Beyond the Brief

Wildfires are raging across the West, and California is grappling with a record-breaking season. Why, then, does the state tell qualified firefighters that they can’t earn a living fighting fires? The state’s irrational law barring people like IJ’s client Dario Gurrola from working isn’t the only one of its kind on the books. Learn more about this and other collateral consequences laws in this epi...

Law enforcement agencies routinely seize currency from travelers at airports using civil forfeiture—a legal process that allows agencies to take and keep property without ever charging owners with a crime, let alone securing a conviction. In this episode, we discuss the real stories of victims of this abusive practice, the new IJ report—"Jetway Robbery?”—that shows just how widespread it is, and w...

When it handed down Espinoza v. MT Dept. of Revenue this summer, the U.S. Supreme Court added one more facet to a year that has already upended the status quo when it comes to education. In this episode, we discuss where the Espinoza case came from, what the ruling means, and what it really does to the separation of church and state.

With an increasing number of parents desperately seeking educational alternatives for the upcoming school year, teachers’ unions and school districts are doubling down on the status quo. Worse, in many places they are moving to take away options that had been available to parents for years. It has never been more clear that the time has come to move past old ways of thinking about education and pu...

Decades ago, the U.S. Supreme Court created the so-called Open Fields Doctrine. The result was an exception to 4th Amendment restrictions on the government’s ability to snoop on Americans. With a new case in Tennessee, IJ is pushing forward a strategy to restore those limits and protect basic property rights. Learn more about the state of the law—and where we go from here—in today’s episode. Hoste...

After a tree fell on her house, IJ client Sarah Hohenberg’s journey through Memphis’ Environmental Court left her bankrupt, homeless, stripped of her possessions, and a fugitive from the law. We discuss how this happened—and how IJ’s new lawsuit aims to end this kind of abuse.

This term the U.S. Supreme Court closely considered eight different petitions dealing with the controversial doctrine of qualified immunity. Ultimately, it denied them all. In this episode, we talk about what the Court’s decision means for IJ’s fight for police and government accountability—and where we go from here.

With more Americans out of work than any time in recorded history, whether or not they will be able to earn a living is top of mind for many people. All too often, however, courts turn a blind eye to laws and rules that arbitrarily and unnecessarily shut people out of work. Recent state supreme court decisions indicate that’s starting to change—and the revolution can’t come fast enough. We discuss...

We’ve all been watching the unprecedented situation with COVID-19 play out. At IJ, we have a particular interest in what’s happening in the law. This episode discusses the kinds of constitutional litigation we’re seeing, as well as legal avenues that can help make life better now and those that lend themselves to longer term strategic litigation.

As we all deal with the many changes in day to day life brought about by the coronavirus pandemic, have you ever wondered just what the government has the power to do to protect public health and safety—and when and how can it exercise that power? In today’s episode, we discuss government police power and the many circumstances in which it is deployed.

Listeners of the podcast who have also listened to IJ’s Short Circuit podcast are probably familiar with the concept of “qualified immunity.” In this episode, we talk about what the term means and how it came to be, as well as what it looks like in practice and why changes to immunity doctrines are essential to protecting individual rights. *Fun fact:  Scott was not quoting Phil Collins.&#160...

Before he was IJ’s president, Scott Bullock spent 25 years as an IJ attorney. In this episode, he recounts his years in the trenches as a litigator, and the ways his cases and clients helped make him and IJ what they are today.

We talk with the director of IJ’s Center for Judicial Engagement about a few of the issues the legal community is buzzing about at the moment.

This discussion is a continuation of our foray into law for non-lawyers. Many people are familiar with the concepts of “due process” and “equal protection,” but where are they found in the Constitution, and what do they look like in practice?

What does it mean when courts apply “strict scrutiny” in their review of a law? Why do property, economic, and other vital liberties get only “rational basis” review? And why do these things matter to a constitutional litigator? Learn all this and more in today’s Deep Dive with the Institute for Justice.

Never heard the term “Blaine Amendments” before? The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to hear IJ’s educational choice case Ezpinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue is likely to change that. In today’s Deep Dive IJ Senior Attorney Tim Keller and IJ Attorney Erica Smith describe what Blaine Amendments are, why they matter to parents who simply want to direct their own children’s education, and whether...

When IJ Associate Director of Activism Brooke Fallon started talking to entrepreneurs in Washington, D.C., about their experience doing business in the District, she got an earful about the burdens and challenges they face just trying to get off the ground. The result of those conversations was District Works, an IJ-led project and coalition of small business owners, nonprofits, and community memb...

IJ Senior Attorneys Robert McNamara and Paul Sherman discuss amicus briefs: what they are, where they came from, and how IJ—and others—use them for maximum impact.