Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Civil Liberties

Backpage.com Lawsuit: Sex Trafficking Doesn't Trump Internet Freedom, Says Federal Judge

Plaintiffs coerced into prostitution as teens alleged that Backpage was complicit in their trafficking.

Elizabeth Nolan Brown | 5.20.2015 2:30 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Large image on homepages | Marcie Casas/Flickr
(Marcie Casas/Flickr)

As politicians in D.C. push to censor the web in the name of catching sex traffickers, civil-liberty lovers may find some solace in a recent federal court ruling. Maintaining a "free and open Internet" is more important than thwarting traffickers at all costs, ruled Judge Richard Sterns of the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts.

The case involved classified advertising site Backpage.com, which—in addition to advertising things like apartment rentals and acting gigs—has become a hub for both prostitution ads and government anti-trafficking hysteria. Keep in mind that Backpage.com services more than 600 cities, runs hundreds of thousands of ads per day, and does not pre-screen user ads. Yet lawmakers at the municipal, state, and federal level argue that because some small percentage of ads may be posted by criminals, the whole site should be shut down, or, at the very least, held criminally responsible for any illegal transactions it unwittingly facilitates.

In their lawsuit against Backpage.com, the plaintiffs—three women who were forced into selling sex as teenage runaways—argued similarly, saying that because their trafficker found clients on Backpage, the website was responsible for their exploitation. But by this logic, Facebook is guilty whenever anyone posts a threat there, Craigslist is culpable should a landlord want "females only," and Reason is guilty should any of you folks broker a drug deal in the comments. Thankfully, section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, passed in 1996, established that the Internet doesn't work this way.

"Let me make it clear that the court is not unsympathetic to the tragic plight described by [the defendants]," wrote Judge Sterns in his opinion. However, "singly or in the aggregate, the allegedly sordid practices of Backpage … amount to neither affirmative participation in an illegal venture nor active web content creation," he continued. "Nothing in the escorts section of Backpage requires users to offer or search for commercial sex with children. The existence of an escorts section in a classified ad service, whatever its social merits, is not illegal."

Ultimately, Sterns found that Backpage.com was not culpable for the trafficking of these women, per the parameters of Communications Decency Act, and granted a motion to dismiss the suit. "Congress has made the determination that the balance between suppression of trafficking and freedom of expression should be struck in favor of the latter in so far as the Internet is concerned," Judge Sterns concluded.

Well, Congress did make that determination. But things are about to change under the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act, which passed the U.S. House yesterday after clearing the Senate in April. The act, now headed Obama's way, included a provision—opposed by civil liberties groups, publishers, and victims' advocates—to hold website owners criminally responsible when trafficking victims are advertised there.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Is the USA Freedom Act the Best We Can Expect Right Now?

Elizabeth Nolan Brown is a senior editor at Reason.

Civil LibertiesSex TraffickingBackpageSection 230InternetAdvertisingCensorshipFirst AmendmentSocial MediaTeenagersSex WorkFree SpeechTechnology
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (127)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Curtisls87   10 years ago

    A bill proffered in the house by Mike "political hack" Honda. Or do I repeat myself?

    1. Quixote   10 years ago

      And all the more glory to him. Let's work together to stop the "free Internet" nonsense that has caused so much pain and suffering in this country. It's surprising the judge even got into such baloney. In New York, they found a good way around the "free speech" claims, now's the time to do the same with the other excuses. See the documentation of America's leading criminal satire case at:

      http://raphaelgolbtrial.wordpress.com/

      1. Carter Mitchell   10 years ago

        I'm sure your mentor, Adolph Hitler, would be very proud of your antipathy to human liberty. Or are you simply demonstrating your ignorance of the subject?

        1. Quixote   10 years ago

          Are you trying to confuse readers with satirical barbs? Surely you are aware of the difference between liberty and licentiousness! Our great American nation is founded on an ordered liberty, with a carefully designed system that allows some of us a measure of freedom as long as we are careful to express ourselves in a polite, civil manner and stay within all the confines prescribed by all of our criminal statutes. And when there is speech that we really don't like, we will find a way of criminalizing it. That is the nature of a democracy. I understand that some of you are not happy with this situation, but you are always free to go and live in Russia or China if you don't like it.

