Trump Mounts a 'Direct Assault on the First Amendment' by Portraying Journalism As Consumer Fraud
The president-elect's lawsuit against The Des Moines Register is a patently frivolous and constitutionally dubious attempt to intimidate the press.
The president-elect's lawsuit against The Des Moines Register is a patently frivolous and constitutionally dubious attempt to intimidate the press.
One in four kids will be the victim of identity theft or fraud. Here's how the government is making it worse.
Despite its enormous budget and vast regulatory powers, the agency has failed to detect major frauds while wasting time and money on relatively useless disclosures.
The spread of conspiracy theories in response to a bruising electoral loss is not only found on the political right.
Narrowly understood, the president-elect's familiar-sounding plan to tackle "massive waste and fraud" may not give us "smaller government" in any meaningful sense.
The Republican presidential candidate argues that CBS and The Washington Post broke the law by covering the election in ways he did not like.
A trucker lost his job because he tested positive for marijuana after consuming a supposedly THC-free CBD tincture.
Contrary to progressive criticism, curtailing bureaucratic power is not about protecting "the wealthy and powerful."
Justice Sonia Sotomayor called the Supreme Court ruling in SEC v. Jarkesy "a power grab." She's right, but in the wrong way.
The decision rejects a system in which the agency imposes civil penalties after investigating people and validating its own allegations.
Just the latest development in the continuing saga of COVID stimulus fraud.
George Norcross III's alleged actions are almost cartoonishly corrupt. But for economic development programs, it's not too far off from business as usual.
Facing an opponent who has been credibly described as a sexual predator, Biden instead emphasizes Trump's cover-up of a consensual encounter.
That take on the former president's New York conviction echoes similarly puzzling claims by many people who should know better.
The lack of a clear rationale for charging Trump with 34 felonies raises a due process issue that is likely to figure in his appeals.
Whatever Trump did after the 2016 presidential election, it seems safe to say that it did not retroactively promote his victory.
There was a glaring mismatch between the charges against the former president and what prosecutors described as the essence of his crime.
The judge said the jurors need not agree about the "unlawful means" that Trump allegedly used to promote his 2016 election.
Closing arguments in the former president's trial highlight the mismatch between the charges and the "election fraud" he supposedly committed.
This week the judge presiding over Trump's trial ruled that jurors do not have to agree on any particular legal theory.
To convert a hush payment into 34 felonies, prosecutors are relying on a chain of assumptions with several weak links.
Contrary to what prosecutors say, the former president is not charged with "conspiracy" or "election fraud."
Under the prosecution's theory, Trump would be guilty of falsifying business records even if Daniels made the whole thing up.
Private unions have every right to exist, but that doesn't mean they're actually beneficial on net.
To convert a hush money payment into 34 felonies, prosecutors are invoking an obscure state election law that experts say has never been used before.
If businesses don't serve customers well, they go out of business. Government, on the other hand, is a monopoly.
Money supposedly spent to help Americans may actually have done a lot of damage.
The leading possibilities are all problematic in one way or another.
The Department of Justice is suing several tax preparers for filing fraudulent returns, but even honest filers risk running afoul of tax laws.
Philip Esformes was sentenced for charges on which a jury hung. After receiving a commutation, the federal government vowed to try to put him back in prison.
Neither Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg nor New York Attorney General Letitia James can explain exactly who was victimized by the dishonesty they cite.
Plus: A listener asks if the editors have criteria for what constitutes a good law.
The law that Attorney General Letitia James used to sue the former president does not require proof that anyone was injured by his financial dishonesty.
Despite brazenly lying on financial documents and inventing valuations seemingly out of thin air, Trump's lender did not testify that it would have valued his loans any differently.
True the Vote told a Georgia court that it can't produce any evidence to support claims of widespread ballot fraud in Georgia.
A system for encouraging cooperation by crime victims was allegedly turned into a means of producing visa fraud.
Plus: an unexpected digression into the world of Little Debbie dessert snack cakes.
A new GAO report details federal prosecutors' attempts to put the horse back in the barn.
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