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

Nanny State

Underboob Banned in Springfield, Missouri, After Rally Seeking to 'Free the Nipple'

Mayor opposed law for implying sight of boobs "transforms men into raving sexual predators who rush to the nearest restroom and kidnap children."

Elizabeth Nolan Brown | 9.30.2015 3:42 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Large image on homepages | smi7r/Flickr
(smi7r/Flickr)

smi7r/Flickr

The "Free the Nipple" movement seeks to repeal laws against women going topless in public. A recent "Free the Nipple" rally in Springfield, Missouri, elicited swift action from the city—but not in the direction activists were hoping for. Rather, the Springfield City Council voted that women should actually cover up more of their breasts in public than was previously required.

The new indecent exposure law prohibits women from showing too much of the sides and bottom of the breasts—aka "underboob"—and everyone from from showing any part of their tush. (For a highly informative video on the parameters of the new breast ban, see the Springfield News-Leader.) 

The issue was contentious among city officials, passing the city council by just 5-4. Springfield Mayor Bob Stephens voted against it, condemning proponents' claim that keeping women's breasts hidden is necessary so as not to encourage sexual assault. "If we believe what we've heard, the sight of a female breast, either inadvertent or deliberate, immediately transforms men into raving sexual predators who rush to the nearest restroom and kidnap children," Stephens said. 

Some took issue with the bill not doing what it set out to: ban Free the Nipple protesters from parading about with only their areolas covered, following the old indecent-exposure law to the letter but not in spirit. City Attorney Dan Wichmer said Free the Nipple rallies are still safe because they're protected political speech. Councilman Craig Hostner, who voted against the new law, said it "doesn't do anything other than make us feel like we've addressed the problem, when we really haven't done that." 

Councilman Mike Schilling, who also voted against the law, said he thought the current requirement was adequate. "I don't anticipate a wave of people roaming the city topless," Schilling said at a city council meeting covered by the News-Leader. "I would prefer to stick with what we have, and that will work fine." 

But the new law's instigator, Councilman Justin Burnett, said it was important for protecting the city's "family-friendly image" and ensuring "the safety of the most vulnerable among us." It is unclear who Burnett thinks is made unsafe by the public presence of underboob. Burnett does not, however, fear for those exposed to erect penises. In updating the indecent exposure law, it was stripped of language banning "the showing of covered male genitals in a discernibly turgid state." 

Burnett crowed at a city council meeting that the new ordinance would shut down a planned "SlutWalk" event in early October, described by Facebook organizers as "a protest walk designed to raise awareness about the prevalence of rape in our culture and to challenge Springfield area residents to face the reality that rape is too often excused or downplayed by referring to aspects of a woman's appearance." Protesters at SlutWalk events (an international phenomenon) tend to dress in campily revealing clothing. 

Earlier this year, the government of Thailand warned women that posting underboob selfies online could violate the country's cybercrime laws. 

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: No, Ben Carson and Donald Trump, the Majority of Syrian Refugees to the U.S. Are Not 'Young Males' [UPDATED]

Elizabeth Nolan Brown is a senior editor at Reason.

Nanny StateIndecencyMissouriWomen's Rights
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (126)

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. DesigNate   10 years ago

    Damn it, seeing underboob at fall festivals is a RIGHT!

    1. gaoxiaen   10 years ago

      This is a travesty inside an outrage, wrapped in an abomination.

  2. Lord Humungus   10 years ago

    Booooobzzzzzz

    I wish America could get over this breast thang. I mean I like 'em, but there are more, uh, interesting parts of the female anatomy.

    1. AlexInCT   10 years ago

      Axxes?

      1. MJGreen - Docile Citizen   10 years ago

        It's all about the legs. All about the legs.

        1. Episiarch   10 years ago

          As amazing as legs are, it's really the whole package.

        2. Antilles   10 years ago

          Who cares about legs? I've already got legs...

          1. Ted S.   10 years ago

            You have breasts, too.

            1. Antilles   10 years ago

              Yeah, but they're not as nice as my girlfriend's.

