A Constitutionally Dubious California Bill Would Ban Possession of AI-Generated Child Pornography
The proposal seems to conflict with a Supreme Court ruling against laws that criminalize mere possession of obscene material.
The proposal seems to conflict with a Supreme Court ruling against laws that criminalize mere possession of obscene material.
Plus: The most boring write-in campaign, some heat in the Argentine streets, Brooklyn's penchant for vehicular manslaughter, and more...
After multiple investigations shed doubt on his conviction, the Supreme Court has agreed to decide whether Oklahoma death-row inmate Richard Glossip will get a new trial.
He is asking the justices to reject the Colorado Supreme Court's conclusion that he is disqualified from running for president.
In an amicus brief filed in Murthy v. Missouri, they ignore basic tenets of First Amendment law in order to quash online speech they don't like.
The justices seem inclined to revise or ditch a 1984 precedent that requires deference to executive agencies' statutory interpretations.
Excessive judicial deference gives administrative agencies a license to rewrite the law in their favor.
Both conservative and liberal justices seem to oppose letting states get away with violating the Takings Clause merely because Congress hasn't enacted a specific law enforcing it against them.
Plus: the Supreme Court weighs housing fees and homelessness, YIMBYs bet on smaller, more focused reforms, and a new paper finds legalizing more housing does in fact bring costs down.
That's the big takeaway from yesterday's oral argument in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado. But it's not clear whether the Court will resolve any additional issues, and if so how.
California made carry permits easier to obtain but nearly impossible to use.
The state's law, which a federal judge enjoined last month, prohibits firearms in most public places.
Only one justice indicated any interest in premature consideration of state-law climate change lawsuits.
The justices will hear the case on an expedited schedule, and could potentially consider all the issues it raises.
The panel covered many cases and featured views many would not expect at a Fed Soc event.
His Supreme Court petition raises serious questions about how to interpret and apply Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
The Supreme Court judges Eighth Amendment cases with "evolving standards of decency." Some conservative jurists don't like it.
After a federal judge deemed the state's location-specific gun bans unconstitutional, the 9th Circuit stayed his injunction.
Letting state officials determine whether a candidate has "engaged in insurrection" opens a huge can of worms.
The former Attorney General disagrees with me on whether state and local government climate change lawsuits belong in federal court.
His lawyers say no jury can ever consider charges based on his "official acts" as president, which include his efforts to reverse Joe Biden's election.
You're not going to save democracy by kicking people out of elections.
Ralph Petty's "conflicted dual-hat arrangement" as an advocate and an adjudicator was "utterly bonkers," Judge Don Willett notes.
The ACLU will represent the gun rights group in a case with widespread relevance for free speech.
The Court announced today that it would take up a case involving access to the abortion-inducing drug mifepristone.
The court upheld several other location-specific gun bans, along with the state's "good moral character" requirement for a carry permit.
The Court granted two petitions for certiorari seeking review of a controversial lower court decision limiting federal approval of mifepristone.
The Court agreed to the special counsel's request for expedited briefing on whether to grant certiorari.
Plus: Austin and Salt Lake City pass very different "middle housing" reforms, Democrats in Congress want to ban hedge fund–owned rental housing, and a look at GOP presidential candidate's housing policy positions.
The justices are considering whether to grant certiorari in Minnesota's lawsuit against energy companies.
Justice Jackson notes her objection to the Court's standard practice of vacating lower court decisions rendered moot by the prevailing party below.
The Court has been asked to intervene in cases involving abortion pills and criminal prosecution of abortion doctors.
The late Supreme Court justice eloquently defended property rights and state autonomy.
The Supreme Court's first decision of the term does not decide very much.
More than you might think—and it’s getting better all the time.
By banning firearms from a long list of "sensitive places," the state is copying a policy that federal judges have repeatedly rejected.
She was the first woman Supreme Court justice, and played a key role in changing the Court's jurisprudence for the better on several issues.
The political push behind the law was well-meaning. But it will backfire on many prospective renters.
The 4th Circuit’s rejection of Maryland’s handgun licensing system suggests similar schemes in other states are unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court mulls how to apply a mandatory minimum for gun possession by people convicted of drug felonies.
An important challenge to the use of agency adjudication to enforce federal regulations.
The Supreme Court will consider whether federal agencies’ administrative judges violate the Seventh Amendment.
Before buying a handgun, residents had to obtain a "qualification license," which could take up to 30 days.
The amicus brief is on behalf of the Cato Institute and myself.
The case highlights the broad reach of a federal law that bans firearm possession by people with nonviolent criminal records.
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