Michigan gay marriage ban struck down. 14th court victory in a row post- Windsor decision

UPDATE: The gay marriages have begun in Michigan! (Saturday March 22, 2014)

A federal judge today, nominated by Ronald Reagan, just struck down Michigan’s ban on gay marriages.

This is the 14th consecutive victory marriage equality advocates have had since last summer’s game-changing Supreme Court decision in US v. Windsor, striking down a key provision of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

Plaintiffs April DeBoer and Jayne Rowze react to the decision:


Plaintiffs April DeBoer and Jayne Rowze react to the Michigan federal court’s decision striking down the state’s constitutional ban on gay marriage.

The state of Michigan has filed an appeal, and asked the court to stay the decision until the appeal is concluded.  In the meantime, it appears gay marriage might begin immediately if the stay doesn’t come soon:

gay marriage michigan

You can find the complete decision below. Here’s the best part:

In attempting to define this case as a challenge to “the will of the people,” Tr. 2/25/14 p. 40, state defendants lost sight of what this case is truly about: people. No court record of this proceeding could ever fully convey the personal sacrifice of these two plaintiffs who seek to ensure that the state may no longer impair the rights of their children and the thousands of others now being raised by same-sex couples. It is the Court’s fervent hope that these children will grow up “to understand the integrity and closeness of their own family and its concord with other families in their community and in their daily lives.” Windsor, 133 S. Ct. at 2694. Today’s decision is a step in that direction, and affirms the enduring principle that regardless of whoever finds favor in the eyes of the most recent majority, the guarantee of equal protection must prevail.

Mark Regnerus, authored of now-debunked anti-gay study.

Mark Regnerus, authored of now-debunked anti-gay study.

In addition to find the Michigan ban unconstitutional, the court took a special swipe at the anti-gays’ star witness, Mark Regnerus, who recently authored a debunked “study” claiming that gay parents turn kids gay and make them want to kill themselves.  The study was conceived at the Republican party’s leading think-tank, the Heritage Foundation.

One of the main problems with Regnerus’ “study” is that it wasn’t terribly clear that any of the children he examined actually grew up with gay parents.

The court had this to say about Regnerus:

The Court finds Regnerus’s testimony entirely unbelievable and not worthy of serious consideration.

Utah saw a large number of weddings during the brief period that gay nuptials were legal in that state in December, 2013, pending appeal of a court case.

Utah saw a large number of weddings during the brief period that gay nuptials were legal in that state in December, 2013, pending appeal of a court case.

This is a big deal since Regnerus faux-study is being used the Russians, other eastern European governments, and anti-gay governments in Africa to justify a draconian crackdown on gay rights in those regions. The judge also noted that Regnerus study was not “impartial,” as he claimed:

While Regnerus maintained that the funding source did not affect his impartiality as a researcher, the Court finds this testimony unbelievable. The funder clearly wanted a certain result, and Regnerus obliged.

The judge even put the word “study” in scare-quotes.:

Whatever Regnerus may have found in this “study,” he certainly cannot purport to have undertaken a scholarly research effort to compare the outcomes of children raised by same-sex couples with those of children raised by heterosexual couples. It is no wonder that the NFSS has been widely and severely criticized by other scholars, and that Regnerus’s own sociology department at the University of Texas has distanced itself from the NFSS in particular and Dr. Regnerus’s views in general and reaffirmed the aforementioned APA position statement….

They, along with Regnerus, clearly represent a fringe viewpoint that is rejected by the vast majority of their colleagues across a variety of social science fields.

Another great quote from the decision:

Fourth, the state defendants’ position suffers from a glaring inconsistency. Even assuming that children raised by same-sex couples fare worse than children raised by heterosexual married couples, the state defendants fail to explain why Michigan law does not similarly exclude certain classes of heterosexual couples from marrying whose children persistently have had “sub-optimal” developmental outcomes. According to Rosenfeld’s study, children raised by suburban residents academically outperformed those children raised by rural and urban residents. Likewise, “middle class and poor families are ‘sub-optimal’ compared to well-off families, and couples with less formal education are ‘sub-optimal’ compared to couples with more formal education.” Pls.’ Ex. 31 at 5. A child’s racial background is another predictive indicator of future success, as the study showed that “the probability of making good progress through school is greater in the U.S. for children of Asian descent than for children of all other racial groups.” Id. Taking the state defendants’ position to its logical conclusion, the empirical evidence at hand should require that only rich, educated, suburban-dwelling, married Asians may marry, to the exclusion of all other heterosexual couples. Obviously the state has not adopted this policy and with good reason. The absurdity of such a requirement is self-evident. Optimal academic outcomes for children cannot logically dictate which groups may marry.

