Religious Employment and Title VII: Part 1—Civil Rights Law and the Tensions between Liberty and Equality
Understanding Title VII as a law designed to advance both liberty and equality helps to illuminate the statute's religious employer exemption.
Understanding Title VII as a law designed to advance both liberty and equality helps to illuminate the statute's religious employer exemption.
Empowering patients is good. Let’s give them a lot more choice and independence.
Excluding generative AI from Section 230 could stymie innovation and cut off consumers from useful tools.
The constitutionally anomalous status of broadcasting invites government meddling.
Recent events in Minnesota bolster the already strong case for abolishing ICE - and for the plan of doing so by transferring its funds to ordinary state and local police.
Gov. Kathy Hochul vetoed a bill mandating two-person subway crews, but union contracts and bipartisan support ensure New Yorkers will keep paying for them anyway.
Politically-motivated firings and increased executive branch scrutiny set “a dangerous precedent,” warns a former archivist of the United States.
A few thoughts on the oral argument in Galette v. N.J. Transit Corp.
Vice President J.D. Vance on the nature of power
The plan violates multiple constituitonal provisions and goes against Supreme Court precedent. If somehow allowed to stand, it would gravely imperil federalism and the separation of powers.
Former U.S. Archivist Colleen Shogan discusses the importance of preserving presidential records and the challenge of maintaining public trust in an era of partisan conflict.
How J.D. Vance misstated the law.
No one likes high interest rates on credit cards and loans, but artificially lowering interest rates via executive power is not a solution.
Presidential non-acquiescence in Humphrey's Executor from 1989 to 2009.
Mayday.Health ads that direct people to an informational website about abortion access are deceptive advertising and must be banned, the state argues. That’s unconstitutional, counters Mayday.
The DATA Act, introduced by Sen. Tom Cotton, would exempt electrical utilities from federal regulation if they don't touch the electrical grid.
A federal district court rules that the case should go back to Minnesota state court, rather than being in federal court.
Humphrey's Executor from 1969 to 1989.
Without any real consequences for copyright infringements, the Department of Homeland Security doesn't have much incentive to follow the law.
Almost every president since 1945 has refused to accept Humphrey's Executor as having been correctly decided.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt did his best to defend presidential removal power at will notwithstanding the Supreme Court’s lawless decision in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States.
Contrary to widespread speculation, the Court's first opinion of an argued case concerned neither Trump's tariffs nor voting rights.
The Death by Lightning miniseries dramatizes the assassination of a president who left little lasting impact on Americans' lives.
Medicaid fraud has been endemic at the state and federal levels for decades. Focusing on a single official or state misses a deeper lesson.
Every President from 1921 to 1933 successfully defended presidential removal power at will.
The Supreme Court’s January docket is packed with big cases.
"Violence is anything that threatens them and their safety, so it is doxing them, it's videotaping them where they're at when they're out on operations," Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said.
That embarrassing mistake highlights the slipperiness of Trump's attempts to justify legally dubious policies by invoking the specter of "foreign terrorist organizations."
Every president from 1901 to 1921 successfully defended presidential removal power at will.
The "filings have led to the Court completely losing trust in" the lawyers involved.
The president is making real progress on deregulation, but he needs to get Congress involved.
If an indictment is enough to justify military action, why bother seeking congressional approval?
Zohran Mamdani signs executive orders to speed up new construction. His housing policy picks also want to abolish private property.
Every president from 1881 to 1901 successfully defended presidential at-will removal power.
Plus: Thank capitalism for the best parts of college football bowl season
Roberts' year-end report on the federal judiciary includes some notable statements about the Declaration and its relevance to constitutional interpretation and judicial review.
The NYT profiles a sloppy and highly problematic empirical study of the Supreme Court.
His explanation for why the Trump administration attacked Venezuela without congressional authorization does not stand up to scrutiny.
You don't need a detailed theory to explain the departing congresswoman's journey.
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