8/7/2019 Liberty & Law: IJ's Bimonthly Newsletter (February 2011)
1/12
The Secret to IJ's SuccessThe Secret to IJ's Success
is celebratinginstit
uteforjustice
2020litig
atingforlibertyyearsyears
is celebratingis celebratingInstit
uteforJusticeInstituteforjustice
Volume 20 Issue 1
Clean Elections
Challenge Goes to
U.S. Supreme Court
2
Strategic Research
Pays Dividends
3
IJ Launches
Center for
Judicial Engagement
4
A Sign of
Freedom
6
Published Bimonthly by theInstitute for Justice
visit us online:
www.ij.org
Inside This Issue
By Chip Mellor
In1991,welaunchedtheInstituteforJustice,
determinedtorestoreconstitutionalprotectionforour
mostbasicfreedomsandtoadvancearuleoflaw
conducivetoasocietyoffreeandresponsibleindi-
viduals.Twentyyearslater,wecelebrateouranni-
versaryhavingachievedmorethanwedareddream,
butrecognizingthatwehavejustbeguntotapour
potential.Overthecourseofthisanniversaryyear,
wewillfeaturearticleslookingatIJshistoryand
showcasingourfutureplans.Thisseriesbeginsby
answeringafrequentlyposedquestion:Whatisthe
secrettoIJssuccess?
Theeasyansweris,ofcourse,thepeopleofIJ.
Ourstaff,board,donorsandclientsareallextraordi-
narilytalentedanddedicatedtotheprinciplesofliberty.
Butthereismoretoitthanthat.
Manyorganizationshavetalentedpeople.The
differenceisthecultureofIJthatpermeatesallof
ourworkandinteractionwithothers.WecallitThe
IJWay.TheIJWayinvolvesfiveattributesthateach
IJerbringstoeverytask.First,weareentrepreneur-
ialincreatingandseizingopportunities,pursuingour
goalswithfocusedtenacity.Wemakethingshappen
ratherthansimplywaitingtoreacttotheagendaof
theotherside.Second,weachieveresultsinthe
realworld.Whileideasandphilosophyundergird
ourwork,wetranslatethatintoactionthatchanges
thelivesofourclientsandinthelongrun,thejuris-
prudenceofAmerica.Third,wearepositiveand
open,approachingeverytaskwithapositiveattitude
20th Anniversarycontinued on page 8
1991-2011
February 2011
2020litig
atingforlibertyyearsyears
8/7/2019 Liberty & Law: IJ's Bimonthly Newsletter (February 2011)
2/122
By William R. Maurer
TheInstituteforJusticeisheadingback
totheU.S.SupremeCourtforoneofthe
mostimportantfreespeechcasesinyears.
AtissueinthecaseArizonaFreedomClub
PACv.Bennettiswhetherthegovernment
mayinsertitselfintopoliticalcampaignsand
placeitsthumbfirmlyonthescalesinfavor
ofgovernment-fundedcandidates.
ThecasealsogivesIJthe
opportunitytoteamupwiththeGoldwaterInstitute,oneofour
closealliesamongstate-based
thinktanks.Goldwateralsorepre-
sentsanumberofcandidatesin
thecaseofMcComishv.Bennett.
Thetwocaseswereconsolidated
bytheU.S.SupremeCourt.
Formorethanadecade,
Arizonahasusedtaxpayermoneytofinance
thecampaignsofpoliticiansrunningforoffice.
ButArizonadoesnotstopthere.Besides
fundingcandidates,ittriestoleveltheplay-ingfieldfortaxpayer-financedcandidatesby
penalizingtraditionallyfundedcandidates
thosewhofinancetheircampaignsthrough
privatecontributions.Arizonaslaweven
penalizestheindependentsupportersoftra-
ditionallyfundedcandidates.Itdoesallthis
byprovidingwhatArizonacallsmatching
funds.Thesearesubsidiesthegovernment
paystogovernment-fundedcandidateswhen
theiropponentsspendmoremoneythanthe
governmentwants.Thatis,thegovernment
setsanarbitrarylevel,andifanindependent
grouporprivatelyfinancedcandidate
spendsmorethanthat,tocounter
theirmessagethegovernmentpaysadditional
moneydirectlytothepubliclyfinancedcandi-
datesintherace.
Thisimpedestheabilityofindependent
groupsandprivatelyfinancedcandidatesto
spendmoneypromotingtheirpoliticalviews
abovethegovernment-setlimit,becauseif
theyspeakabovethatlimit,thegovernment
directlysubsidizestheirpoliticalopponents.
Inthiszero-sumgameofelectoralpolitics,the
endresultisadefactolimitonhowmuch
speechoccursincampaigns.Forexample,
underArizonasscheme,ifatraditionallyfundedcandidateraisesandspends$10,000
topromotehiscampaign,thegovernment
givesapproximately$10,000toeachofhis
government-fundedopponents.So,ifthecan-
didatehasthreegovernment-fundedrivalsin
aprimary,thatmeanshis$10,000turnsinto
nearlya$30,000gainforhisopponents.
TheCleanElectionsActcreatesan
abbreviatedMirandaRightfortraditionally
fundedcandidates:Theyhavetherightto
remainsilent,anyspeechtheymayundertake
canandwillbecounteredbygovernment
funding.