(I’m told that in order to better see my Facebook posts in your feed, you need to “follow” me.)

Michigan gay marriage decision

Follow me on Twitter: @aravosis | @americablog | @americabloggay | Facebook | Instagram | Google+ | LinkedIn. John Aravosis is the Executive Editor of AMERICAblog, which he founded in 2004. He has a joint law degree (JD) and masters in Foreign Service from Georgetown; and has worked in the US Senate, World Bank, Children's Defense Fund, the United Nations Development Programme, and as a stringer for the Economist. He is a frequent TV pundit, having appeared on the O'Reilly Factor, Hardball, World News Tonight, Nightline, AM Joy & Reliable Sources, among others. John lives in Washington, DC. .

Share This Post

  • neroden

    Snyder’s making it very clear that it’s nothing to do with him, that it’s all Bill Schuette — the *elected* AG of Michigan.

    Never underestimate Snyder. He’s very clever, and his primary goal is to destroy all competition. After Schuette makes a fool of himself for a while, watch for Snyder to propose a Constitutional amendment to have the governor appoint the AG rather than having the AG elected.

  • neroden

    Snyder is a clever one. He’s going to leave all this to Schuette and stay out of it personally.


    The Michigan Republicans are ideological right-wingers, with a fundamentalist agenda. But Snyder is different. Snyder has one and only one agenda: Snyder wants to be King of Michigan.

    This issue threatens his chances of becoming King of Michigan, because he needs to keep the fundamentalist ideological right-wingers as his foot soldiers, but he also needs to keep the general populace from getting too angry at him. His ideal situation would be for this to become a *fait accompli* so he can get back to dismantling local governments. (Yes, he’s targeing the Democratic-voting municipalities now… but make no mistake, he’s not going to stop there, he’ll dismantle the Republican-voting municipalities as soon as he can.)

    Snyder may actually be hoping for Schuette to make a fool out of himself and waste a bunch of state money. Because then Snyder can step in and call for the attorney general position to be appointed by the governor, instead of elected as the position is now. To eliminate this waste and abuse by Schuette, you know.

    Do NOT underestimate Snyder. He is MUCH smarter than goons like Walker and Scott and even Kasich.

  • neroden

    Jefferson was a smart cookie, realizing that property could not be a fundamental right.

  • Stev84

    Don’t be so sure. They are already having problems hiring credible scientists. So the pool is getting more fringe as time goes on. Regnerus reputation is already trashed, so he may take more gigs. They also pay very well.

  • docsterx

    Yes, they felt the need to defend traditional marriage.

    Sorry to hear about your father. He had a wonderful daughter.

  • docsterx

    No, I’ve never heard that. Seriously? I guess that could be expected but it’s still repulsive. SO the right will support “science” as long as it supports them. Disgusting.

  • docsterx

    Good point “they love the undifferentiated mass” and not the individual. Maybe they see the “preborn” as a huge mass that needs protection and the postborn as individuals who are the products of single mothers or moochers who deserve to starve.

    Of course, they don’t really do much even for the undifferentiated mass of troops, paying them so little that they need to shop at base commissaries and use food stamps.

  • docsterx

    I’ve often thought that the right shares delusions about gays, same-sex marriage, gay parenting, “choosing” to be gay, etc. In psychiarty it used to be known as Laseque-Fairet Syndrome (folie a plusieurs or madness of many). It’s now called shared psychotic disorder. It’s when a group shares the same delusions. The group tends to be socially isolated and refuses to interact with other groups. They all adopt similar, unrealistic beliefs: all gays are sinners (ignoring other sinners), all gays are bad parents, same-sex marriage is evil and will undermine heterosexual marriage, “traditional marriage” (as if there were just one traditional marriage) is about one man and one woman and is only for procreation, being gay is a choice, gayness can be cured, etc.