          1. Carter Mitchell   10 years ago

            Yes, I am aware of the difference between liberty and licentiousness. Just as I am aware of the difference between a Ford Mustang and a Gala apple.

            And I am aware of the nature of democracy. Which is why, when asked what sort of government that the Constitutional Convention had given the people, Benjamin Franklin replied "A republic, madam, if you can keep it."

            As to the nature of democracy, this little anecdote sums it up perfectly: "Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on the lunch menu. Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote."

            Just because some busybodies get together to "criminalize" something they don't like doesn't mean that the "something" is inherently wrong, or that subsequent laws adhere to the principles of liberty.

            I suppose our founders were free to go elsewhere, also. Instead, they put their words into action: "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it..." The Tories (your spiritual brethren) opposed the efforts of the rebels to overthrow the government of King George. The ones that lived through it were free to return to England and enslave themselves once again.

  2. Fist of Etiquette   10 years ago

    ...and Reason is guilty should any of you folks broker a drug deal in the comments.

    AND YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE.

    Maybe Judge Sterns would like to rule on whether constitutional rights can be curbed in pursuit of drug trafficking.

    1. kinnath   10 years ago

      Hey buddy. Wanna buy some home-grown hops?

      1. sarcasmic   10 years ago

        I tried growing my own but I just don't get enough sun anywhere on my property. My wife is about to learn that this summer as she tries to grow some tomatoes and peppers.

        1. LynchPin1477   10 years ago

          There's your problem. Ever since the beginning of time, man has yearned to destroy the sun.

          1. Pathogen   10 years ago

            Yes, I say.. end "the tyranny of the sun"...

            1. Spencer   10 years ago

              what would you do if you saw the sun burning itself out, every day, in order to give life to the earth? I'd tell it to shrug... oh, wait...

        2. Almanian!   10 years ago

          Yeah, we had zero tomatoes last year when we moved the garden to the north side of the house. Everything else grew....

          Still haven't planted them yet this year, as Mrs. Almanian argues with herself where to put them*.

          * I, of course, already decided we'll plant them on the porch and deck again, in pots - cause they grow GREAT there. Worked before.,...just need to nudge her back there.

          1. Zeb   10 years ago

            You can't put a shovel in teh ground where I live without hitting a medium sized boulder, so we plant everything in pots or raised beds. Tomatoes do do quite well in pots. On a deck is good too because they like the reflected light.

            1. LynchPin1477   10 years ago

              The wife is using pots for the tomatoes at our new place. I'm not hopeful, it's a townhouse and we just don't get much sun. But I can't believe how big the recommended pot size is for tomato plants. Those are some greedy bastards!

              1. Zeb   10 years ago

                They are really hot climate plants, so they need all the help they can get. If you only have a few hours of direct light a day, you probably won't get much of anything.

              2. Pl?ya Manhattan.   10 years ago

                I built some raised planters with Rumblestone.

                It's awesome, like outdoor legos for adults. You can build fire pits too.

                http://www.pavestone.com/rumblestone/

                1. Zeb   10 years ago

                  Those are cool. But I have a big pile of bricks and an abundance of stones, so I'm not about to buy any. I use the outside slabs of logs and replace them when they rot. Goes well with my rustic redneck aesthetic.

      2. Spencer   10 years ago

        look man, i was just providing the hops for him to look at. what he and the hops decided to do after that wasn't anything to do with me.

        1. Almanian!   10 years ago

          The cops are hopping mad at you now, Spencer!

    2. perlhaqr   10 years ago

      So... anybody got some weed?

      1. Spencer   10 years ago

        I had some weeds, but then I resodded the whole front yard.

  3. Paul.   10 years ago

    The act, now headed Obama's way, included a provision?opposed by civil liberties groups, publishers, and victims' advocates?to hold website owners criminally responsible when trafficking victims are advertised there.