              1. Tonio   10 years ago

                Depends on ones frame of reference, Aunty.

                1. Antilles   10 years ago

                  I'm unable to place a certain part of my body between mine. Because if I could then I wouldn't need her anymore.

          2. Tonio   10 years ago

            And some men have quite responsive ones.

            1. Antilles   10 years ago

              The amount of bourbon required to make this acceptable would prevent me from being responsive.

    2. Warty   10 years ago

      "You know, I find the most erotic part of a woman is the boobies."

    3. Crusty Juggler   10 years ago

      Ah, a fellow foot fetish man.

      1. GILMORE?   10 years ago

        I once knew a rapper with a foot shoe fetist.

        It was no joke. For the first year I thought he was just sort of vaguely interested in shoes from a a design perspective. Then one day he said something really odd and I just asked him what the fuck he was talking about, and he just full on explained that for him... a woman started at the feet and everything became less interesting the farther up you went.

        I still don't fucking understand it. But he was a good dude, and did an excellent job pleasing all of the women in his life.

        1. Heroic Mulatto   10 years ago

          You knew LL Cool J?

    4. gaoxiaen   10 years ago

      ( . Y . )

    5. Real American   10 years ago

      Like the Penis.

  3. AlexInCT   10 years ago

    Where is the alt text for that nice picture, huh?

  4. mad.casual   10 years ago

    Sorry to be a legal/grammar Nazi ENB but;

    Burnett does not, however, fear for those exposed to erect penises. In updating the indecent exposure law, it was stripped of language banning "the showing of covered male genitals in a discernibly turgid state."

    Covered =/= exposed.

    1. Warty   10 years ago

      You realize that the phrase "exposed to a covered erect penis" makes perfect sense, right?

      1. mad.casual   10 years ago

        And even you can type it too!

        1. Mad Scientist   10 years ago

          So, you don't realize it then?

          1. mad.casual   10 years ago

            Yup. The one thing he does right and we chastise him for inconsistency.

      2. Episiarch   10 years ago

        It makes more than sense!

  5. Brian   10 years ago

    Hmmm... I seem to have misplaced... my wood chipper...

    Oh, there it is.

    BRRERERERERERERERERERERERERERERERERERERER.

  6. Rhywun   10 years ago

    I'm beginning to think that "Free the Nipple" is more interested in making fun of "yokels" than in freeing the nipple.

    1. This Machine   10 years ago

      Oh, come on, man. If we can't turn every fight for a little personal liberty into a social crusade against the people we don't like, then what's the point of even trying?

    2. Suthenboy   10 years ago

      Well they certainly were successful. What a fuckin' clown show they instigated.

      I don't think there is anything more hostile to liberty in spirit than an official dress code. Maybe when the broccoli mandate arrives I will change my mind.

    3. Tonio   10 years ago

      Why can't it be both? Although shaming the yokels is rarely effective, take Eddie for example.

      1. Rhywun   10 years ago

        Because "freeing the nipple" is not an activity that the vast majority of American women give a shit about.

        1. Choadintheroad   10 years ago

          Yeah, and it's a tiny minority of men who are interested in seeing bare breasts...smh

  7. Rt. Hon. Judge Woodrow Chipper   10 years ago

    I'm not saying Councilman Justin Burnett is an ISIS sympathizer, I'm merely asking the question.

  8. Notorious UGCC   10 years ago

    Hmmm...no jokes about "five boobs on the City Council?"

    You're all losing your touch.

    1. Pope Jimbo   10 years ago

      Which one had the mastectomy?

      Oh wait, only freaks run for city council. So which one is a martian with three tits?

  9. Citizen Nothing   10 years ago

    In Ohio, women can go topless whenever they want, except in bars. But none seem to want. True story.

    1. Antilles   10 years ago

      The biggest danger to women who choose to go topfree in places they're 'allowed' to is idiotic cops who don't know the law and arrest them. They're ultimately released without charge, but who wants to deal with that hassle?

