Ninth Circuit sides with PLF in an important free speech decision

The First Amendment doesn’t just protect your right to speak, it also protects your right not to speak. So imagine if your municipal government required you to devote 20% of … ›

Weekly litigation report — September 16, 2017

On Thursday, in Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, PLF filed this reply brief in support of its cert petition to the Supreme Court of the United States. In this case, we’re representing Minnesota voters in a First Amendment challenge to a ban on political apparel at polling places.

PLF files reply in challenge to Minnesota’s ban on political apparel

Minnesota bans political apparel at polling places across the State. The government interprets “political” broadly: the ban applies to shirts with classic American phrases such as “Liberty” or “Don’t tread on me,” as long as those phrases appear alongside a tea party logo — no matter how small.

Weekly litigation report — September 2, 2017

This week’s topics: Can the executive branch be the judicial branch? When is “just compensation” unjust? Meet the new boss, same as the old boss?

Four-year-old boy banned from school for having long hair

Jessica Oates is the single mother of Jabez, a four-year-old boy who was excited to start his first day of school. Unfortunately, administrators at Barbers Hill ISD in Texas told the … ›

Weekly litigation report — July 22, 2017

A case to tweet about! Pushing back against an unfair Clean Water Act prosecution PLF files input letter on GMO labeling law Gnatcatcher notice of intent to sue letter submitted … ›

PLF submits letter on GMO labeling rule

The government shouldn’t be able to force you to say things you don’t want to say. When the State compels speech for no good reason, Americans may call on the First … ›

Liberating workers from compulsory unionism

The very powerful public employee unions in Illinois have long relied on their favored status to garnish wages of workers and “represent” them in politically-fraught negotiations over collective bargaining agreements … ›

Obamacare's First Amendment problem

The Affordable Care Act raises myriad constitutional problems. The Supreme Court has held that the commerce clause does not provide Congress with the power to enact the individual mandate. The Court also invalidated, … ›

Brand Logo for the blog page

Ninth Circuit sides with PLF in an important free speech decision

The First Amendment doesn’t just protect your right to speak, it also protects your right not to speak. So imagine if your municipal government required you to devote 20% of … ›

Weekly litigation report — September 16, 2017

On Thursday, in Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, PLF filed this reply brief in support of its cert petition to the Supreme Court of the United States. In this case, we’re representing Minnesota voters in a First Amendment challenge to a ban on political apparel at polling places.

PLF files reply in challenge to Minnesota’s ban on political apparel

Minnesota bans political apparel at polling places across the State. The government interprets “political” broadly: the ban applies to shirts with classic American phrases such as “Liberty” or “Don’t tread on me,” as long as those phrases appear alongside a tea party logo — no matter how small.

Weekly litigation report — September 2, 2017

This week’s topics: Can the executive branch be the judicial branch? When is “just compensation” unjust? Meet the new boss, same as the old boss?

Four-year-old boy banned from school for having long hair

Jessica Oates is the single mother of Jabez, a four-year-old boy who was excited to start his first day of school. Unfortunately, administrators at Barbers Hill ISD in Texas told the … ›

Weekly litigation report — July 22, 2017

A case to tweet about! Pushing back against an unfair Clean Water Act prosecution PLF files input letter on GMO labeling law Gnatcatcher notice of intent to sue letter submitted … ›

PLF submits letter on GMO labeling rule

The government shouldn’t be able to force you to say things you don’t want to say. When the State compels speech for no good reason, Americans may call on the First … ›

Liberating workers from compulsory unionism

The very powerful public employee unions in Illinois have long relied on their favored status to garnish wages of workers and “represent” them in politically-fraught negotiations over collective bargaining agreements … ›

Obamacare's First Amendment problem

The Affordable Care Act raises myriad constitutional problems. The Supreme Court has held that the commerce clause does not provide Congress with the power to enact the individual mandate. The Court also invalidated, … ›

The Morning Docket

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

Ninth Circuit sides with PLF in an important free speech decision

The First Amendment doesn’t just protect your right to speak, it also protects your right not to speak. So imagine if your municipal government required you to devote 20% of … ›

Weekly litigation report — September 16, 2017

On Thursday, in Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, PLF filed this reply brief in support of its cert petition to the Supreme Court of the United States. In this case, we’re representing Minnesota voters in a First Amendment challenge to a ban on political apparel at polling places.

