U.S. Supreme Court rules that some taxpayer funded benefits are available to religious institutions

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a win for the Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia.  The question in the case against the State of Missouri, was whether the State violated the … ›

Weekly litigation report — June 24, 2017

Supreme Court goes squishy on property rights Free speech includes freedom to insult Free speech means letting high school kids be high school kids Howling at the wolf listing Doing … ›

PLF asks Supreme Court to invalidate Minnesota dress code for voters

On Election Day, millions of Americans trek to polling places in all corners of this Nation. On the way to casting their vote, many proudly wear shirts, buttons, and badges … ›

New PLF petition highlights the national importance of the Murr case

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the regulatory takings case, Murr v. Wisconsin, is expected to come down any day. At issue in that case is the so-called “relevant parcel” question, … ›

Supreme Court calls for the Solicitor General's views on Rinehart v. California

This morning, the Supreme Court asked the United States’ Solicitor General to weigh in on Rinehart v. California, PLF’s challenge to California’s suction dredge mining ban. The case raises significant … ›

Weekly litigation update — May 13, 2017

PLF fights for booksellers’ First Amendment rights On Thursday, PLF filed a major civil rights lawsuit on behalf of Book Passage, a bookstore in the Bay Area. The lawsuit challenges … ›

Supreme Court directs West Hollywood to respond to PLF’s legislative exactions challenge

Earlier this week, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered the City of West Hollywood to respond to PLF’s certiorari petition in the legislative exactions case, 616 Croft Ave, LLC v. City … ›

PLF asks Supreme Court to hear massive beach land grab case

This week, Pacific Legal Foundation attorneys filed a Petition for Certiorari asking the United States Supreme Court to review the case of Nies v. Town of Emerald Isle, discussed more here. … ›

PLF asks U.S. Supreme Court to grant review of a Washington state “relevant parcel” case

PLF lawyers filed a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to grant and hold the Washington state regulatory takings case, Kinderace v. City of Sammamish, pending its anticipated decision in … ›

Brand Logo for the blog page

U.S. Supreme Court rules that some taxpayer funded benefits are available to religious institutions

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a win for the Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia.  The question in the case against the State of Missouri, was whether the State violated the … ›

Weekly litigation report — June 24, 2017

Supreme Court goes squishy on property rights Free speech includes freedom to insult Free speech means letting high school kids be high school kids Howling at the wolf listing Doing … ›

PLF asks Supreme Court to invalidate Minnesota dress code for voters

On Election Day, millions of Americans trek to polling places in all corners of this Nation. On the way to casting their vote, many proudly wear shirts, buttons, and badges … ›

New PLF petition highlights the national importance of the Murr case

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the regulatory takings case, Murr v. Wisconsin, is expected to come down any day. At issue in that case is the so-called “relevant parcel” question, … ›

Supreme Court calls for the Solicitor General's views on Rinehart v. California

This morning, the Supreme Court asked the United States’ Solicitor General to weigh in on Rinehart v. California, PLF’s challenge to California’s suction dredge mining ban. The case raises significant … ›

Weekly litigation update — May 13, 2017

PLF fights for booksellers’ First Amendment rights On Thursday, PLF filed a major civil rights lawsuit on behalf of Book Passage, a bookstore in the Bay Area. The lawsuit challenges … ›

Supreme Court directs West Hollywood to respond to PLF’s legislative exactions challenge

Earlier this week, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered the City of West Hollywood to respond to PLF’s certiorari petition in the legislative exactions case, 616 Croft Ave, LLC v. City … ›

PLF asks Supreme Court to hear massive beach land grab case

This week, Pacific Legal Foundation attorneys filed a Petition for Certiorari asking the United States Supreme Court to review the case of Nies v. Town of Emerald Isle, discussed more here. … ›

PLF asks U.S. Supreme Court to grant review of a Washington state “relevant parcel” case

PLF lawyers filed a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to grant and hold the Washington state regulatory takings case, Kinderace v. City of Sammamish, pending its anticipated decision in … ›