    2. Rhywun   10 years ago

      Of course not. In western societies most women do not in fact want to walk around topless. This group is just trolling.

      1. Warty   10 years ago

        Tittrolling.

        1. Episiarch   10 years ago

          Moto boto?

          1. SimonJester   10 years ago

            I am embarrassed about how long I watched that.

  10. Sapient Mulch   10 years ago

    The city attorney, Dan Wichmer, has said the new law will not outlaw the topless rallies that started this discussion, because those are protected by free speech.

    But it sure is fun punishing all the other heathens in this town!

  11. Antilles   10 years ago

    This is so baffling. What harm do these cretins think will be caused if women are 'allowed' to expose their nipples in public? Children suck on them for the first 18 months of life (sometimes longer, shudder), but if they see one before they turn the arbitrary age of eighteen they'll somehow be traumatized? People were so much more open about nudity in the 70s than they are now--further proof our society is going backwards.

    1. Pan Zagloba   10 years ago

      What harm do these cretins think will be caused if women are 'allowed' to expose their nipples in public?

      It might de-sexualize the female breast, leading to sadder, more humdrum world? That's all I can think of.

      1. Thomas O.   10 years ago

        I read that's what some women are lamenting, the loss of a sexual commodity if unharassed female toplessness becomes the norm. They end up sounding like prison guard union bosses whining about criminal justice reform.

      2. Antilles   10 years ago

        Technically speaking, there's nothing sexual about a woman's breast. They're secondary sexual characteristics and are no more sexual or offensive than a man's beard. Women's breasts are only shocking now because we rarely see them anywhere other than our bedrooms and strip clubs.

        1. Pan Zagloba   10 years ago

          Dunno, between nipple and beard, I know which is far more fun to tease and stroke.
          And yes, because they are covered, they are extra-sexualized, which makes it a better world for us men. Having them out in the public might ruin it.
          Of course, comes the question of what's the ratio of 'should be uncovered' to 'should be uncovered', but that's for each man (and some of the ladies) to decide on their own.

          1. Antilles   10 years ago

            Most people assume I only support a woman's right to go topless because I want to see tits, but that's not the case. I just believe the laws should apply equally regardless of gender. If it's ok for men to go topless, then it should be ok for women too. If it's a crime for women to go topless, then it should be a crime for men to. And you're right, it should be up to each individual to decide if they wish to expose themselves or not. Right now only half the population is allowed that option.

    2. Sevens   10 years ago

      Well, the historically usual trend seems to be toward decadence and then into ruin. Not sure what role sexual decadence plays.

  12. Just say Nikki   10 years ago

    Councilman Craig Hostner, who voted against the new law, said it "doesn't do anything other than make us feel like we've addressed the problem, when we really haven't done that."

    Laughing too hard to breathe rn

  13. SugarFree   10 years ago

    They are just boobs. The vast majority of women and fat guys have them. Jeez.

  14. Almanian - Micro Trumper   10 years ago

    Tits about what I'd expect from those boobs in Springfield. Breast just move along - nothing to see here.

    1. waffles   10 years ago

      You are an artist.

  15. Fist of Etiquette   10 years ago

    "...the sight of a female breast, either inadvertent or deliberate, immediately transforms men into raving sexual predators who rush to the nearest restroom and kidnap children," Stephens said.

    That doesn't even make sense. Restroom children don't have female breasts. Do they?

    1. Antilles   10 years ago

      Sounds like the real problem is men. Ban 'em!

      1. Riven   10 years ago

        Have you any idea how it feels to be a Fembot living in a Manbot's Manputer's world?

    2. mad.casual   10 years ago

      I assumed the rest of the sentence might have explained things more clearly, but I'm probably wrong.

    3. Long Woodchippers   10 years ago

      I'm not going to go kidnap a child. Choke my chicken - maybe.