Inthepastfewyears,theU.S.Supreme
Courtandthelowercourtshavebegunstrik-
ingdownlawsthatinterferewithspeechdur-
ingcampaigns.ThecaseIJisbringingbefore
theCourtaskswhetherthegovernmentmay
getaroundthesedecisionsbycreatingdisin-
centivesandburdenstoachieve
indirectlywhatthegovernmentisprohibitedfromdoingdirectly.
Inthiscase,IJrepresents
twogroupsthatmakeindependent
expendituresinArizonacam-
paignstheArizonaFreedomClub
PACandtheArizonaTaxpayers
ActionCommittee,alongwith
stateSenatorRickMurphyand
formerArizonaTreasurerDeanMartin.The
casedemonstratesthepersistenceofIJand
itsclients.MartinandIJstartedchallenging
thislawin2004and,astheyearsoflitiga-tionwenton,includingtwotripstotheNinth
U.S.CircuitCourtofAppeals,theotherclients
joinedwithhimtonowpresenttheircaseto
thehighestcourtintheland.
Onceagain,IJisattheforefrontofset-
tingtheagendaforconstitutionallitigationin
America.Theargumentwilltakeplaceon
March28,andtheCourtisexpectedtoissue
adecisionbeforetheendof
June.u
William R. Maurer is the IJ
Washington Chapterexecutive director.
IJs Challenge to Arizonas Clean Elections
Goes to the U.S. Supreme Court
2
The Clean Elections Act creates anabbreviated Miranda Right for traditionally
funded candidates: They have the right to
remain silent, any speech they may
undertake can and will be countered
by government funding.
8/7/2019 Liberty & Law: IJ's Bimonthly Newsletter (February 2011)
3/12
February 2
2020litig
atingforlyearsyears
By Lisa Knepper
TheInstituteforJusticesstrategic
researchprogramissomethingtrulynewin
theworldofpublicinterestlaw.Noother
organizationhasthecapabilitytoproduceacademic-caliberresearchandthenemploy
thatresearchincutting-edgelitigationto
advancefreedom.
InIJsconstitutionalchallengetoTexas
civilforfeiturescheme,forexample,our
researchunderscoreda
keylegalclaimandput
thestateonthedefen-
sive.InForfeitingJustice,
releasedinNovember,
DirectorofStrategic
ResearchDickCarpenteruseddataprovidedby
Texaslawenforcement
agenciesthemselvesto
showthat,onaverage,for-
feiturefundsrepresented
14percentofagencybud-
getsin2007.Forthe10
agenciesthattookinthe
mostforfeituremoney,pro-
ceedsequaledawhopping
37percentofbudgets.
IJarguesthatTexas
schemeprovidespoliceand
prosecutorsimproperincentivestopursuefor-
feituresthatgeneratefundsfortheagencies,
distractingthemfromotherlawenforcement
goalsandputtingthepropertyofinnocent
citizensatrisk.Thedatashowthatthese
incentivesarerealandsizable.Perhapsthat
iswhythestatefoughttopreventIJfrom
accessingmorerecentanddetaileddata,but
alsochallengedincourtthepresentationof
thedatawedohave. Strategicresearchlikewisedemonstrated
thereal-worldharmsofArizonasso-called
CleanElectionssystem,nowbeforetheU.S.
SupremeCourt.Inexperttestimony,David
Primo,apoliticalscientistattheUniversity
ofRochester,showedthat
privatelysupportedcandi-
datesdelayspendingon
orraisingmoneyfortheir
speechtoavoidtriggering
matchingfundstopub-
liclyfundedopponents. Inotherwords,these
candidatesholdtheirfire
sotheirspeechisnot
matchedwithadditional
subsidiestotheiroppo-
nents.TheGovernment
AccountabilityOfficecited
Dr.Primosfindingsina
recentreportontaxpayer
fundingplanslikeArizonas
andfoundevidencethat
independentgroups
behavesimilarly.This
proofofharmtotheunfetteredexerciseof
FirstAmendmentrightswasakeypartofIJs
successfulpetitionaskingtheCourttotake
thecase,aswellasourmeritsbriefarguing
matchingfundsshouldbestruckdown.
Strategicresearchalsoplayedarole
inIJsdefenseofArizonasschoolchoice
programbeforetheHighCourt.Opponents,
drawingonanecdotalreportsfromlocal
newspapers,attemptedtopainttheindividualtaxcreditprogramasriggedtofavorwealthy
families.WeaskededucationanalystVicki
Murraytoevaluatethatclaim,andshefound
thatscholarshiprecipientsmedianincome
isactually$5,000lessthanthestatewide
median.Thatprovidedpowerfulevidenceto
theCourtthatArizonasprogramdoesinfact
openthedoorsofeducationalopportunityto
low-andmiddle-incomefamilies.
Intheseandothercases,strategic
researchisgivingIJlitigatorsanadditional
tooltomakethecaseforfreedomincourt.Andincreasingly,ourworkisalsohavingan
impactonscholarlyandpolicydebates.We
havehad10articlespublishedinoraccept-
edforpublicationbypeer-reviewedjournals,
andatleast36otherarticleshavecitedour
workinscholarly,lawreviewandpolicypubli-
cationstestamentstoboththequalityofthe
researchanditsrelevancetovitalissuesof
theday.