The Morning Docket

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

U.S. Supreme Court rules that some taxpayer funded benefits are available to religious institutions

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a win for the Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia.  The question in the case against the State of Missouri, was whether the State violated the … ›

Weekly litigation report — June 24, 2017

Supreme Court goes squishy on property rights Free speech includes freedom to insult Free speech means letting high school kids be high school kids Howling at the wolf listing Doing … ›

PLF asks Supreme Court to invalidate Minnesota dress code for voters

On Election Day, millions of Americans trek to polling places in all corners of this Nation. On the way to casting their vote, many proudly wear shirts, buttons, and badges … ›

New PLF petition highlights the national importance of the Murr case

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the regulatory takings case, Murr v. Wisconsin, is expected to come down any day. At issue in that case is the so-called “relevant parcel” question, … ›

Supreme Court calls for the Solicitor General's views on Rinehart v. California

This morning, the Supreme Court asked the United States’ Solicitor General to weigh in on Rinehart v. California, PLF’s challenge to California’s suction dredge mining ban. The case raises significant … ›

Weekly litigation update — May 13, 2017

PLF fights for booksellers’ First Amendment rights On Thursday, PLF filed a major civil rights lawsuit on behalf of Book Passage, a bookstore in the Bay Area. The lawsuit challenges … ›

Supreme Court directs West Hollywood to respond to PLF’s legislative exactions challenge

Earlier this week, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered the City of West Hollywood to respond to PLF’s certiorari petition in the legislative exactions case, 616 Croft Ave, LLC v. City … ›

PLF asks Supreme Court to hear massive beach land grab case

This week, Pacific Legal Foundation attorneys filed a Petition for Certiorari asking the United States Supreme Court to review the case of Nies v. Town of Emerald Isle, discussed more here. … ›

PLF asks U.S. Supreme Court to grant review of a Washington state “relevant parcel” case

PLF lawyers filed a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to grant and hold the Washington state regulatory takings case, Kinderace v. City of Sammamish, pending its anticipated decision in … ›

U.S. Supreme Court rules that some taxpayer funded benefits are available to religious institutions

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a win for the Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia.  The question in the case against the State of Missouri, was whether the State violated the … ›

Weekly litigation report — June 24, 2017

Supreme Court goes squishy on property rights Free speech includes freedom to insult Free speech means letting high school kids be high school kids Howling at the wolf listing Doing … ›

PLF asks Supreme Court to invalidate Minnesota dress code for voters

On Election Day, millions of Americans trek to polling places in all corners of this Nation. On the way to casting their vote, many proudly wear shirts, buttons, and badges … ›

New PLF petition highlights the national importance of the Murr case

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the regulatory takings case, Murr v. Wisconsin, is expected to come down any day. At issue in that case is the so-called “relevant parcel” question, … ›

Supreme Court calls for the Solicitor General's views on Rinehart v. California

This morning, the Supreme Court asked the United States’ Solicitor General to weigh in on Rinehart v. California, PLF’s challenge to California’s suction dredge mining ban. The case raises significant … ›

Weekly litigation update — May 13, 2017

PLF fights for booksellers’ First Amendment rights On Thursday, PLF filed a major civil rights lawsuit on behalf of Book Passage, a bookstore in the Bay Area. The lawsuit challenges … ›

Supreme Court directs West Hollywood to respond to PLF’s legislative exactions challenge

Earlier this week, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered the City of West Hollywood to respond to PLF’s certiorari petition in the legislative exactions case, 616 Croft Ave, LLC v. City … ›

PLF asks Supreme Court to hear massive beach land grab case

This week, Pacific Legal Foundation attorneys filed a Petition for Certiorari asking the United States Supreme Court to review the case of Nies v. Town of Emerald Isle, discussed more here. … ›

PLF asks U.S. Supreme Court to grant review of a Washington state “relevant parcel” case

PLF lawyers filed a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to grant and hold the Washington state regulatory takings case, Kinderace v. City of Sammamish, pending its anticipated decision in … ›