  16. Coralskipper@gmail.com   10 years ago

    I know Springfield, Mo and that region of the Ozarks incredibly well and it was absurdly stupid to have a "Free the Nipple" rally there. It's not a region that was ready for such a, pardon the term, frontal assault on the ban. It's the freakin' buckle of the Bible Belt and you expect that rally to go well? Really? Would it be nice for the area to be ready for something like that. Sure, but we're dealing with reality and not hypotheticals. I am in no way surprised that it backfired.

    1. Rhywun   10 years ago

      It's the freakin' buckle of the Bible Belt

      That's the whole point

    2. waffles   10 years ago

      We are all trolls now. No one would give a hoot if they did it in Branson.

    3. Tonio   10 years ago

      Hey, the bible doesn't (AFAIK) say anything about boobies. In stoneage goatherder societies breastfeeding would have been as unexceptional as drinking water. Of course in those societies women were often segregated from non-related males.

      1. John DeWitt   10 years ago

        Oh, it talks about breasts alright:

        "Your breasts are like two fawns, like twin fawns of a gazelle."
        ~ Song of Solomon 7:3

  17. Mongo   10 years ago

    A few years ago, I caught a doc on the Playboy mansion where the playmates' titties were pixelized and the grossly overweight, hideous mens' juggs were allowed to flop in full view.

    1. Episiarch   10 years ago

      You're watching the wrong porn.

      1. Just say Nikki   10 years ago

        Jesus, Epi, way to be judgmental.

        1. Episiarch   10 years ago

          I'll be whatever I wanna do!

  18. Princess Trigger   10 years ago

    Where is your God now!

    1. SimonJester   10 years ago

      "Where is God now?"
      And I heard a voice within me answer him:
      "Where is He? Here He is?He is hanging here on this gallows. . . ."

  19. Kristen Bids No Trump   10 years ago

    If ever a post called for Lobster Girl, this was it.

    1. RBS   10 years ago

      Free Lobster Girl!

    2. kinnath   10 years ago

      my first thought

    3. Charles Easterly   10 years ago

      Lobster Girl

      1. Long Woodchippers   10 years ago

        that's some nice boobie

    4. Spartacus   10 years ago

      I am seriously disappointed that it took this long before the first Lobster Girl comment.

      And a world without Lobster Girl is a world I don't want to live in anymore.

  20. Mad Scientist   10 years ago

    Councilman Justin Burnett, said it was important for protecting the city's "family-friendly image"

    Boobs promote friendliness, and families.

    1. Crusty Juggler   10 years ago

      I come from a family full of boobs.

  21. Crusty Juggler   10 years ago

    Protesters at SlutWalk events (an international phenomenon)

    Really?

  22. esteve7   10 years ago

    Soon feminists will be arguing for all women to be 100% clothed except just there eyes, you know to protect them. Oh and they should always have a male escort with them to fend off the other males.

    Other countries do this too right? Maybe that's why SJWs have such a hard on for them

    1. Just say Nikki   10 years ago

      So, based on a post about feminists agitating against laws criminalizing toplessness, you posted that comment. Right.

      1. Antilles   10 years ago

        I read an article once (just searched but couldn't find it) by a staunch feminist who spent an entire day in a burqa. She said it was a liberating experience to not be judged by your appearance, and suggested that wearing them would make all women equal. I don't think what esteve suggested is that far-fetched.

        1. Sevens   10 years ago

          Yeah, it doesn't perfectly match the article, but the point is valid. This is the remarkable area where conservatives and progressives often agree. Sex. Of course the law is then often transformed (see antidiscrimination law embracing affirmative action, against original meaning) -- so conservatives should be careful, currently.

        2. gaoxiaen   10 years ago

          ...a staunch, fat, ugly, feminist who...

    2. Sapient Mulch   10 years ago

      Read it again and sound out the words you don't know. If you get stuck again, be sure to ask for help!

  23. Aloysious   10 years ago

    Underboob Banned in Springfield, Missouri...

    This is a sad, sad, day.

    Now there will be no more free range underb00b, only black market underb00b.

    1. Aloysious   10 years ago

      On a side note, it is interesting what pops up on a google search of the word 'areola'. I had no idea nipple cysts were a thing.