Startingthisfirst-of-its-kindprogram
requiredthekindofentrepreneurialspiritand
long-termvisionthatarethehallmarksofIJs
success.Alittlelessthanfiveyearsintothis
venture,itisclearerthanever
thatitispayingdividends.u
Lisa Knepper is an IJ director of
strategic research.
Strategic Research Paying Dividends
Strategic research is giving IJ litigators an additional tool to make the case
for freedom in court.
IJs combined approach of cutting-
edge litigation, effective media rela-
tions and strategic researchinclud-
ing our Forfeiting Justice report
(available at www.ij.org/3577)is
keeping the state on the defensive.
February 2
2020litig
atingforlyearsyears
8/7/2019 Liberty & Law: IJ's Bimonthly Newsletter (February 2011)
4/124
Neverinmoderntimeshastheneedforenforcingconstitu-tionallimitsongovernmentbeenmoreurgent.Governmentat
alllevelshasexpandedtothreatenourmostbasiclibertiesand
ourverywayoflife.Thisexplosionofpoliticalpowerviolatesour
Constitution,whichwascarefullycraftedtoprotectusfromthe
rampantandintrusivegovernmentwenowhave.
ButtheConstitutionismeaninglessiftheprovisionsenshrined
initbytheFramersarenotenforced.Thatisthedutyofourcourts.Theymustbethebulwarksoflibertyenvisionedby
JamesMadison,andjudgesareobligedtopreventthegovernment
fromexercisingpowersnotauthorizedbytheConstitution.But
ratherthanthebulwarkstheyweredesignedtobe,courtshave
insteadincreasinglyshownmisguideddeferencetootherbranches
ofgovernment.
Thismustchange.Aprincipledcommitmenttojudicial
engagementistheessentialfirststeptowardestablishingaruleof
lawthatisfaithfultotheConstitutionanditsdesigntosecurethe
blessingsoflibertyforallAmericansbylimitingthesizeandscope
ofgovernment.
TheInstituteforJusticehascreatedtheCenterforJudicial
Engagementtoeducatethepublicandpersuadejudgestofully
enforcethelimitsourConstitutionplacesonthegovernmentsexer-
ciseofpoweroverourlives.
I. The Constitution and the Judiciary
Individualshaverightsthatareinherentandunalienable.
Governmentsareinstitutedamongmentosecurethoserights,a
smallportionofwhichwedelegatetogovernmentinexchangefor
protectionofthefarmoreexpansivefreedomsthatweretain.The
Constitutionrecognizesandprotectstheseretainedfreedoms,and
itestablishesafederalgovernmentofstrictlylimitedandenumer-
atedpowers.Italsoimposeslimitsonstategovernments,whose
powers,thoughbroaderthanthoseofthefederalgovernment,are
likewisefinite.
TherightsguaranteedbytheConstitutionaremanyand
broad.Someareidentifiedspecifically,othersarenot.The
NinthAmendmentprovidesthattheenumerationofcertainrightsshallnotbeconstruedtodenyordisparageotherrights,andthe
FourteenthAmendmentforbidsstatesfromabridgingthebroad
setofprivilegesorimmunities(meaningrights)heldbycitizensof
theUnitedStates.Dueprocessprovisionslimitboththemeans
andtheendsofgovernment,whiletheprincipleofequalprotec-
tionrequiresthatgovernmentpowerbeexercisedfairlyandwithout
improperdiscrimination.
Theconstitutionalityofparticulargovernmentconductis
ultimatelydeterminedthroughjudicialreview,whichhasbeenan
essentialfeatureofAmericangovernmentformorethan200years.
Judicialreviewisvitaltooursystemofgovernmentbecausewhen
courtsfailtoenforceconstitutionallimitsongovernmentpower,we
areleftonlywiththeself-restraintofpublicofficials,whichexperi-
enceshowsisnorestraintatall.
II. Government Out of Control
Governmentactivityatalllevelstodayfarexceedswhatthe
Constitutionauthorizes.Thefederalgovernment,forexample,long
agoabandonedanypretenseofconfiningitselftopowersactually
grantedbytheConstitutionandregulateseverythingfromchildrens
educationtothecropsfarmersgrowfortheirownconsump-
Declaration of the Institute for JusticesCenter for Judicial Engagement
IJ Launches Center for Judicial EngagementIn January, IJ launched its Center for Judicial Engagement tosecure constitutional limits on government power by reinvigorat-ing the courts role as bulwarks of liberty. IJ will challenge the
notion, far too prevalent today on the right and the left, thatcourts should routinely defer to legislative and executive authorityThe Center will be guided in its mission by the declaration below
4
8/7/2019 Liberty & Law: IJ's Bimonthly Newsletter (February 2011)
5/12
February 2
2020litig
atingforlyearsyears
February 2
2020litig
atingforlyearsyears
tion.BesidesexercisingpowersnotconferredbytheConstitution,
Congressroutinelydelegatesitslegislativepowerstotheexecutive
branch,instructingunaccountableagenciestopursueill-defined
goalswithoutintelligibleguidance.
