Do minor bureaucrats tell federal judges what to think?

Last week PLF filed this amicus brief in the Supreme Court of the United States in Gloucester County School Board v. G.G. The question in this case is whether federal judges interpret federal law, or whether low level agency bureaucrats do. … Continue reading

Weekly litigation report — November 12, 2016

School choice in Montana Discrimination in government contracting Waters of the United States School choice in Montana We filed this reply brief in Armstrong v. Kadas, our challenge to the Montana Department of Revenue’s attempt to undercut a voter initiative to establish … Continue reading

What does the Bill of Attainder Clause say about newfangled punishments?

Three years ago, California businesses faced crippling liability in the wake of court decisions interpreting the state’s minimum wage laws. This year, the state legislature enacted Assembly Bill 1513, which allows businesses to avoid statutory liability if they promptly paid back wages … Continue reading

PLF files Eighth Circuit brief to end discrimination in St. Louis

Edmund Lee, Jr., a fourth-grade student in St. Louis, is smart, likable, hardworking, optimistic, and a big fan of the Carolina Panthers. None of these qualities mattered when Edmund sought to continue his education at Gateway Science Academy, an excellent charter school … Continue reading

EEOC loses its hairstyle discrimination case

Earlier today, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s lawsuit against Catastrophe Management Solutions. This an important decision concerning the proper scope of Title VII. At issue was whether a business’s policy requiring professional-looking … Continue reading

Weekly litigation report — September 10, 2016

Union access shenanigans from the Department of Labor PLF supports charter schools from death by limbo Environment and the right to intervene in lawsuits Property rights: Loss in Knick v. Scott Township Beer drinkers must register to drink? Adverse anti-discrimination … Continue reading

Federal courts and the duty to decide

Sometimes federal courts will dodge the Constitution rather than defend it. That happened with our constitutional challenge to Montana’s discriminatory school regulations. Yesterday, in Armstrong v. Kadas, we filed a brief asking the Ninth Circuit to remind the district court of its duty to exercise its jurisdiction–especially … Continue reading