    Their unreasonable beliefs also extend to other areas, as well: the US is a Christian nation, Obama is the antichrist, the left wants to take our guns, etc. Since they don’t interact with other groups and can’t seem to take an objective view, their delusions are reinforced by their fellow right-wingers. So Regnerus says gay parents are bad, Fox and Breitbart repeat that, it gets repeated by Limbaugh, the right wingers repeat it to each other right wing blogs, in magazines, on other websites, on TV, on radio, to each other in groups (religious and political gatherings) and it just keeps getting reinforced. And they become comfortable with their beliefs and totally convinced that those beliefs are correct and so are they in believing them.

  • Ninja0980

    I’m betting the state thought that him being a St.Ronnie appointee that he was going to play along with them.
    They thought wrong.

  • itsjoe618

    The rhetorical icing on the cake for sure.

  • itsjoe618

    “Of course, this won’t stop the right wing or the Russians from continuing to wave his deeply flawed work as proof that children of same sex couples fare worse than children of straight couples.”

    I believe its called “confirmation bias” in psychology. The right wingers and their overseas allies are all guilty of being made deaf to reason by the cacophony of their own echo chamber. These people are largely immune to reason.

  • Badgerite

    It is a beautiful decision. The Judge takes apart the defendants ( Snyder, et al) arguments one by one. Piece by piece. Til it is quite clear that this decision upholds the interests of people ( society ) in general and families in particular. And that the United States Constitution requires this result. I particularly liked the part where he noted that marriage laws were adopted to provide protection to existing families by providing stability and safety. And as this case demonstrates, safety and stability can only be ensured through equality.

  • StraightGrandmother

    I have a message from me to Regnerus,
    “Checkmate asshole”

  • StraightGrandmother

    Sherif Girgis, a Robert George protege.
    Girgis & oh what is that other young Heritage Foundation guy, oh Yes Ryan t Anderson and Robert George wrote that Marriage book about a year ago.

    So basically Robert George would not take the stand he sent a kid to do it.
    My dad used to have a saying that comes to mind right now,

    “Never send a boy to do a man’s job”
    I miss my dad, he died a year ago. He was a kind, loving, gentle, strong, great man.

  • StraightGrandmother

    Don’t you know he was gifted with a think tank. Nice building paid staff, yeah he got his payoff.
    Who is funding his think tank you ask?
    Wait for it….drum roll…. The Witherspoon Institute.
    This came out at Trial.

  • Badgerite

    For my money, this is what defines us as Americans. Our agreement as to the fundamental rights of our citizens. The contract, as it were. And it crosses or should cross party lines and even religious lines.
    What makes a ‘sin’ a crime is the demonstrable harm it does to people and or society. Other aspects of religion are confined to personal belief. Not civil laws.

  • Badgerite

    Or perhaps a phrase entering modern vocabulary such as to pull a regnerus. Definition: to trip over your own ass on the way to the bathroom. (Sorry. Couldn’t resist. His ‘study’ is such a frigging fraud.) I can’t believe he actually thought he would get away with a piece of crap like that as ‘evidence’ of anything.

  • Butch1

    “Dr.” Regnerus should lose his teaching position for doing such shoddy junk “science” like this so-called study turned out to be. When his own department distanced itself from him that is a good sign just how much of a charlatan he is in his own field. Wherever he teaches should not renew his contract out of embarrassment.

  • I’m no lawyer either, but I feel the same way.

    Argument: “Tradition!”
    Rebuttal: “So were bans on interracial marriage. Not to mention laws allowing slavery. Inadmissible.”

    Argument: “Sacred!”
    Rebuttal: “That’s a religious argument. This case about secular law. Disallowed.”

    Argument: “Immoral!”
    Rebuttal: “That’s animus against a minority group. Moral disapproval is not a valid reason. Overruled.”

    Argument: “Children!”
    Rebuttal: “We allow infertile opposite-sex couples to marry. There is no evidence married gay and lesbian couples are bad parents. Irrelevant.”