Stategovernmentsalsoroutinelyexercisepowersdeniedbythe
Constitution,whichincludesspecificrestraints,suchastheContracts
ClauseandtheFourteenthAmendment,thatfederalcourtshave
failedtoproperlyenforce.Moreover,likethefederalgovernment,
statesoftenadoptregulationswhoseonlyplausiblepurposeisto
advancetheinterestsoffavoredgroupsattheexpenseofothers.
Thisisparticularlyevidentinthefieldofoccupationallicensing,
whereeconomicprotectionismiscommonplaceandgovernment
officialsfrequentlyimposeanti-competitiverestrictionsdesignedto
thwart,notfoster,thepursuitoftheAmericanDream.
Wearesmotheredunderablanketofregulationthatimpedes,envelops,andexhaustsus,withthegovernmentdemandingan
ever-increasingportionofthefruitsofourlabor.Indeed,govern-
menttodayspendssofarbeyonditsmeansthatithassaddled
ourchildrenandgrandchildrenwithcrushingdebtsthatexceed
byordersofmagnitudewhatanyprecedinggenerationhasfaced.
Thatisunjustandimmoral,butitisthenaturaltendencyofgovern-
mentunchecked.
III. Judicial Engagement
Judicialreviewplaysakeyroleinoursystemofgovernmentandthepreventionoftyranny.Yetthereisanincreasingtendencyto
presentthepublicwithafalsedichotomybetweenimproperjudicial
activismandsupposedlylaudablejudicialrestraint.Strikingdown
unconstitutionallawsandblockingillegitimategovernmentactions
isnotactivism;rather,itisjudicialengagementenforcinglimits
ongovernmentpowerconsistentwiththetextandpurposeofthe
Constitution.Allowingthegovernmenttoexerciseforbiddenpowers
andtrampleindividualrightsisnotrestraint,itisabdication.
Priorrulingsthatignore,dilute,orotherwiserendermeaning-
lessconstitutionallimitsongovernmentpowerprovidenobasisfor
courtscontinuedfailuretostopthegovernmentfromactinguncon-
stitutionally.Whereaconflictexistsbetweenprecedentandthe
Constitutionforexample,thepracticaleliminationofthepublicuse
provisionfromtheFifthAmendmentinKelov.CityofNewLondon
theConstitutionmustprevail.
Overtheyears,courtshaveeffectivelyamendedthe
Constitution,grantingtogovernmentpowersitdoesnotpossessand
allowingittorestrictfreedomarbitrarily.Thistrendmuststop,and
thedamageithascausedmustbeundonebylimitingoroverruling
casesthathavetransformedourConstitutionfromaguarantorof
libertytoavirtualblankcheckfortheexerciseofgovernmentpower.
Governmentactionsarenotentitledtodeferencesimply
becausetheyresultfromapoliticalprocessinvolvingelectedrep-
resentatives.Tothecontrary,theFramerswereacutelyawareof
anddeeplyconcernedaboutthedangersofinterest-grouppolitics
andoverweeninggovernment,andthestructureoftheConstitution
rejectsreflexivedeferencetotheotherbranches.Itisthecourts
jobtocheckforbiddenpoliticalimpulses,notratifythemunderthe
bannerofmajoritariandemocracy.
Constitutionalcasesareoftendifficultandfrequentlydefy
brightlinesorsimplerules.Butjudgesmustengagethefacts
ofeveryconstitutionalcase,justastheydoinnon-constitutionalcases.Judgesmustmeaningfullyevaluatethegovernmentsaction
andtherestrictionsitimposesonlibertysotheycandetermine,
basedontheevidencepresented,thetruebasisofthatactionand
whetheritpassesconstitutionalmuster.Ignoringevidence,invent-
ingfacts,andrubber-stampingthewantonexerciseofgovernment
powerrepresentjudicialabdication,notmodesty.
To our fellow citizens we say:
TheConstitutionpromisesagovernmentoflimitedpowers.
That promise has been broken.
TheConstitutionpromisesanarrayofindividualrightsbothwritten
andunwrittenthatthegovernmentmayneitherdenynordisparage.
That promise has been broken.
TheConstitutionpromisesaruleoflawunderwhichindividualscan
controltheirdestiniesasfreeandresponsiblemembersofsociety.
That promise too has been brokenover and over again.
Courtsfailuretoproperlyfulfilltheirrolehasdeprivedusof
thelibertythatisourbirthrightandhastransformedgovernment
intoaninsatiablebehemoththatthreatenstheveryfutureofthis
nation.
JudicialengagementmeanstakingtheConstitutionseriously
asacharteroflibertyandabulwarkoffreedomagainstillegitimate
governmentpower.Forourselvesandourposteritywemust,from
thisdayforward,acceptnothingless.u
Striking down unconstitutional laws and blocking illegitimate government actions
is not activism; rather, it is judicial engagementenforcing limits on government
power consistent with the text and purpose of the Constitution.
