Broader Implications of the Supreme Court's Sports Gambling Decision
Commentators are right to suggest that Murphy v. NCAA will help sanctuary cities, but wrong to claim it is like to undermine federal laws restricting state taxes.
Commentators are right to suggest that Murphy v. NCAA will help sanctuary cities, but wrong to claim it is like to undermine federal laws restricting state taxes.
From ripping families apart to nominating a torture-enabler as CIA director, the administration is calling the GOP's bluff, Reason editors argue.
I am reposting my 2016 post on this subject, on the occasion of Kevin Walsh's guest-blogging stint addressing the same issue.
Unemployment is down, but low- and high-skilled immigrants can't get in.
The Supreme Court's invalidation of a federal law preventing state legalization of sports gambling strengthens protection for state autonomy from the federal government.
The president hopes that forcibly separating parents from their kids will deter illegal entry.
Don't believe the falsehoods peddled by Trump and Sessions.
The Delaware Criminal Justice Council found it difficult to "justify the resources that have been expend on so few" participants with such a "low rate of success."
It's all about the Constitution.
They are crying for baby Alfie in England but ignoring the plight of families being separated at the border
Maybe she'll move to Mexico if he implements a guest worker program
Because nothings says "rule of law" like a sheriff held in contempt for refusing to follow a judge's orders.
More undocumented immigration meant less violent crime.
Does their commitment to family values stop at the Rio Grande's edge?
This forthcoming article discusses how we can massively expand economic opportunity by making it easier for people to "vote with their feet," both domestically and through international migration.
The federal charges against Mack highlight how human trafficking hysteria harms vulnerable women.
The justices' comments in the oral argument suggest this will be a close case that could easily go either way. The outcome could well turn on the views of that perennial swing voter, Justice Anthony Kennedy.
Giving the government blanket power to check the Bill of Rights at the border won't serve the interests of citizens or immigrants
The White Slavery Panic of the late 19th/early 20th centuries caused Congress to pass the vaguely-worded Mann Act. It allowed the FBI and prosecutors broad discretion to go after individuals they didn't like.
Prof. Michael Mannheimer and I have coauthored an op ed explaining why the Bill of Rights limits federal power over immigration, and renders Trump's travel ban unconstitutional.
On the eve of the of Supreme Court oral argument in the travel ban case, here are links to some of my more notable VC posts on the subject.
If the Supreme Court rules that Trump's campaign statements cannot be used to prove that his travel ban order was an attempt to discriminate against Muslims, it could create a dangerous precedent.
The US Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit affirms a district court ruling against the administration's efforts to deny federal grants to sanctuary jurisdictions.
But dumb, offensive speech still isn't violence.
He wants to keep them in the kitchen with their "involuntary housewife visa"
A new Cato Institute study finds that screening of visitors, immigrants, and refugees is about as thorough as can reasonably be expected.
But it's a great game for gringos and Mexicans alike.
A bill in the California senate could legalize street vending across the state.
He should stop gutting America's refugee program.
The two justices face off in Sessions v. Dimaya.
The Supreme Court rules against the federal government in Sessions v. Dimaya.
Backpage CEO Carl Ferrer turned over the company and seven other executives in exchange for leniency.
Indictment reveals money-laundering, conspiracy charges, and a tricky federal law known as the Travel Act.
How will Trump and new national security adviser John Bolton respond to a reported chemical attack in a war-ravaged country?
The various lawsuits pitting the Trump administration against sanctuary jurisdictions has important implications for constitutional federalism that go beyond immigration policy.
Site had long been a target for sex work and sex trafficking advertisements.
5 editorials call for the federal government to thwart Sinclair's expansion efforts in wake of creepy promo video; meanwhile you can count the number of anti-FOSTA eds on one finger
The Trump administration is wasting time, money, and people by sending National Guard members to the U.S.-Mexico border.
Border Patrol guards average just two illegal-immigrant apprehensions per month; they don't need reinforcements.
If the president sends active-duty Army troops to the border without congressional approval, he will be acting in violation of federal law.
He is trashing the First Amendment to stifle the immigrant rights movement.
The ruling allows a civil suit against Backpage to proceed for one of the case's three plaintiffs.
Only a man with a big heart can dump on foreign workers while enjoying their services.
The brief, which I coauthored on behalf of myself and six other legal scholars explains why the Bill of Rights constrains federal power over immigration no less than other types of federal power.
A higher non-response rate among illegal immigrants is a goal to be celebrated, not some minor potential side effect to be lamented, Kris Kobach, David Vitter, and other would-be gerrymanderers stress.
The Trump administration is violating the rule of law in the name of upholding it.
Even our restrictionist president has yet to go full Romney.
Help Reason push back with more of the fact-based reporting we do best. Your support means more reporters, more investigations, and more coverage.
Make a donation today! No thanksEvery dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.
Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interestedSo much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.
I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanksPush back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.
My donation today will help Reason push back! Not todayBack journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.
Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksBack independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksYour support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksDonate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks