Recent threats to the First Amendment and short-term rentals

It should come as no surprise that governments struggle to regulate the disruptive nature of the “sharing economy.” Lately, this struggle has resulted in increasingly burdensome regulations on property owners … ›

Paradise Lost: A Family’s U.S. Supreme Court Property Fight

Pacific Legal Foundation is representing the Murr family of Wisconsin at the U.S. Supreme Court. The Murrs own a modest cabin on the St. Croix River in Wisconsin that they … ›

California Supreme Court will review controversial tax decision

Last month, Pacific Legal Foundation filed a letter brief urging the California Supreme Court to review a decision denying taxpayers the right to vote on taxes imposed by initiative. Yesterday, … ›

Duarte Nursery seeks immediate appeals in Clean Water Act case

Following the trial court’s remarkable June 10 ruling that plowing violates the Clean Water Act, despite clear regulatory provisions to the contrary (see 33 CFR 324.4(a)(1)(iii)(D)), Duarte Nursery has moved for reconsideration … ›

Loss in gopher frog critical habitat challenge

This morning, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an adverse split decision in Markle Interests v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.  The case concerns a challenge to the Service’s designation … ›

The Slants in the Supreme Court

As we noted earlier this year, The Slants–an Oregon rock band comprised of frontman, Simon Tam, and other Asian-American band members–was denied a trademark on the band name because the … ›

Major Property Rights Battle Continues In Palo Alto

PLF Director of Communications Harold Johnson interviews PLF attorney and Director of the Liberty Clinic project, Larry Salzman, about their case titled Jisser v. City of Palo Alto. The Jisser … ›

The Ohio Legislature is dazed and confused about equal protection

Earlier this month, Ohio Governor John Kasich signed Ohio HB523, a bill legalizing medical uses of cannabis in the state. Like every other state to liberalize its regulation of marijuana, … ›

"Ban the box" laws and disparate impact liability

Pacific Legal Foundation opposes disparate impact, a form of liability that brands an act (e.g. an employer’s hiring practice) as discriminatory just because it does not produce the “right” racial result. … ›

Brand Logo for the blog page

Recent threats to the First Amendment and short-term rentals

It should come as no surprise that governments struggle to regulate the disruptive nature of the “sharing economy.” Lately, this struggle has resulted in increasingly burdensome regulations on property owners … ›

Paradise Lost: A Family’s U.S. Supreme Court Property Fight

Pacific Legal Foundation is representing the Murr family of Wisconsin at the U.S. Supreme Court. The Murrs own a modest cabin on the St. Croix River in Wisconsin that they … ›

California Supreme Court will review controversial tax decision

Last month, Pacific Legal Foundation filed a letter brief urging the California Supreme Court to review a decision denying taxpayers the right to vote on taxes imposed by initiative. Yesterday, … ›

Duarte Nursery seeks immediate appeals in Clean Water Act case

Following the trial court’s remarkable June 10 ruling that plowing violates the Clean Water Act, despite clear regulatory provisions to the contrary (see 33 CFR 324.4(a)(1)(iii)(D)), Duarte Nursery has moved for reconsideration … ›

Loss in gopher frog critical habitat challenge

This morning, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an adverse split decision in Markle Interests v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.  The case concerns a challenge to the Service’s designation … ›

The Slants in the Supreme Court

As we noted earlier this year, The Slants–an Oregon rock band comprised of frontman, Simon Tam, and other Asian-American band members–was denied a trademark on the band name because the … ›

Major Property Rights Battle Continues In Palo Alto

PLF Director of Communications Harold Johnson interviews PLF attorney and Director of the Liberty Clinic project, Larry Salzman, about their case titled Jisser v. City of Palo Alto. The Jisser … ›

The Ohio Legislature is dazed and confused about equal protection

Earlier this month, Ohio Governor John Kasich signed Ohio HB523, a bill legalizing medical uses of cannabis in the state. Like every other state to liberalize its regulation of marijuana, … ›

"Ban the box" laws and disparate impact liability

Pacific Legal Foundation opposes disparate impact, a form of liability that brands an act (e.g. an employer’s hiring practice) as discriminatory just because it does not produce the “right” racial result. … ›

The Morning Docket

Stay up to date with the Morning Docket, a weekly highlight of PLF's best articles, videos, and podcasts.