    You can't yell 'fire' in a crowded theater, guys.

    1. kinnath   10 years ago

      Fuck. What number was that one?

      1. Almanian!   10 years ago

        You almost had it - just add "You, That's Why" and you're there. That's the one...

    2. Xeones   10 years ago

      If you WERE to yell "fire" in a crowded theater, though, obviously the theater owner would be responsible.

    3. Spencer   10 years ago

      You can't stop me. I wanted to during mad max just to make the shittiness stop.

      1. Almanian!   10 years ago

        The new one? Cause I KNOW you're not dissing the original.

        /I AM THE NIGHTRIDER!!!!

        1. Spencer   10 years ago

          no, the new one. the original was awesome. Someone is systematically destroying everything great from my childhood.

          1. Spencer   10 years ago

            also, I run bartertown now!

            1. Almanian!   10 years ago

              That's not the Goose....

          2. Almanian!   10 years ago

            Oh boy. Was going to see it...now I'm conflicted.

            I LOVE the old ones. Road Warrior best, Mad Max #2, Thunderdome #3 - but they're ALL must watch. Over, and over, and over....

            The new one not so much, eh? I'll see it with my son, and block it out with drugs if it's bad....

            Anyone selling drugs on this site? Asking for...a friend. Just in case....

            1. LynchPin1477   10 years ago

              It still has a 98% on Rotten Tomatoes, and 92% user review.

              There's not accounting for taste, but they're making somebodies happy.

              1. Almanian!   10 years ago

                *whew*

                Thanks for that info 🙂

              2. Spencer   10 years ago

                yeah, that's why i went and saw it. Boy have I never felt so out of touch with the proles.

            2. Spencer   10 years ago

              It was like mad max met cirque du soliel- only with bad acting and a worse plot.

              It's like they haven't advanced the idea or concept at all (and if you're not going to make it better, why make it at all... see Indy and the Crystal Skull).

              It DOES look pretty.

              1. kinnath   10 years ago

                I haven't been to a theater in years. But I almost decided to go to this one. I suppose I will wait for it to hit Dish now.

            3. perlhaqr   10 years ago

              Dude, the new movie was fucking awesome. Spencer was clearly on some of those Reason.com brokered drugs, and bad ones at that, if he felt otherwise. I feel that so much so that I'm paying more of my own dollars to go see it again. Possibly more than once again.

              1. Zeb   10 years ago

                There are drugs that can make a movie seem worse?

                1. Hamster of Doom   10 years ago

                  Well, you could be watching Groundhogs Day while so high that funny things are happening with time.

              2. Spencer   10 years ago

                perl, no. It was stupid. Max didn't even need to be in the movie at all. his part was worthless and stupid. Tom hardy is no mel gibson. The badguys weren't scary. Characters didn't matter to the plot- subplots didn't go anywhere and just disappeared... etc.

                1. Florida Man   10 years ago

                  Hundred percent agree spencer.

    4. Mx. F. Stupidity, Jr.   10 years ago

      Can I yell "Fire!" in a nearly-empty theater?

      1. Fist of Etiquette   10 years ago

        Is it on fire?

        1. Mx. F. Stupidity, Jr.   10 years ago

          Not necessarily, but the crowded theater has been the standard for a long time. I wondered if falsely yelling fire would be okay if there was only four other people in it.

    5. Zeb   10 years ago

      You can't yell 'fire' in a crowded theater, guys.

      Yes you can. I've done it. It wasn't interesting.

      People are pretty stupid, but not nearly as stupid as many people seem to imagine.

    6. Pro Libertate   10 years ago

      What, pray tell, are you supposed to yell when a theater is in the midst of a conflagration?

      1. Swiss Servator, Quelle frisch   10 years ago

        "Conflagration!"

        1. Pro Libertate   10 years ago

          That's a word I actually remember learning. Got it directly from Ray Bradbury.

    7. mad.casual   10 years ago

      You can't yell 'fire' in a crowded theater, guys.

      Someone said fire!

