Guns. Abortion. And maybe even racial preferences in college admissions. The next Supreme Court term has all the makings of an explosive, blockbuster term. Will the Court rule that the Second Amendment protects a right that extends beyond the home? Will the Court uphold a state’s abortion regulation that directly challenges Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey? Will the Court take up a case involving Harvard’s admissions practices that discriminate against Asian American applicants? Will eviction moratoria, vaccine mandates, and other COVID-19 issues continue to flood the Court’s emergency docket? And how will the Court shift as the three newest justices settle into their roles?
Join us for a panel discussion with three of our nation’s top Supreme Court litigators. Our distinguished panel members will offer insights into the most significant cases of the upcoming term, including cases the Court selects during its September 27 “Long Conference.” They will also highlight promising cases on the horizon that may be granted later in the term.
Judicial deference isn’t just a hot topic at the federal level. In fact, many states are leading a revolution against administrative deference doctrines. In recent years, at least six states have rejected deference through judicial rulings, two have done so through legislation or referendum, and still other states have taken skeptical intermediate …
Pacific Legal Foundation’s Center for the Separation of Powers and New York University School of Law’s Journal of Law & Liberty seek papers for a symposium on “Responding to Emergency: A Blueprint for Liberty in a Time of Crisis,” to be held in February of 2022 at the NYU Law campus in New York City.
The COVID-19 pandemic prompted varied responses from legislative bodies and executive branch actors at every level of government, all of which has affected almost every aspect of American society. At the federal level, Congress set policy through legislation on diverse matters ranging from employment and federal housing issues to various economic relief packages. In 2020, the Trump administration took a relatively laissez-faire approach, compared to its executive branch counterparts at the state level. Notably, governors throughout most of the country took unprecedented actions aimed at slowing the spread of the disease, with many continuing to exercise “emergency powers” into 2021—generally without complying with the constitutional and procedural requirements applicable for executive branch action in ordinary times.
Paper proposals are due by August 1, 2021.
The past year has introduced many “firsts”: mask mandates, virtual schooling, shuttered businesses, and more. It will likely be years before we truly understand the total benefits—and the human and economic costs—of government responses to the coronavirus. Emergencies—like a global pandemic—can certainly justify emergency actions. Bu …
Join us on March 3 for a discussion of how property rights relate to labor policy in this case and beyond. PLF attorneys will get you up to date on the current status and history of property rights and takings law, leaving you prepared to connect this case to the larger labor issues at stake in America.
This spring, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, the only property rights case this term.
What’s at stake? Nothing less than the fundamental right to exclude people from your own, private property. If California’s access rule is allowed to stand, then government can permit anyone to enter private property at any time, essentially taking away your property rights.