  24. Bill Dalasio   10 years ago

    Burnett crowed at a city council meeting that the new ordinance would shut down a planned "SlutWalk" event in early October,...

    That's a shame. It strikes me that the Slutwalkers and the Springfield, MO City Council are two groups that truly deserve one another.

  25. Crusty Juggler   10 years ago

    Is sideboob still okay?

    What is the cleavage standard? Are smaller-breasted ladies required to wear bras on the chance that a child could see the outline of an areola?

    1. Mad Scientist   10 years ago

      They'll know it when they see it.

    2. PH2050   10 years ago

      Gotta ban that black shoulder thing that goes up

      1. Sapient Mulch   10 years ago

        +1 removeable strap

    3. Sapient Mulch   10 years ago

      The video is pretty funny, and no, no sideboob. Nothing from the top of the areola down, and all the way around the torso. Old law said center third of buttocks must be covered, new law says 100% buttock coverage.

      I suppose the thing to do is just to carry a protest sign with me if I want to walk around downtown topless. Then it's protected speech.

      Oh, nice moobs on the guy objecting to topless women in the video too!

      1. Crusty Juggler   10 years ago

        "Look at me, I watched the provided video instead of typing stupid questions."

        You are such a show-off.

      2. PH2050   10 years ago

        I read one of the linked articles but can't watch the video right now. From your description, I take it that public breastfeeding of children is okay? What if, by moving babe to or from nipple, areola is briefly exposed? Hopefully the mom won't get in trouble. Does the video mention anything like that?

        nice moobs

        Look at you, with the silver tongue.

        1. Sapient Mulch   10 years ago

          It's one of the local news kids with a mannequin that has no nipples, but they've put blue painters tape over the spot where the nipples would be. Nope, nothing about breastfeeding but as you know, that's totally unacceptable anywhere anyway, so this law didn't have to address that. He just compares the old and new laws with black censor rectangles held up to the mannequin.

          Look at you, with the silver tongue.

          *blush*

  26. waffles   10 years ago

    Lobster girl hardest hit.

  27. GILMORE?   10 years ago

    verbotten unter titten

    1. Sevens   10 years ago

      Verboten. For whatever the loss, there's no German word for underboob.

      1. Juice   10 years ago

        There's a German word for everything, even complete sentences.

  28. Tonio   10 years ago

    Boobies (SFW, for realz).

  29. Sevens   10 years ago

    I doubt walking around naked is protected speech. Obscenity - based on local standards - is a known exception. And why shouldn't public property be regulated? As long as it exists, a plurality of standards - i.e. local standards - makes sense.

    "A recent "Free the Nipple" rally in Springfield, Missouri, elicited swift action from the city?but not in the direction activists were hoping for. Rather, the Springfield City Council voted that women should actually cover up more of their breasts in public than was previously required."

    Yeah, who ever thought that running around naked might actually reaffirm people in their belief that running around naked is not so good. Hilarious, when they are so righteous that they think the goodness of public nakedness is self-evident.

  30. kbolino   10 years ago

    If property is "regulated", then it is not "public".

    1. kbolino   10 years ago

      meant as reply to Sevens

      1. Sevens   10 years ago

        I consider city ordinances regulation. A city's park is public property. It's use may be governed - regulated - by an ordinance. Where do you think we disagree?

        1. Sevens   10 years ago

          *Its

        2. kbolino   10 years ago

          A city's park is public property.

          No, it's government property.

          Where do you think we disagree?

          That there is such a thing as "public" property.

          1. Sevens   10 years ago

            Alright. Are you saying it's theoretically inconceivable, or that it's just not there practically? (What I have in mind is co-ownership of the members of some democratic, political unit. Don't be restricted by that.)

            1. kbolino   10 years ago

              I would say two things:

              1. That true public property is just as theoretically possible (or not) as true anarchy;

              2. That ownership in practice by the public of public property is not evident; a shareholder has a more credible claim to ownership of the corporation in which he holds stock, and even that claim is quite circumspect.