    8. Carter Mitchell   10 years ago

      That argument has nothing to do with free speech. The reason that you can't yell fire in a crowded (or empty) theater is simple: you are violating the implied contract with the proprietor which guarantees each customer the enjoyment of services provided. It's contract law, not basic principles of liberty.

      It's amazing how many people (Paul) on a site such as Reason are so ignorant of these basic principles. I would recommend a thorough reading of Murray Rothbard's The Ethics of Liberty or For a New Liberty.

  4. Spencer   10 years ago

    Where else is one supposed to find out how to get a good "rub'n'tug"?

    Seriously, backpage.com users have to already be at rock bottom- why kill the only thing that pretends to love them for money?

    1. Hamster of Doom   10 years ago

      Don't be silly, I'm sure their wives pretend to love them for money.

      1. Spencer   10 years ago

        you're assuming they have wives- or enough money for long term pretend love.

    2. Ivoted4KODOS   10 years ago

      Rub N Tiz'ug here

  5. LynchPin1477   10 years ago

    Reason is guilty should any of you folks broker a drug deal in the comments

    Relax, the only thing being brokered here is a war on COZMOTARIANS!

    1. Marshall Gill   10 years ago

      Weigeltarians?

  6. Hamster of Doom   10 years ago

    We don't do drugs here, Brown. Drugs are bad.

    1. Spencer   10 years ago

      "m'kay"

      1. Almanian!   10 years ago

        JINX!!!

        1. Bobarian (sexbot hand model)   10 years ago

          The squirrels declared you to be loser...

          Just deal with it.

    2. Almanian!   10 years ago

      Mmmkay.

  7. Almanian!   10 years ago

    "Backpage.com" - more like "backdoor.com", amirite?

    1. Krieger's Waifu   10 years ago

      *jazz hands*

    2. Restoras, BHS   10 years ago

      That usually costs extra.

    3. LynchPin1477   10 years ago

      /Ramsay Bolton nods and smiles

  8. Almanian!   10 years ago

    Also,

    THIS ^^^^^ is the commentariat I love. And Rico hates.

    Snarky, 90 different subjects, all over the map - perfect.

    Good job! Carry on, team.

    1. Zeb   10 years ago

      Well, Elizabeth loves us. And that's what's important.

      1. LynchPin1477   10 years ago

        Women are a precious resource around here, so they tend to be treated well.

        1. Almanian!   10 years ago

          Women? WHAT WOMEN??!!!

        2. Hey Nikki!   10 years ago

          Like the sluts they are, amirite?

          1. LynchPin1477   10 years ago

            Slut praising!

            1. waffles   10 years ago

              I love sluts!

          2. mad.casual   10 years ago

            You're the worst*.

            *The colloquial praising/respectful definition of the worst. Not the literal definition of worst or any definition with any sort of moral, sex, or gender connotation associated with it. Unless that's insulting to presume that a woman couldn't be the worst. Whatever, just don't ask me to call you the worst and mean it because, like any good misogynist, I'll refuse.

        3. Trevor St McGoodbody   10 years ago

          They're as rare as unicorns and get spooked easily... like ordinary horses.

          1. Hamster of Doom   10 years ago

            When the conversation goes from women to horses, there's a Tijuana joke not far behind.

            1. Pro Libertate   10 years ago

              This is starting to sound like an America song.

              1. Crusty Juggler   10 years ago

                "Summer Breeze?"

                1. Pro Libertate   10 years ago

                  Not America. Have you been blowing too much jasmine directly into your mind?

                  1. Crusty Juggler   10 years ago

                    "Baby I'm a Want You?"

                    1. Pro Libertate   10 years ago

                      No. No Bread. Really. Ugh.

  9. Dark Lord of the Cis   10 years ago

    Judge Stern? Really? Is he Judge Smails' cousin? Does he have the kind of hat you get a free bowl of soup with?

    1. Spencer   10 years ago

      If I'm elected president I'm appointing Howard Stern to a federal judge position.