PLF files reply in challenge to Minnesota’s ban on political apparel

Minnesota bans political apparel at polling places across the State. The government interprets “political” broadly: the ban applies to shirts with classic American phrases such as “Liberty” or “Don’t tread on me,” as long as those phrases appear alongside a tea party logo — no matter how small.

Weekly litigation report — September 2, 2017

This week’s topics: Can the executive branch be the judicial branch? When is “just compensation” unjust? Meet the new boss, same as the old boss?

Four-year-old boy banned from school for having long hair

Jessica Oates is the single mother of Jabez, a four-year-old boy who was excited to start his first day of school. Unfortunately, administrators at Barbers Hill ISD in Texas told the … ›

Weekly litigation report — July 22, 2017

A case to tweet about! Pushing back against an unfair Clean Water Act prosecution PLF files input letter on GMO labeling law Gnatcatcher notice of intent to sue letter submitted … ›

PLF submits letter on GMO labeling rule

The government shouldn’t be able to force you to say things you don’t want to say. When the State compels speech for no good reason, Americans may call on the First … ›

Liberating workers from compulsory unionism

The very powerful public employee unions in Illinois have long relied on their favored status to garnish wages of workers and “represent” them in politically-fraught negotiations over collective bargaining agreements … ›

Obamacare's First Amendment problem

The Affordable Care Act raises myriad constitutional problems. The Supreme Court has held that the commerce clause does not provide Congress with the power to enact the individual mandate. The Court also invalidated, … ›

Ninth Circuit sides with PLF in an important free speech decision

The First Amendment doesn’t just protect your right to speak, it also protects your right not to speak. So imagine if your municipal government required you to devote 20% of … ›

Weekly litigation report — September 16, 2017

On Thursday, in Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, PLF filed this reply brief in support of its cert petition to the Supreme Court of the United States. In this case, we’re representing Minnesota voters in a First Amendment challenge to a ban on political apparel at polling places.

PLF files reply in challenge to Minnesota’s ban on political apparel

Minnesota bans political apparel at polling places across the State. The government interprets “political” broadly: the ban applies to shirts with classic American phrases such as “Liberty” or “Don’t tread on me,” as long as those phrases appear alongside a tea party logo — no matter how small.

Weekly litigation report — September 2, 2017

This week’s topics: Can the executive branch be the judicial branch? When is “just compensation” unjust? Meet the new boss, same as the old boss?

Four-year-old boy banned from school for having long hair

Jessica Oates is the single mother of Jabez, a four-year-old boy who was excited to start his first day of school. Unfortunately, administrators at Barbers Hill ISD in Texas told the … ›

Weekly litigation report — July 22, 2017

A case to tweet about! Pushing back against an unfair Clean Water Act prosecution PLF files input letter on GMO labeling law Gnatcatcher notice of intent to sue letter submitted … ›

PLF submits letter on GMO labeling rule

The government shouldn’t be able to force you to say things you don’t want to say. When the State compels speech for no good reason, Americans may call on the First … ›

Liberating workers from compulsory unionism

The very powerful public employee unions in Illinois have long relied on their favored status to garnish wages of workers and “represent” them in politically-fraught negotiations over collective bargaining agreements … ›

Obamacare's First Amendment problem

The Affordable Care Act raises myriad constitutional problems. The Supreme Court has held that the commerce clause does not provide Congress with the power to enact the individual mandate. The Court also invalidated, … ›