8/7/2019 Liberty & Law: IJ's Bimonthly Newsletter (February 2011)
6/126
Arlington Virginias Sign OrdinanIs For the Dogs
By Robert Frommer
Americasroadtoeconomicrecov-
erywontbegininWashington,D.C.It
willstartinthehomesandofficesof
entrepreneurswhoriskitalltobringan
ideatolife.Andtheirsuccessisour
success:Thegoodsandservicesthat
theseinnovatorsofferandthejobsthey
createbenefitusall.Youwouldthink
thatlocalgovernmentswouldtryto
makestartingoneofthesebusinesses
aseasyaspossible,butyouwouldbe
wrong.InArlingtonCounty,Va.,ithasgottensobadthatentrepreneursmust
choosebetweentheirrighttospeak
andtheirrighttoearnanhonestliving.
Formorethan20years,Kim
HoughtonsoldadvertisingatThe
WashingtonPost.ButKimwanted
more:Shesoughtanewdirectionthat
wouldletherworkonsomethingshe
feltpassionateabout.Afterlookingat
herlife,Kimrealizedthatsheloved
IJ client Kim Houghton, above, displays an image of the mural
Arlington County is trying to force her to paint over or turn into
a government sign. IJ Staff AttorneyRobert Frommer, left, dis-cusses Kims case at IJs launch press conference.
spendingtimewithherthree
dogs.AndsoKimdecidedtoopenWagMoreDogs,ahigh-end
caninedaycare,groomingand
boardingbusiness.
Kimrentedabuildingnextto
anareadogparkandbegantoget
WagMoreDogsupandrunning.
Inordertogivebacktothepark
shehadgonetoforyearsand
engendersomegoodwillforWag
MoreDogs,Kimcommissioneda
16-by-60footpieceofartonthe
sideofthebuildingsheleasesthatdepictshappycartoondogs,
bones,andpawprints.Forthree
monthsthepaintingsatwithout
issue,withdogparkpatronstelling
Kimhowmuchtheylikeditcom-
paredtotheuglycinderblock
wallsthatdominatedthepark.
Thenoneday,Arlington
officialsblockedKimsbuild-
ingpermitandtoldherthat
6
8/7/2019 Liberty & Law: IJ's Bimonthly Newsletter (February 2011)
7/12
February 2
2020litig
atingforlyearsyears
February 2
2020litig
atingforlyearsyears
WagMoreDogs
couldnotopenuntilshepaintedoverher
happycartoondogs.
Theprobleminthe
eyesofArlington
officialswasthat
Kimsartworkhad
arelationshipwithherbusiness.
Inotherwords,ifWagMoreDogs
paintinghaddepictedkittensor
ponies,thatwouldhavebeenfine.
Andifanautoshophadpainteda
muralofcartoondogs,thatwouldhavebeenfineaswell.Butbecause
WagMoreDogsisadogbusiness,
ArlingtonCountyforcedKimtoput
upanuglybluetarpthathascov-
eredherinnocuouspaintingforover
fourmonths.
TheFirstAmendmentdoesnot
letthegovernmentplayartcritic.
ButArlingtonslawgivesgovernment
bureaucratsabsolutediscretionto
treatentrepreneurswithabsolute
disdain.ThatiswhytheInstitutefor
Justicesteppedup.InDecember,
wefiledafederallawsuitcontend-
ingthatArlingtonssignordinance
isunconstitutionalbecauseitis
hopelesslyvagueandbecauseit
imposesspecialburdensonsome
paintingsbasedonwhopaintedthemandwhattheydepict.When
weprevail,wewillhavedonemore
thanjusthelpKimteardownatarp.
Wewillhaveadvancedthecause
ofeconomiclibertyandvindicated
asimplebutincrediblyimportant
legalprinciple:thatundertheFirst
Amendmenttherighttospeakis
justthatarightnotaprivilegefor
governmentofficialstodoleoutas
theyplease.u
Robert Frommer is an
IJ staf f attorney.
www.ij.org/DogMuralVideo
Watch the case video, IJ Fights to Unleash Free Speech.
8/7/2019 Liberty & Law: IJ's Bimonthly Newsletter (February 2011)
8/128
focusedonsolutions,notproblems.Indeed,our
abilitytoseetheglassashalf-fullhasbeencen-
traltoourabilitytodevelopcreativestrategies,
persevere,andultimatelyprevailagainstwhatto
othersmayseemlikehopelessodds.Fourth,
weareprincipledandadhereunfailinglytothose
principleswhetherinlitigation,publicdebateor
internaldiscussion.Andfinally,weareresilient,
andeveninthefaceofheart-
breakingsetbacks,werecover
quicklyandsetinmotionstrat-egiestoovercomewhatever
defeatwemayhavesuffered
andmoveaheadaggressively.
Whenpeopleremark,asthey
oftendo,ontheespritdecorps
ofIJ,theyarerecognizingthis
culture.
Inadditiontothevictoriesthisculturehas
madepossible,ithasbeenindispensablein
growingIJintothenationalinstitutionitistoday.
TheIJWayenablestalentedpeopletothrive
andtosucceedbeyondexpectationsyearafter
year.Thatinturnhasenabledustopioneeran
unprecedentedapproachtopublicinterestlaw.
Wepursuecutting-edgeconstitutionallitigation
thathasputourissuesonthenationalagenda
andbroughtfivecasestotheU.S.Supreme
Courtinthepasteightyears.
Butaswestatedatourfounding,litigation
aloneisnotenough.