Recent threats to the First Amendment and short-term rentals

It should come as no surprise that governments struggle to regulate the disruptive nature of the “sharing economy.” Lately, this struggle has resulted in increasingly burdensome regulations on property owners … ›

Paradise Lost: A Family’s U.S. Supreme Court Property Fight

Pacific Legal Foundation is representing the Murr family of Wisconsin at the U.S. Supreme Court. The Murrs own a modest cabin on the St. Croix River in Wisconsin that they … ›

California Supreme Court will review controversial tax decision

Last month, Pacific Legal Foundation filed a letter brief urging the California Supreme Court to review a decision denying taxpayers the right to vote on taxes imposed by initiative. Yesterday, … ›

Duarte Nursery seeks immediate appeals in Clean Water Act case

Following the trial court’s remarkable June 10 ruling that plowing violates the Clean Water Act, despite clear regulatory provisions to the contrary (see 33 CFR 324.4(a)(1)(iii)(D)), Duarte Nursery has moved for reconsideration … ›

Loss in gopher frog critical habitat challenge

This morning, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an adverse split decision in Markle Interests v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.  The case concerns a challenge to the Service’s designation … ›

The Slants in the Supreme Court

As we noted earlier this year, The Slants–an Oregon rock band comprised of frontman, Simon Tam, and other Asian-American band members–was denied a trademark on the band name because the … ›

Major Property Rights Battle Continues In Palo Alto

PLF Director of Communications Harold Johnson interviews PLF attorney and Director of the Liberty Clinic project, Larry Salzman, about their case titled Jisser v. City of Palo Alto. The Jisser … ›

The Ohio Legislature is dazed and confused about equal protection

Earlier this month, Ohio Governor John Kasich signed Ohio HB523, a bill legalizing medical uses of cannabis in the state. Like every other state to liberalize its regulation of marijuana, … ›

"Ban the box" laws and disparate impact liability

Pacific Legal Foundation opposes disparate impact, a form of liability that brands an act (e.g. an employer’s hiring practice) as discriminatory just because it does not produce the “right” racial result. … ›

Recent threats to the First Amendment and short-term rentals

It should come as no surprise that governments struggle to regulate the disruptive nature of the “sharing economy.” Lately, this struggle has resulted in increasingly burdensome regulations on property owners … ›

Paradise Lost: A Family’s U.S. Supreme Court Property Fight

Pacific Legal Foundation is representing the Murr family of Wisconsin at the U.S. Supreme Court. The Murrs own a modest cabin on the St. Croix River in Wisconsin that they … ›

California Supreme Court will review controversial tax decision

Last month, Pacific Legal Foundation filed a letter brief urging the California Supreme Court to review a decision denying taxpayers the right to vote on taxes imposed by initiative. Yesterday, … ›

Duarte Nursery seeks immediate appeals in Clean Water Act case

Following the trial court’s remarkable June 10 ruling that plowing violates the Clean Water Act, despite clear regulatory provisions to the contrary (see 33 CFR 324.4(a)(1)(iii)(D)), Duarte Nursery has moved for reconsideration … ›

Loss in gopher frog critical habitat challenge

This morning, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an adverse split decision in Markle Interests v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.  The case concerns a challenge to the Service’s designation … ›

The Slants in the Supreme Court

As we noted earlier this year, The Slants–an Oregon rock band comprised of frontman, Simon Tam, and other Asian-American band members–was denied a trademark on the band name because the … ›

Major Property Rights Battle Continues In Palo Alto

PLF Director of Communications Harold Johnson interviews PLF attorney and Director of the Liberty Clinic project, Larry Salzman, about their case titled Jisser v. City of Palo Alto. The Jisser … ›

The Ohio Legislature is dazed and confused about equal protection

Earlier this month, Ohio Governor John Kasich signed Ohio HB523, a bill legalizing medical uses of cannabis in the state. Like every other state to liberalize its regulation of marijuana, … ›

"Ban the box" laws and disparate impact liability

Pacific Legal Foundation opposes disparate impact, a form of liability that brands an act (e.g. an employer’s hiring practice) as discriminatory just because it does not produce the “right” racial result. … ›