A new lawsuit argues the state's requirement that doctors must be licensed in California to do remote consultations with patients there is unconstitutional.
How a use tax on mifepristone might scramble abortion debates.
A look at personal jurisdiction after Mallory.
The Supreme Court issues five merits opinions, but there are still forty more waiting.
A response to Professors Goldsmith & Volokh
Notwithstanding federal pot prohibition, the appeals court says, the requirement violated the Commerce Clause's implicit prohibition of anti-competitive interstate trade barriers.
The answer is probably "no." But the federal government could more easily ban such transactions.
The inspections caused great economic harm, and may also have violated the Dormant Foreign Commerce Clause of the Constitution.
National Pork Producers Council v. Ross could have implications far beyond bacon prices in California.
Do California's rules violate the dormant commerce clause?
I was interviewed by Joe Salvetta of the Pioneer Institute, a leading Massachusetts public policy think tank.
A new paper raises constitutional questions about expansive state-level regulations that reach beyond their borders.
What today's decision in South Dakota v. Wayfair might tell us about the future of qualified immunity
Two states attempt to dictate how farmers outside their boundaries treat their animals.
A federal appeals court raises California's unconstitutional ban from the dead.
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