Thus,wehavebuiltanaward-winning
communicationsteamthatnotonlysecures
widespreadrecognitionofourwork,butalso
achievesreformsbymarshallingpublicopinion.
Ouractivismandoutreachtakeustoneigh-
borhoodsacrossAmericatothwarteminent
domainabuse,supportschoolchoiceand
opposearbitraryoccupationallicensinglaws.
Ourstrategicresearchprogrambringssophisti-
catedsocialsciencetobearon
issuesrelatedtoourlitigation.
Ourconstitutionalexpertiseistranslatedeffectivelyintoselect
legislativearenasbyournewleg-
islativecounsel.OurIJClinicon
Entrepreneurshiphelpsaspiring
inner-cityentrepreneurstopursue
theirdreamsofself-sufficiency.
Andourleandevelopmentand
administrationstaffsprovideanddeploythe
resourcesnecessarytooperateanationwide
organizationwithsixsoontobesevenoffices
andanearly$12millionannualbudget.
ThisiswhatthepeopleofIJhaveachieved
sofar.AndthisiswhythepeopleofIJevery-
whereshouldcelebratethefoundationwehave
laidforsuccessoverthenext20
years!u
Chip Mellor is IJs president and
general counsel.
20th Anniversarycontinued from page 1
2020liti
gatingforliberty
yearsyears
1991-2011
8
The IJ Way
Entrepreneurial Real World
Positive & Open
Principled
Resilient
8/7/2019 Liberty & Law: IJ's Bimonthly Newsletter (February 2011)
9/12
February 2
2020litig
atingforlyearsyears
February 2
By John E. Kramer Ineverunderstoodaudiophiles.Ilistened
tomyiPodthroughrun-of-the-millheadphones
anditsoundedjustfinetome.
ThenIwasluckyenoughtovisitwith
JimThiel,thefounderofTHIELAudioand
anIJdonoruntilhisrecentpassing.Jimsat
medowninhiscompanysshowroomatthe
ConsumerElectronicsShowtheworldslargest
technologytradeshowtoshowmewhatIwas
missing.HehookeduphisowniPodtoplay
BeethovensFifthPianoConcertothroughhis
soundsystem.InstantlyIunderstoodtheexpe-rienceaudiophileswereafter.
Doyouheartheseparationbetweeneach
instrument?heasked.Youcanheareach
instrumentindividually,asiftheentireorches-
traweresittinginfrontofyou.Thatiswhat
audiophilesareafter.Thatiswhatmakesour
systemdifferent.
JimThieldrewintheuninitiatedandthe
skepticalandwonthemoverthroughthemas-
teryofhiscraft.
ThatisthesamethingtheInstitutefor
Justiceworkstodoeachday,sharingourmes-sagewithmainstreammediawhomightnotini-
tiallyunderstandorappreciateourworldview.In
theendbecauseofthewaywecommunicate
andthecontentofthemessagewedeliverwe
consistentlyearnrespectfulmediacoverage
fromallcornersofthejournalisticrealm.
Oneofmyfavoritesuccessstoriesalong
theselinescamefromNationalPublicRadios
LegalCorrespondentNinaTotenberg,who
summedupwhatwehaveheardfromsomany
IJ Boldly GoesBeyond Usual Media Outlets
reportersovertheyears:Ilikeworkingwith
theInstituteforJusticebecauseyouguysare
happywarriors.Youreinformed,youbelieve
inwhatyousayanddeliveritwithasmile.As
Totenbergscommentattests,inthesubstance
andstyleofourmessage,IJismadeupof
happywarriors.
SimilarappreciationwasheapedonIJ
attheDailyDish,apopularblogrunin The
AtlanticbyjournalistAndrewSullivan,where
ConorFriedersdorfcountedIJamongthose
pursuingpragmaticlibertarianism.That,too,
ishowweseeourselves.Fromourinception,IJwascreatedtoberealworldwetakeimportant
ivorytowerideas,likeeconomicliberty,and
demonstratetheirimportancetoAmericans
onMainStreet.ThatiswhyTheAtlanticwrit-
ersandmanyotherscoverIJcases,suchas
ourlawsuitonbehalfofLouisianamonkswho
areblockedfromsellingcasketsbecauseof
agovernment-imposedfuneralhomecartel.
HeavyweightliberalbloggerMattYglesiasofthe
influentialCenterforAmericanProgress,like-
wiserecentlypraisedthisIJcasesaying,
...theviewthatpublicpolicyshouldencour-ageratherthandiscouragecompetitionisone
progressivesshouldbeabletoeasilyembrace.
Onemightbesurprisedtofindlengthydis-
cussionsinliberalnewsoutletsdemonstrating
theimportanceofpropertyrights,andyet,year
inandyearout,theInstituteforJusticehas
earnedsuchplacementsinpublicationslike
MotherJones,whichcoveredIJsbattleagainst
civilforfeitureabuse,andsyndicatedtelevision
programslikeDemocracyNow!,whichspot-
lightedIJsefforttoturnthedisastrousU.S.
SupremeCourtrulingintheKelocaseintoa
nationalcauseforreform.
