Laws Requiring Permission to Obtain Guns Look Vulnerable
The 4th Circuit’s rejection of Maryland’s handgun licensing system suggests similar schemes in other states are unconstitutional.
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.
The Trump administration’s unilateral ban on bump stocks turned owners of those rifle accessories into felons.
The provisions seem sensible, though there are legitimate concerns about enforcement.
That prosecutors in the Hoosier State successfully denied people this due process is a reflection of how abusive civil forfeiture can be.
Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar falsely claims a federal gun ban "requires individualized findings of dangerousness."
In an upcoming Supreme Court case, the Cato Institute argues that the "threadbare procedures" required by federal law provide inadequate protection for constitutional rights.
The U.S. Supreme Court keeps putting off deciding whether to take up a challenge to New York's rent control scheme.
A wave of ballot measures reminds us most Americans are moderate on abortion.
The Supreme Court considers whether and when banishing irksome constituents violates the First Amendment.
Without a prompt post-seizure hearing, people can lose their property for months or years even when they ultimately get it back.
with implications for the pending Supreme Court case of United States v. Rahimi
The appeals court is reviewing an injunction by a judge who concluded that the law is inconsistent with the Supreme Court's Second Amendment precedents.
School officials in three states are effectively immune from lawsuits over excessive corporal punishment. A Louisiana mother is asking the Supreme Court to step in.
Democrats and Republicans are united in thinking their political agendas trump the First Amendment.
Aside from narrowly defined exceptions, false speech is protected by the First Amendment.
The justices agreed to consider whether the Biden administration's efforts to suppress online "misinformation" were unconstitutional.
Sylvia Gonzalez, an anti-establishment politician, spent a day in jail for allegedly concealing a petition that she organized.
The Court is taking more cases from the Fifth Circuit, and its decisions do not appear to be faring well.
A lawsuit against a Black Lives Matter activist could have a chilling impact on constitutionally protected activity.
The Court saw no reason to consider the Eighth Circuit's conclusion that the states lacked standing.
Plus: House speaker battles, a Jesus-themed Trump courtroom sketch, Eric Adams' travel plans, and more...
The decision is another rebuke to states that have imposed broad, location-specific limits on the right to bear arms.
The Solicitor General rejects an academic argument offered in defense of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
If Facebook et al. are pushing a "radical leftist narrative," why don’t they have a constitutional right to do that?
Not all of the justices are happy about the Court's stingy approach to certiorari.
The case will consider whether the government is exempt from takings liability for imposing exactions as a condition of development rights in situations where the exaction is imposed by legislation. Unlike many Supreme Court cases, this one can be resolved very easily by applying a basic principle of constitutional law.
The badly flawed lower court ruling defies the Supreme Court's landmark 2019 decision forbidding such Catch-22 traps, and threatens the property rights of large numbers of people.
Before correcting the record, the former president's spokesman inadvertently implicated him in a federal crime.
"There is no American tradition of limiting ammunition capacity," U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez says, calling the state's cap "arbitrary," "capricious," and "extreme."
The former president is right to worry that supporting restrictions on abortion could hurt him in the general election.
The governor's attempt to rule by decree provoked widespread condemnation instead of the applause she was expecting.
Some estimates suggest the number of abortions has even increased.
New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham thinks violent crime gives her a license to rule by decree.
Local police officials are leery of enforcing Michelle Lujan Grisham's ban on public carry, which gun rights groups have challenged in federal court.
Preferential college admissions violated the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
The Colorado governor finds common ground with many libertarians. But does he really stand for more freedom?
Politicians are throwing laws at the wall and seeing what sticks.
"The opportunity to think for ourselves and to express those thoughts freely is among our most cherished liberties," Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the majority opinion.
A federal judge compared Waylon Bailey’s Facebook jest to "falsely shouting fire in a theatre."
The appeals court ruled that a Facebook post alluding to World War Z was clearly protected by the First Amendment.
Reason is an independent, audience-supported media organization. Your investment helps us reach millions of people every month.
Yes, I’ll invest in Reason’s growth! 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 thanksYour donation supports the journalism that questions big-government promises and exposes failed ideas.
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