Testifying in Nevada: The Competitor's Veto is unconstitutional
Tomorrow I’ll be testifying in the Nevada Assembly Committee on Transportation about the constitutionality (or lack thereof) of the state’s licensing laws for taxis, limousines, and moving companies. In order to start a transportation business in the state, entrepreneurs essentially have to ask their competitors for permission first. We call these laws the Competitor’s Veto, and we’ve challenged them successfully in Oregon, Missouri, and Kentucky.
Following our lawsuit in Nevada, the Senate introduced SB 183, which would get rid of the anti-competitive licensing requirements while leaving in basic fitness and safety requirements. The bill has passed the Senate, and will be heard for the first time in the Assembly tomorrow.
Update: The Assembly has posted video of my testimony, which you can access here. I start my presentation at 42:20.
What to read next
PLF asks the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that there is no “legislative exception” to the unconstitutional conditions doctrine
It seems that some governments and courts prefer to treat Supreme Court precedent as an option, rather than a requirement. The Supreme Court has ruled—twice—that it’s unconstitutional for government to … ›