<?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: RM200: New SORNA regulations (Again)	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.registrymatters.co/podcast/rm200-new-sorna-regulations-again/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.registrymatters.co/podcast/rm200-new-sorna-regulations-again/</link>
	<description>A legal and policy podcast about the sex offender registry</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Nov 2021 17:56:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Neil Williams		</title>
		<link>https://www.registrymatters.co/podcast/rm200-new-sorna-regulations-again/#comment-2801</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Neil Williams]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Nov 2021 17:56:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.registrymatters.co/?post_type=podcast&#038;p=2727#comment-2801</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Is anyone considering illegal ex post facto applications? Recent case of John Doe vs. Kent removed plaintiff from registry in Tenn. through Due Process and ex post facto because feds ruled registry punitive without review.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is anyone considering illegal ex post facto applications? Recent case of John Doe vs. Kent removed plaintiff from registry in Tenn. through Due Process and ex post facto because feds ruled registry punitive without review.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
