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Periodicals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Legal Periodicals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: 11th Circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: 5th Circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB): Morality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Sex Toys]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Lawrence v Texas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Reliable Consultants v Earle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Williams v Morgan]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=1706</guid>
		<description><![CDATA["This Note . . . supports the Eleventh Circuit's interpretation of Lawrence in Williams v. Attorney General of Alabama as a means of limiting the Lawrence decision and preserving traditional state authority to democratically police the borders of accepted sexual behavior in preservation of public morality."]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/12/15/rabbit-hunting-in-the-supreme-court-the-constitutionality-of-state-prohibitions-of-sex-toy-sales-following-lawrence-v-texas/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Courts divide over constitutionality of sex toy bans</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/11/10/httpwrit-lp-findlaw-comgrossman20091110-html/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/11/10/httpwrit-lp-findlaw-comgrossman20091110-html/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:55:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles: Pornography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Sex Toys]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: 1568 Montgomery Highway Inc v City of Hoover]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Lawrence v Texas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Reliable Consultants v Earle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: Williams v Morgan]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=1552</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://writ.lp.findlaw.com/grossman/20091110.html">FindLaw</a>: "The Supreme Court of Alabama recently upheld a state obscenity law banning the sale or promotion of sex toys. In so holding, the Court agreed with one of the two federal appellate courts to consider the same question in recent cases"]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/11/10/httpwrit-lp-findlaw-comgrossman20091110-html/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Porn flounders, but adult novely business booms&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/10/28/porn-flounders-but-adult-novely-business-booms/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/10/28/porn-flounders-but-adult-novely-business-booms/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 17:42:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Sex Toys]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=1396</guid>
		<description><![CDATA["While the current business surge among sex toys isn’t quite that strong, it’s notable. Babeland, a chain of sex toy stores across the country, says sales were up 10 percent in the first half of the year. Representatives at Hustler Hollywood, one of Los Angeles’ most high profile adult stores, said they have seen a significant increase in business as well, though declined to give numbers."]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/10/28/porn-flounders-but-adult-novely-business-booms/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Following the 11th Circuit in Williams, Alabama court holds that public morality is a sufficient basis to uphold ban on sale of &#8220;sex toys&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/09/11/following-the-11th-circuit-in-williams-alabama-court-holds-that-public-morality-is-a-sufficient-basis-to-uphold-ban-on-sale-of-sex-toys/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/09/11/following-the-11th-circuit-in-williams-alabama-court-holds-that-public-morality-is-a-sufficient-basis-to-uphold-ban-on-sale-of-sex-toys/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 17:45:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: 11th Circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: 5th Circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Alabama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Sex Toys]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: 1568 Montgomery Highway Inc v City of Hoover]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=1312</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.communitydefense.org/cases/20090911.pdf">1568 Montgomery Highway, Inc. v. City of Hoover</a>, (AL Sup. Ct., Sept. 11, 2009)]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/09/11/following-the-11th-circuit-in-williams-alabama-court-holds-that-public-morality-is-a-sufficient-basis-to-uphold-ban-on-sale-of-sex-toys/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Alabama High Court Says Morality Can Still Justify Commercial Regulation</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/09/11/alabama-high-court-says-morality-can-still-justify-commercial-regulation/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/09/11/alabama-high-court-says-morality-can-still-justify-commercial-regulation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 17:28:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB): Morality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Alabama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Sex Toys]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: 1568 Montgomery Highway Inc v City of Hoover]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=1309</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.alabamaappellatewatch.com/uploads/file/1070531.PDF"><em>1568 Montgomery Highway, Inc. v. City of Hoover</em></a>, (AL Sup. Ct., Sept. 11, 2009)

"In a 7-2 decision, the court upheld against constitutional attack Alabama's ban on the commercial distribution of sex toys . . . The court concluded that 'public morality' can serve as a legitimate rational basis for regulating non-private commercial activity . . ."]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/09/11/alabama-high-court-says-morality-can-still-justify-commercial-regulation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