  • Gay herdman

    Smoke Quality Buds here at moderate prices
    we offer lemon haze, sour diesel,Og Kush,Mango kush,banana kush and many more
    text via (360) 209-1845 for order

  • Monophylos Fortikos

    I’m going with your first thought. The important distinction is that Mark Regnerus is a someone, a “name”, whereas to right-wingers soldiers don’t have names. It’s ARE TROOPS they love, as an undifferentiated mass, not soldiers. Regnerus, however, because he’s well-known as himself and not just as a faceless member of an abstract class, is a good candidate for martyrdom. I fully expect he’ll be made a pet social scientist on a good salary, sent around to give speeches about how the liberal academic community punishes dissenters like himself.

  • docsterx

    Yes, he was a 3rd year law student. The judge said something like, “You might be an expert witness some day, but not while someone else is still grading your papers.”

    I think the judge was having a field day slapping down the anti-gay crowd and their “expert witnesses” and the points they tried to make concerning the case.

  • docsterx

    I’ve wondered what the conservatives would do for Regnerus if he lost his job. At first I thought that, since he was a such willing handmaiden for the rightwingers, that they’d always see that he had a job. Somewhere at a christianist university, conservative think tank or elsewhere. But then I remembered how the right wing loves the members of the military while they’re serving. But once they’re discharged, they willingly cut food stamps and other benefits. I think they’d do to Regnerus what they do to post-born fetuses, let them starve.

  • MyrddinWilt

    Yeah but they got a stay so the bigots think it doesn’t count.

    The courts have stopped giving stays during appeals and the appeals courts now seem unlikely to grant them. Which is as expected when there are like 14 straight victories over the bigots.

  • Mighty

    Rule of law is something the religious right hates above all else. They want this country run by mosaic law just like Iran is run by sharia law.

  • Stev84

    The only bad thing is the obligatory suck up to religious nuts. Because saying that most of the voters were motivated by animus would be a bad thing.

  • Indigo

    Biblical indeed.

  • Silver_Witch

    I love your post. It reminds me that money does not always buy the answer. With so many states wasting millions of dollars to in essence attempt to keep rights from people, it is nice to know that “right” can win even over corruption by monied people.

  • jomicur

    There are, I believe, a total of SIX cases winding their way through the courts here in PA. It’s impossible to imagine all of them failing.

  • keirmeister

    Kudos to the judge. I’m not a lawyer, but I find it insanely frustrating to hear anti-rights arguments – particularly concerning gay rights. Their arguments are so unsophisticated, easily debunked, and don’t hold up to basic logic. I guess this shows the power of money in a “debate”, but it’s nice to see someone in authority smack this stupidity down into the sewer of bigotry-disguised-as-science where it belongs.

  • MyrddinWilt

    Uh oh, the biblical marriage forces are regrouping. They have a list of demands!


    Note these in particular:

    E. Since marriage is for life, neither this Constitution nor the
    constitution of any State, nor any state or federal law, shall be
    construed to permit divorce. (Deut 22:19; Mark 10:9)

    F. If a married man dies without children, his brother shall marry
    the widow. If he refuses to marry his brother’s widow or
    deliberately does not give her children, he shall pay a fine of one
    shoe and be otherwise punished in a manner to be determined by law.
    (Gen. 38:6-10; Deut 25:5-10)

    G. In lieu of marriage, if there are no acceptable men in your
    town, it is required that you get your dad drunk and have sex with
    him (even if he had previously offered you up as a sex toy to men
    young and old), tag-teaming with any sisters you may have. Of
    course, this rule applies only if you are female. (Gen 19:31-36)

  • I’ve yet to have a gay couple come into my office to file a tax return, but I look forward to the day. Philadelphia is nearly surrounded with New Jersey, Delaware, and Maryland nearby.

  • Indigo

    The sad part is how the states are waiting to be taken to court, their anti-gay regulations be overturned, and then they file for a stay while . . . well, I don’t exactly know what they’re doing. Stalling for time because . . . they’re haters. That’s all I get out of it. Meanwhile, equal rights for gblt people continues to be affirmed in the courts.

  • HeartlandLiberal

    Also Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, Northern Mariana Islands, and U.S. Virgin Islands. And there are ten other unincorporated islands under U.S. Territory designation and control scattered around the globe, I wonder if we should include Guantanamo in this list? Bringing a little justice there would not be a bad thing.

