Everyone hates robocalls. But last year, the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Congress’s attempt to regulate robocalls—through the Telephone Consumer Protection Act— violated the First Amendment. Instead of banning all robocalls, Congress had banned robocalls on some topics while allowing robocalls that discussed other topics (like certain kinds of debt collection). So…

It is essentially impossible to sustain a claim for damages against federal officers when they violate constitutional rights. That’s because courts have shunned the only generally available means for obtaining relief: Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. The decision is considered controversial; many believe it to be a product…

Braider Freedom

In the defining constitutional debate of our time—whether the individual mandate of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) is constitutional—only one doctrine will lead the justices to fulfill their mandate to act as a check on congressional power: judicial engagement. Several lower courts that have heard challenges to the individual mandate have opined…

In January 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Sackett v. EPA. The Sacketts are owners of a half-acre residential lot near Priest Lake, Idaho, which they bought to build a single family home. After they were granted a permit by local authorities and began construction, however, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency…

In a tremendous victory for property rights, 73 percent of Mississippians overwhelmingly rejected the infamous U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Kelo v. City of New London to become the 44th state to pass stronger protections for property owners against eminent domain abuse. Initiative 31 amends the Mississippi Constitution to prohibit the government from seizing private…

The Institute for Justice urges the Supreme Court to hear City of Milwaukee Post No. 2874 Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States v. Redevelopment Authority of the City of Milwaukee, which concerns the meaning of “just compensation” under the Fifth Amendment. In the state of Wisconsin, courts use the so-called “undivided fee” rule…

In a sweeping regulation of political speech, the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, known as McCain-Feingold, banned so-called “electioneering communications”—corporate or union-funded broadcast ads that mentioned the name of a federal candidate shortly before an election.  Using this law, the Federal Election Commission banned the nonprofit Citizens United from airing Hillary:  The Movie on cable…

If you own a piece of property in New York, you should care deeply about a case about to be argued before the state’s highest court. Goldstein v. New York State Urban Development Corporation—a challenge to New York’s controversial use of eminent domain to hand privately owned businesses and homes in Brooklyn over to private…

In October 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Alvarez v. Smith.  The plaintiffs in Alvarez are Chicago residents whose cars and money were taken by the Chicago Police Department.  While being innocent of any wrongdoing, the plaintiffs have gone for months, and in some cases years, without any way to get…

In 1999, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a jury verdict against Monterey, Calif., for refusing to allow property owners to develop their property.  The Institute co-authored an amicus curiae brief in City of Monterey v. Del Monte Dunes with the nation’s leading constitutional scholar on such takings—University of Chicago law professor Richard Epstein.