Nevada needs economic liberty
A successful limousine company with a proven safety record shouldn’t have to get permission before expanding its fleet. But in Nevada, the Transportation Authority requires businesses to first seek permission from their competitors before expanding. This type of occupational licensing law, known as a “Competitor’s Veto,” is not only outrageous, it’s also unconstitutional.
Ron and Danell Perlman own Reno-based, Reno Tahoe Limousine. They have safely and successfully operated seven limousines in Nevada for several years, and now they’d like to add to their fleet. Unfortunately, thanks to the “Competitor’s Veto” law, the Perlmans have been unable to get permission to expand. So, with the help of Pacific Legal Foundation, the Perlmans are currently suing. In response to an ongoing debate over occupational licensing in the Reno Gazette-Journal’s editorial pages, yesterday I authored a piece highlighting the Perlman family. You can read that article here, and more about the Perlman case here and here.
What to read next
Can the government designate your private property critical habitat for a species that can’t survive there?
Pacific Legal Foundation filed its Reply Brief today in Weyerhaeuser v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. The Supreme Court of the United States will hear oral argument in this important … ›