The U.S. Supreme Court struck down a polling-place dress code in Minnesota, upholding free speech rights across the nation and protecting the right of Americans to peacefully express their political views at the polls.
PLF represented Minnesota voters, including Andy Cilek, who showed up at his polling place wearing a t-shirt that read “Don’t tread on me.” State law banned voters from wearing any “political” apparel at a polling place. This includes any t-shirt, button, or other items that could be construed as political, or even organizations that take political positions such as the AFL-CIO or NRA. A poll worker not only prevented Andy from voting for five hours, but also took down his name for possible prosecution.
Read the voters of Minnesota’s case
Pacific Legal Foundation is one of the most active and effective public interest legal organizations in the United States. PLF has won an unprecedented ten cases for its clients before the Supreme Court, out of its twelve direct appearances—a record of success unmatched by any other public interest legal organization.
Read about our missionRentberry v. City of Seattle
Rentberry is a small San Francisco-based startup that connects landlords and renters through a rent-bidding website. The company hopes to expand its service to Seattle, however city council adopted a one-year moratorium on the service over concerns it might violate existing rental law and might inflate housing costs—despite no evidence that either is true. Pacific Legal Foundation has filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Rentberry, arguing the moratorium prohibits free speech rights of Rentberry, as well as the landlords and renters who would like to use such sites to communicate.
Read moreYim v. City of Seattle
In a noble but misguided effort to combat racial discrimination, the City of Seattle passed a series of ordinances forbidding local landlords from choosing their own tenants. A “first in time” ordinance requires landlords to rent to the first financially-qualified tenant who applies. And the “Fair Chance Housing Ordinance” forbids landlords from considering applicants’ criminal histories. PLF represents several small-scale landlords who are denied their constitutionally-guaranteed choice to decide who to allow on their private property.
Read moreTaylor v. Polhill, et al
In Florida, you need a license to sell hearing aids. Dan Taylor of Melbourne, Florida, gave up his license after 30 years, because Florida’s outdated regulations were made for older models, not the updated, technologically sophisticated models he and his customers prefer. In a federal lawsuit on behalf of Dan, PLF argues that Florida’s licensing scheme increases cost and reduces access to modern hearing aids—and they’re even preempted by federal laws aimed at reducing unnecessary regulation.
Read moreVictory in New Orleans home demolition case! Supreme Court goes part of the way on limiting administrative power PLF files reply brief to compel California agency to follow state law. … ›
Read moreToday, we filed our opening merits brief in our challenge to the federal Endangered Species Act listing of the coastal California gnatcatcher. Our lawsuit takes aim at the taxonomic foundation … ›
Read moreToday, we received a favorable, published decision from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of Garrett v. City of New Orleans. This case challenges the City’s demolition … ›
Read moreYesterday, PLF filed a petition asking the Supreme Court to review a decision that diminishes property rights by throwing unnecessary obstacles to raising Fifth Amendment claims. The story behind this case … ›
Read moreYesterday, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Lucia v. Securities and Exchange Commission and held that administrative-law judges (ALJs) in the SEC are “officers of the United States” under … ›
Read more“Those who won our independence believed that the final end of the state was to make men free to develop their faculties, and that in its government the deliberative forces … ›
Read moreIn late May, PLF attorneys filed this brief on the merits in the case of Knick v. Township of Scott, Pennsylvania, which is currently before the United States Supreme Court. The … ›
Read moreOn Monday, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Washington v. United States. This case dealt directly with whether various Indian Tribes in the Puget Sound could require the state … ›
Read more