IJtookitsbattleforfreespeechand
againstcampaignfinancerestrictionstoThe
HuffingtonPostinthewakeoftheunfounded
outrageovertheSupremeCourts Citizens
Unitedruling.IJSeniorAttorneyBertGall
pointedoutthattheverymediathatisupset
overtheruling,whichinrealitydidnothingbut
expandfreespeechrights,shouldhavefeared
theconsequencesofarulingthatwenttheotherwayanoutcomethatcouldultimately
haverestrictedthemediasabilitytoeditorialize
onpoliticsandendorsecandidates.
Throughoutitsnearly20-yearhistory,
theInstituteforJusticehasworkedtosetthe
standardintheFreedomMovementtoeffec-
tivelyadvanceouridealsnotonlyincourt,but
inthecourtofpublicopinion,andnotsolely
tothosefewinthemediawhoarephilosophi-
callypredisposedtoagreewithus,butalsoto
thosemanyinfluentialreportersandoutlets
whoareoftenatoddswithhowwethink.By
remainingpositive,real-worldandinsightful,
wewillcontinuetoworktoearntheircover-
ageandexpandthemessageof
freedom.u
John E. Kramer is IJs vice presi-
dent for communications.
2020litig
atingforlyearsyears
8/7/2019 Liberty & Law: IJ's Bimonthly Newsletter (February 2011)
10/120
By Anthony Sanders
IJhastakenonsomeofthenastiest
licensingcartelsinAmericanindustry,
frominteriordesigntotransportationtoveterinarymedicine.Whereestablished
interestshaveusedoccupationallicens-
ingandgovernmentforcetofenceout
competitors,IJhasbeentheretoprotect
therightsofhard-workingAmericansto
earnanhonestliving.
Andnow,IJhastakenonthebig-
gestandmost-entrenchedcartelofthem
all:thelegalbar.
Acrossthenation,licensinglaws
protectestablishedattorneysbyburden-
ingaspiringpractitionerswithsuperflu-ouseducationalrequirementsjustfor
theprivilegeoftakingabarexam.A
minorityofstatesgoasfarasrequir-
ingattorneystoattendonlythoselaw
schoolsaccreditedbytheAmericanBar
Association.Inthesestates,evenifan
attorneyhaspracticedforyearswitha
stellarrecord,heorshecannotsitfor
thestatesbarexamletalonebecome
licensedwithoutgraduatingfroman
ABA-accreditedschool.
Minnesotaisoneofthesestates.
InDecember,IJMinnesotasubmittedto
theMinnesotaSupremeCourtadetailed
analysisofthechoke-holdthattheABA
hasoverthelicensureoflawyersinthe
landof10,000lakes.IJproposeda
changeallowingapersontotakethe
Minnesotabarexamifhealreadyis
licensedinanotherstate.
IJseffortsinMinnesotawillbea
significantblowtothemonopolythat
theABAhasoveraccreditationoflaw
schools.Itwilllowerthebarriersto
entryforprospectivelawyersandthereby
expandconsumerchoice.Inturn,we
willcontinuetoeducatethejudiciaryon
themisuseofoccupationalregulationsforfutureattacksonotheranticompetitive
regulations.
IJnotonlyattackedcurrentlicensing
requirements,butbriefedthecourton
theincreasingoverreachofoccupational
licensing.Forexample,lessthanfive
percentofworkersneededalicenseto
workinthe1950s.Approximately30
percentdotoday.Morethan800occu-
pationsrequirealicensetoworkinat
leastonestate.Further,althoughlicens-
ingisalmostalwayssoldtothepublicasnecessaryforhealthandsafety,thefact
thatestablishedindustrygroupsareusu-
allytheonespushingforgreaterlicensing
lawsshouldtipoffthepublicandregula-
torsthatsuchdemandsaremoreabout
protectingthemselvesfromcompetition
thanprotectingthepublic.Inother
words,whenapractitionerstandsupand
cries,Pleaseregulateme!thatshould
bearedflagtoallinvolved.
Ofcourse,keepingoutcompeti-
tionpaysrichdividends.Licensing
lawsdriveupwagesforlicenseesby15
percentwithinregulatedprofessions.
Forallthis,thereislittleevidencethat
licensingprotectspublichealthand
safetyorimprovesquality.
Justthink:IfIJcanbringeconomic
libertytolawyers,what
cantwedo?u
Anthony Sanders is an IJ
Minnesota Chapter
staff attorney.
IJ v. The Legal Cartel
Texas Horse TeethFloaters File RegulationsDown to Size
By Clark Neily
Afterathree-yearlegalbattleonbehalfof
horseteethfloatersinTexas,weareproudtosay,
Yippee,yall!OnNovember9,2010,Travis
CountyJudgeOrlindaNaranjostruckdownthe
Texasvetboardslawlesscampaignagainstnon-
veterinarianpractitioners,enablingourclients(andhundredsofotherhard-workingTexans)to
continuefloatinghorsesteethwithoutbureau-
craticinterference.
Horsesteethgrowthroughouttheirlifetimes
andmustoccasionallybefileddownorfloated
tomaintainproperlengthandalignment.Teeth
floatingisananimalhusbandrypracticethat
hasbeenperformedforcenturiesbylaypersons
whoseskillandexperienceoftenfarexceedthat
ofgovernment-licensedveterinarians.