              1. Sevens   10 years ago

                Roughly, I agree with that.

                The point of local standards is to reduce the number of co-owners, get closer (still great distance) to unanimity, and to make exit less costly. The problem is that there's a physical, geographic, component, which shareholding in a corporation lacks. You don't walk, or live on company property, physically; the purpose you pursue is narrow; viable alternatives exist, and costs of exit are low. What I have in mind with that park or city example is closely related to home owner associations (HOAs). Barnett desribed the aspect nicely in Restoring the Lost Constitution, Princeton UP.

  31. HolgerDanske   10 years ago

    It's interesting how much these free nipple people have in common with the open carry movement.

    1. Choadintheroad   10 years ago

      Only if you're the type of moron who would prefer to be accidentally shot in the face with a bullet than some milk.

      1. DesigNate   10 years ago

        Yep, if people are allowed to open carry, everything will devolve to the wild west and you'll be lucky if you never get accidentally shot in the face.

        DEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRPPPPPPP.

    2. Thomas O.   10 years ago

      And you'd think the pro-breastfeeding crowd would latch on (no pun intended) to the FTN movement, since they would definitely see some benefit.

  32. Thomas O.   10 years ago

    This happened in Springfield, Missouri. Not surprising to me, given that it's near that socon playground called Branson.

  33. Agile Cyborg   10 years ago

    The liquid cock comets spurted like particle lava bursting with happy space elves from three cocks into the moist vaginal paradise of a svelte sanguine lovely lady with her knees spread toward the two suns mixes and slops in a way that can, sadly, be compared to the intermingled nature of repulsive evil people like left-wing feminist excreta and church fuckwaffles that adhere to each other and reprehensibly work to degrade and violently wrack sexual expression.

    1. Sevens   10 years ago

      Yes, you may have ice cream.

      1. Agile Cyborg   10 years ago

        I don't eat ice cream. I eat little plastic people dripping with ego soup. Against their will, of course. I reach into the misty cities and scoop the motherfuckers up off the sidewalks they saunter and then scatter on and suck them into my mouth screaming and writhing like a mass of strange eels wearing denim and nylon and cheap leather and the mobile phones are like pop rocks gushing among the crushed tendons and joints and brains.

        1. Sevens   10 years ago

          Alright, no more coffee.

  34. LG Erikson   10 years ago

    I've just written a new blog post on nudity issues and how #freethenipple should stir up a new conversation on our questionable moral views:

    http://www.lgerikson.com/my-bl.....ble-morals

  35. LG Erikson   10 years ago

    I've just written a new blog post on nudity issues and how #freethenipple should stir up a new conversation on our questionable moral views:

    http://www.lgerikson.com/my-bl.....ble-morals

  36. Friendo   10 years ago

    I think an article about underboob should have some damn underboob in it! Show me the underboob.

    1. Sevens   10 years ago

      Withholding underboobs may be a more effective form of protest.

  37. Peter   10 years ago

    Boob = bad
    Boner = OK

  38. juggared   10 years ago

    Excellent read, Positive site, where did u come up with the information on this posting?I have read a few of the articles on your website now, and I really like your style. Thanks a million and please
    keep up the effective work.
    http://havenlied.nl | http://whatsapphack.cheatelites.net

  39. mariesoloed   9 years ago

    hello,I used to be suggested this web site through my boss um friends http://www.excellentacademiche.....t-writing/ and we were very impressed your articles thank you so much.

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

No Divorce From China

Liz Wolfe | 5.13.2025 9:30 AM

New Jersey Town Says Small Setbacks, Stray Cats Allow It To Seize Private Property

Christian Britschgi | 5.13.2025 8:00 AM

Pakistan Deports Afghans Awaiting U.S. Resettlement

Beth Bailey | 5.13.2025 7:00 AM

How Britain's Protectionist Trade Policies Created Valley Forge

Eric Boehm | From the June 2025 issue

Brickbat: Reading Problem

Charles Oliver | 5.13.2025 4:00 AM

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!