      1. LynchPin1477   10 years ago

        He'd make a good FCC commissioner. Or head of the FBI. You know, that FBI.

        1. Spencer   10 years ago

          fine beans of ireland?

          1. Ahem'   10 years ago

            Food born illness?

  10. Viscount Irish, Slayer of Huns   10 years ago

    So has Reason reported on Robby Soave's interesting experience at University of Michigan yet?

    "Robby Soave @robbysoave
    So I went to UM to hear Coach Harbaugh's supposed apology to Muslim students. I was barred from entering the room."

    "I am being told the meeting between #JimHarbaugh and offended students is private and I can't even listen in. Also, that I am a threat"

    "Robby Soave @robbysoave
    I clarified repeatedly that my only interest was reporting the event. Activist told me I was making them feel unsafe. Not joking."

    1. Hamster of Doom   10 years ago

      I'm going to tell him he makes me feel unsafe.

    2. Zeb   10 years ago

      I would like to hear more about that.

    3. mr lizard   10 years ago

      And this is why Michigan will never have a good running offense ever again.

      1. Bobarian (sexbot hand model)   10 years ago

        Running backs are muslim?

    4. LynchPin1477   10 years ago

      I didn't even hear about this.

      Harbaugh would do well to focus less on Muslim students and more on boosters. Rich Rod and Hoke didn't change zip codes because of Muslim activists.

      But I suspect Harbaugh will do well.

      1. Viscount Irish, Slayer of Huns   10 years ago

        Remember though: According to Tulpa it's wrong to criticize Islam because Muslims are a powerless minority - you know, the kind of powerless minority capable of forcing a school's football coach to engage in a private apology because they felt offended.

        I wish I could be that powerless.

    5. Spencer   10 years ago

      Until we have pro sports stars in this country (in the big 3 sports) of Persian or Arabic descent, there will never be peace.

      1. Zeb   10 years ago

        Well, there are lots of people with Arabic names. Does that count?

        Seems like there must be some Arab or Persian players.

        1. Almanian!   10 years ago

          + Ahmad Rashad

          1. Mx. F. Stupidity, Jr.   10 years ago

            Ahmad Rashad is never a plus.

            1. Spencer   10 years ago

              his wife, however... circa 1988...

              also his real name is Robert Earl Moore

        2. mad.casual   10 years ago

          Well, there are lots of people with Arabic names. Does that count?

          If so, can we count Kareem Abdul-Jabbar as 3?

      2. LynchPin1477   10 years ago

        America's rejection of soccer is just another sign of white privilege. We're so unenlightened. Why can't we be more like soccer fans?

        1. Spencer   10 years ago

          because we want results!

        2. Zeb   10 years ago

          We just aren't drunk or violent enough to properly appreciate soccer.

          1. Florida Man   10 years ago

            Now that's saying something.

        3. Trevor St McGoodbody   10 years ago

          Watching people move a ball from one end of a large field to another for what feels like an eternity without much progress is definitely the greatest sport that was ever conceived!

          1. Zeb   10 years ago

            I'm not saying it is necessarily the best sport ever. But there must be some reason it's the most popular in the world.

    6. Suthenboy   10 years ago

      Efforts like the anti-trafficking efforts discussed in the article and the protests at UM are specifically designed to destroy civil liberties. It isn't about sex trafficking or Muslim sensibilities.

      Foreseeable consequences are not unintended.

      1. Trevor St McGoodbody   10 years ago

        There are always people who will prey on fears about the unsavory aspects of society as a pretense to encroach on civil liberties. I think they're called politicians. Let me look that up.

    7. Agile Cyborg   10 years ago

      If Robby Soave offends these fucks then what the fuck version of the Qu'ran are these fucks reading? One of three New Age, watered-down, milquetoast, limited-edition prints hand-written by crystal-gazing hippies from Ojai?

    8. tarran   10 years ago

      Poor Robby! He should consider engaging in SJW friendly signaling to make them think he isn't out-group!

    9. Crusty Juggler   10 years ago

      As I said on another thread, Harbaugh and the rest of the University loathe Cosmotarians.