  • HeartlandLiberal

    I am sure that the chair and leadership of University of Texas at Austin, where Regnerus is “professor” in sociology department, would love to hear details from this decision. I just emailed the chair, whose address is on the department’s web site.

    Note, the quotes around “professor”. Given the judges use of quotes around “study:, they just seemed appropriate.


    We have gay women friends who married recently in Maryland. They can now file their federal taxes together. Then they have to figure out how to redo them to file for the state.

    Now the state requires as starting point on the state form that you enter the adjusted gross from the Fed before calculating various deductions.

    Now how the h*ll are they going to do that?? Their joint federal return is legal, it is the legal figure.

    There is no legal way they can break it out. Are they supposed to pretend to each file separate federal returns? That would produce totally different outcomes in calculating the adjusted gross.

    The equality clause is just so hard to ignore when ignoring it is so blatantly obvious. Just the impact on filing taxes alone means all state level laws such as this are doomed. States defending them are wasting their citizens time and money defending the indefensible.

  • mirror

    I didn’t even read this posting at first. I realize now I was somehow taking it for granted. Of course, they threw it out. It’s bogus. Then tonight I came to AmericaBlog to check in and was overwhelmed by a feeling of optimism when I saw the link and I’ve been crying reading it. 10 years ago, I never would have expected to see this day, with these barriers falling one after another. Maybe humanity isn’t totally hopeless.

  • EdA

    Well, santorum has become the term for frothy mixture (and still ranks #1 and #3 on Google search, with the Wikipedia entry on the living embodiment of santorum being #2. You should check for yourself.)

    So there’s no reason why regnerus should not be used to describe intentionally flawed “research” rejected by actual scholars, as in The Koch suckers spend tens of millions of dollars on regnerus disputing the reality of global climate change.


    Congrats, it appears several county clerk offices will be open tomorrow.

  • emjayay

    I also like the part where he says OK, if we don’t let gay people have kids because they are shitty parents, I guess we’ll have to limit parenting to suburban Asians.

  • emjayay

    Actually, that’s the Declaration of Independence.

    “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
    that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
    that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

    Or, as Jefferson originally wrote:

    We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are
    created equal & independant, that from that equal creation they
    derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the
    preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness

    Notice he used “sacred” but didn’t refer to a Creator. I think there was another rough draft that used the “self-evident” wording like the final version instead of “sacred & undeniable”. Also he got the part you referred to from I think Locke, who said life, liberty, and property.

  • Ron Robertson

    Yes, it smashed Regnerus so badly that I don’t think any court in the US will ever accept his testimony or “evidence” again. The whole opinion is worth reading. The judge basically let the defendants completely hang themselves. Every one came out looking like their own conclusions were unjustified by their own data.

  • I am so, so, so glad to see Mark Regnerus having his face rubbed in his own pseudo-academic vomitus. But given the very real harm he’s done here in America and all over the globe, I won’t be satisfied until he is ruined, disgraced, and dismissed utterly.

    It should also be clear from his testimony and continued defense of his rubbish study, Regnerus was never a patsy in this, but an eager and willing participant in a sham of scientific research.

    I hope one day for the very name–‘Regnerus’–to become synonymous with scientific fraud, irresponsible slander, and deliberately misrepresented results.

    “Hey Jones, you hear what happened to Peters?”

    “No what?”

    “He tried to publish a totally Regnerus paper. Flawed, self-selected sample. Funding that demanded a pre-determined outcome. And totally bogus data analysis. The department head fired his ass immediately. He’ll never work in the field again.”

    “Rightly so.”

  • Congratulations, Elijah.

  • I think your suspicions are probably correct, Mark, that Judge Friedman wanted Regnerus on the stand, to help establish once and for all — in official court transcripts — that the NFSS is pure and utter BS. As well as the Marks and Price papers.

    But the NFSS is especially egregious in its mendacity. The part I found most amusing was how Friedman pointed out in his decision that the only two people in the Regnerus sample pool who were ACTUALLY raised by gay couples — both lesbian — for their entire childhoods, actually turned out rather well-adjusted and successful.

    As for the excluded ‘researcher’, if I remember correctly, the anti-gay defendants wanted to put this law student on the stand, pretending he was an expert.