Butin2007,theTexasvetboardwhich
hadlongacknowledgedandapprovedteethfloat-ingbynon-veterinarianssuddenlychangedits
policyandorderednon-veterinarianpractitioners
toceaseanddesistorfaceprosecutiontothe
fullestextentofthelaw.IJquicklyfiledsuiton
behalfofteethfloaterswhostoodtolosetheir
livelihoods,aswellashorseownerswhodidnt
appreciatethegovernmentdictatingwhothey
couldandcouldnotemploytocarefortheirani-
mals.
SuingtheTexasvetboardwaslikechasing
agreasedpigforthreeyears,theboardjuked
andjived,doingeverythingitcouldtopreventthe
courtsfromrulingonthelegalityofitsnewteeth-
floatingrule.Butjusticeprevailedintheend,
aswestoppedthevetboardsanti-competitive
assaultoneconomiclibertydeadinitstracks.
Notsurprisingly,theboard,stillbeholdentothe
veterinarianswhoselivelihoodsitprotects,has
vowedtotryagain.Wesay,Dont
messwithTexasteethfloaters!u
Clark Neilyis an IJ senior attorney.
8/7/2019 Liberty & Law: IJ's Bimonthly Newsletter (February 2011)
11/12
February 2
2020litig
atingforlyearsyears
Volume20Issue1
About the publication
Liberty & Lawis published bimonthly by the
Institute for Justice, which, through strategic
litigation, training, communication, activismand research, advances a rule of law under
which individuals can control their destinies
as free and responsible members of society.
IJ litigates to secure economic liberty, school
choice, private property rights, freedom of
speech and other vital individual liberties,
and to restore constitutional limits on the
power of government. In addition, IJ trains
law students, lawyers and policy activists in
the tactics of public interest litigation.
Through these activities, IJ challenges theideology of the welfare state and illustrates
and extends the benefits of freedom to those
whose full enjoyment of liberty is denied by
government.
Editors: John E. Kramer
Layout & Design: Don Wilson
Howtoreachus:
Institute for Justice
901 N. Glebe RoadSuite 900
Arlington, VA 22203
General Information . . . . . (703) 682-9320
Fax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (703) 682-9321
Extensions:
Donations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
Media . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
Website: www.ij.org
E-mail: [email protected]: www.ij.org/donate
Quotable QuotesCrains Chicago Business
IJ Clinic on Entrepreneurship Director
Beth Milnikel: Chicagoisunfortunatelytough
onentrepreneurs.Itshardtostartasmall
businessinthebestofcircumstances.Andits
tragicwhenthecityisstandinginthewayof
innovatorsandcreativepeoplewhoaretryingto
makeneighborhoodsabetterplacetolive.
WUSA9
(CBS-TV DC)
IJ client Kim Houghton regarding her
mural: Imnotgoingtoliedown.Imnot
goingtorollover.Iwasntgoingtojustwalk
awayandwhitewashoversomethingthatIspent
somuchmoneyonandputsomuchheartinto.
Itreallyisanexpressionofmypassionfordogs.
Washington Post(Editorial)
[S]hefiledsuitinfederalcourtwiththehelpoftheInstituteforJustice,acivillib-
ertieslawfirm.ThesuitarguesMs.HoughtonsFirstAmendmentrighttoexpress
herselfthroughartisbeingabridged.Anditnotesthattherewouldnothavebeen
aproblemifthemuraldepictedflowers,dragonsorponiesinsteadofdogs.The
absurditythatrevealsshouldcauseArlingtonresidentstowonderabouttheirgov-
ernmentsgraspofcommonsense.
CNN.com
IJ Washington Chapter Director Bill Maurer: WehopetheSupremeCourt
willstrikedownArizonasmatchingfundslaw.TheentirepurposeoflawslikeArizonasistoprovidethegovernmentwiththemeanstolimitindividualsspeech
bylimitingtheirspendingwhileputtingathumbonthescaleinfavorofgovernment-
fundedcandidates.ThatisnotallowedundertheFirstAmendment.
Las Vegas Review-Journal
IJ Senior Attorney Dana Berliner: Citiesandstategovernmentsareplacingall
kindsofbarrierstobusinessstartupsandinnovation.Thisisabadthingatalltimes
andparticularlyabadpolicyintimesofeconomiccalamity.Ingeneral,occupational
licensestendtoprotectpeoplealreadyinbusiness.
8/7/2019 Liberty & Law: IJ's Bimonthly Newsletter (February 2011)
12/12IJi Ed d d Bill M i
Institute for Justice901 N. Glebe RoadSuite 900
Arlington, VA 22203
[T]he Supreme Courts
010 ruling in Citizens
United v. Federal Election
Commissionand a related
ower-court decision,
peechNow.org v. Federal
Election Commission, argu-
bly represent the most
undamental changes to
ampaign finance law in
ecades.
Congressional Research Service
NoN-PRoFIT oRG.
U . S . P o S T A G E
P A I D
I N S T I T U T E F o R
J U S T I C E
I i f J i
City officials want to throw us in jail because we give tours and describe things without a license.
The First Amendment does not allow the government to be inthe business of deciding who is and is not allowed to speak.
We are standing up for our right to communicate for a living.
And we will win.
We are IJ.
Top Related