    10. Fist of Etiquette   10 years ago

      Rico makes me feel uncomfortable... IN MY BREECHES.

  11. Agile Cyborg   10 years ago

    This is all well and OK but internet fucking freedom doesn't trump the very real streets the very real people walk, live, buy, eat, and fuck on either, Judge. Let's get some goddamn freedom up in the real streets while we're trying to get the goddamn freedom up in the digital replica of our realities.

    I'm just saying, freedom is an existential chain-breaker wherever sentience rolls its beady eyes and draws its silky breath.

    1. Zeb   10 years ago

      I'm just saying, freedom is an existential chain-breaker wherever sentience rolls its beady eyes and draws its silky breath.

      Good one.

      1. Almanian!   10 years ago

        AC - Poet. Fucking Laureate.

      2. Xeones   10 years ago

        Yeah, i want that tattooed across my shoulders.

        1. Marshall Gill   10 years ago

          There just isn't enough skin to properly tattoo The Agile One's quotes. Even in tiny, tiny print, I could only fit a couple of hundred of the very best ones.

          I had most of the other quotes (around 10GB) put on a chip and injected into my pancreas.

          1. Xeones   10 years ago

            Be careful doing that, man. That's how SugarFree got the diabeezy.

    2. Spencer   10 years ago

      break the chains Darrow, my gorydamn goodman.

  12. C. S. P. Schofield   10 years ago

    Has anyone checked the Plaintiffs? Because, based on the career of Somaly Mam and similar do-gooders I would not be astonished to discover that their stories of "being trafficked" are substantially bullshit.

    One thing about the Human Trafficking panic; like the White Slavery Panics of the 19th and early 20th centuries (which it strongly resembles) it provides all kinds of opportunities for clever young whores to get rich, if they are willing to tell the right sob-stories.

    1. neoteny   10 years ago

      Somaly Mam and similar do-gooders

      Yeah, they do good for themselves.

  13. Enjoy Every Sandwich   10 years ago

    I can tell that I'm getting old and unhinged. I still cling to that odd belief that the people who actually commit a crime are the ones responsible for it, not "society" or "the internet" or "the violence in Road Runner cartoons".

    1. Pro Libertate   10 years ago

      "That's bullshit. You're a white suburban punk just like me."

  14. widget   10 years ago

    My research of Backpage.com tells me that the women who post ads there are in their 20's and 30's mostly, a few in their in their early 40's.

    Sometimes there are ads the stipulate "No black guys" from black gals. Someone needs to call the Justice Department about that. It's social media so another curiosity is that providers often take photos of themselves in the motel mirror. This is an attempt at authentication. This keeps customers from getting a girthier provided than they had anticipated.

    1. Zeb   10 years ago

      That's some nice work there, widget.

    2. mad.casual   10 years ago

      This keeps customers from getting a girthier provided than they had anticipated.

      I'm confused. Are fat chicks or big dicks (or both) being discriminated against here?

      1. Ahem'   10 years ago

        Excellent ^^^^

  15. retiredfire   10 years ago

    By this kind of retarded thinking, the streets need to be shut down, since so much "sex trafficking" goes on there.

  16. JoeyD333   10 years ago

    It sucks for their women, but it's the people who post on backpage, not backpage itself. Always be safe and check Rub Maps for good things.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

'Banal Horror': Asylum Case Deals Trump Yet Another Loss on Due Process

Billy Binion | 5.29.2025 5:27 PM

Supreme Court Unanimously Agrees To Curb Environmental Red Tape That Slows Down Construction Projects

Jeff Luse | 5.29.2025 3:31 PM

What To Expect Now That Trump Has Scrapped Biden's Crippling AI Regulations

Jack Nicastro | 5.29.2025 3:16 PM

Original Sin, the Biden Cover-Up Book, Is Better Late Than Never

Robby Soave | 5.29.2025 2:23 PM

Did 'Activist Judges' Derail Trump's Tariffs?

Eric Boehm | 5.29.2025 2:05 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!