Indiana Supreme Court Creates a Clear Split on Compelled Decryption and the Fifth Amendment
Next stop, the U.S. Supreme Court?
Next stop, the U.S. Supreme Court?
What would happen, I wonder, if protesters decide to set up an autonomous zone in the Twitter parking lot?
Public health officials have squandered their credibility
Making the correct legal argument would have cast doubt on other elements of immigration law, and the acting DHS Secretary refused to say that DACA was a bad policy
"The original meaning of the constitution binds us as a matter of the rule of law. Its restraint on our power cannot depend on whether we agree with its current application on policy grounds. Such a commitment to originalism would be no commitment at all. It would be a smokescreen for the outcomes that we prefer."
I wouldn't have expected abortion politics there ....
The decision in Bostock v. Clayton County is well-justified from the standpoint of textualism (a theory associated with conservatives), but less clearly so from the standpoint of purposivism (often associated with liberals).
I edited the 120-page decision down to about 30 pages.
SCOTUS did more today than decide that Title VII applies to employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and transgender status.
He views the doctrine as likely not authorized by the text of the Civil Rights Act of 1871, or the legal principles that it may have implicitly absorbed; instead, he argues, it was created it just "because of a 'balancing of competing values' about litigation costs and efficiency."
Justice Gorsuch writes for six-justice majority that discrimination based upon sexual orientation or transgender status is sex discrimination under Title VII.
Some progressive activist groups are trying to resuscitate the idea. Whether they succeed remains to be seen.
for all J.D. graduates of law schools accredited by the American Bar Association who are already registered for the July or Sept. 2020 bar exams.
Horseshoeing school, tour guide licensing, and a lawsuit that will not go gentle into that good night.
Jonathan Chait's article on progressive intolerance both describes and illustrates the problem.
Dean Peñalver defends Jacobson's academic freedom, but adds an entirely gratuitous, and somewhat unfair condemnation of Jacobson's writings.
An interesting draft study by Harvard economics professors Tanaya Devi and Roland G. Fryer Jr.
If "defunding the police" means abolishing them completely, it's a bad idea. But there are ways to use cuts in funding to improve police incentives for the better.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, with one recorded dissent, finally acted on a process that began in 2016.
American rabbis were strongly in favor of strict "stay at home" policies--until the recent protests started.
Early COVID lockdown effects show no significant increases in most crime. In most cases, there were drops.
Article IV territorial officers hold “Office[s] under the Authority of the United States,” and are bound by the Sinecure Clause.
A federal court in Connecticut struck down a policy that effectively stopped gun purchases; a week ago, a federal court in California upheld such a policy.
Income inequality is increasingly a phenomenon driven by big cities.
All of the files are now available on a shared drive.
While the current protests are certainly well-meaning and anger over police violence and racism justified, claiming that the protests' positive effects on public health will exceed the harms from the spread of coronavirus is an assertion of faith, not science.
Professor Peter Margulies argues the writ should be denied, for the most part, at least for now.
Episode 319 of the Cyberlaw Podcast - an interview with Ben Buchanan
Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.
This modal will close in 10