  • annatopia

    already did. back in february:


    the decision is being stayed while the state appeals. i didn’t expect enjoinment considering the political climate here, but it’s a step in the right direction and it’s going to happen.

  • vickif

    I wish you many years together and have a wonderful wedding and life together.

  • vickif

    BS to Ricky Snyder, No one should ever vote on other people’s civil rights. According to the Constitution of the United States everyone is entitled to LIFE LIBERTY AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS. What part don’t these clowns understand”?

  • MyrddinWilt

    Oh even better, the judge basically told the plaintiffs to bring the marriage case. Specifically their original complaint was that they could not adopt. The judge told them that they can’t bring that case because they weren’t married, would they like to bring a marriage case instead?

    It actually makes a lot of sense for the judge to do that because otherwise the state would end up with different rules for people who are allowed to marry and those who are not. That sort of situation causes a huge amount of work for the courts. And all for a set of bigoted laws and constitutional amendments passed out of pure spite. But it does look like the judge was basically looking for an opportunity to issue a marriage equality ruling.

    Texas, when do we get one there? I just want to see Cruz and Perry eating crow.

  • annatopia

    same! i just read the whole decision. pure brilliance.

  • docsterx

    Of course, the best part of this decision is the ruling that the Michigan ban is unconstitutional and finding in favor of the plaintiffs, DeBoer and Rowze.

    But a VERY close second is the judge’s dismemberment of Regnerus and his “research.” He clearly stated that Regnerus was a whore, producing the data that the Heritage Foundation paid him to produce. Then he went on to explain that the “data” was not even consistent with the sweeping conclusion that Regnerus drew. Clearly labeling it as manipulated data that was pure BS. Then he rubbed Regnerus’ nose into it by saying that his department and other sociologists discounted his findings. Of course, this won’t stop the right wing or the Russians from continuing to wave his deeply flawed work as proof that children of same sex couples fare worse than children of straight couples. When the trial was going on, I wondered why the judge let Regnerus testify. After all, the judge previously excluded another junior “researcher” who was going to testify for the conservative side. I wonder if the judge let Regnerus hang himself just so that the judge could do what he did – hang Regnerus and his data out to dry.

    Of course, this won’t stop Regnerus, the right wing, religionists, Russia, Uganda and others from still citing his paper as justification against gays raising children. But it was really heart warming to hear him so thoroughly destroyed, again. I doubt that he’ll be called as an expert witness again.

  • Ninja0980

    The beatdown of Regnerus was the best part of the whole ruling.

  • MyrddinWilt

    50 states plus the District, so 51 at least.

    And even then they won’t realize.

  • How many courts does the definition of “equality” have to be dragged through before the Revangelicans realize that equality means equality?

  • Ninong

    If gay-marriage bans can be overturned in Utah and Oklahoma, they can and will be overturned everywhere! Are Louisiana and Mississippi next? That will be fun!

  • 3am Mystic

    WONDERFULL!! This Christian shouts, “AMEN”!!!

  • pricknick

    We can’t afford to fix the roads, yet we’ll damn sure fight this.

    Tricky Ricky Snyder.

    “Michigan voters enshrined that decision in our state constitution, and their will should stand and be respected. I will continue to carry out my duty to protect and defend the constitution,” Schuette said.

    Yet he will also fight the law of the people when it comes to marijuana.

  • PeteWa

    indeed, I really enjoyed how he eviscerated Regnerus.

  • Silver_Witch

    Congratulations…hope you have a wonderful wedding and a long life together!

  • wayne

    I trust that no Attorney General in any other state will produce these fabricators as his expert witnesses. Perhaps the Christian right wing can induce the health minister of Uganda to appear at future trials on its’ behalf……

  • We live in Michigan are planning our wedding.

  • Silver_Witch

    Okay sorry …this part made me cry…

    ” affirms the enduring principle that regardless of whoever finds favor in the eyes of the most recent majority, the guarantee of equal protection must prevail.

  • Silver_Witch

    Doing that happy happy dance.

    EDITED TO ADD: Thanks Ronnie for that Judge – seems all the old ways are starting to die off!

  • They already are. But damn that’s a fun decision.

  • caphillprof


  • pricknick

    Snyder will appeal it. The POS loves to spend taxpayer (not corporate) money.

© 2017 AMERICAblog Media, LLC. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS