After years of litigating, a Malibu couple can build a small additional unit on their property; the Supreme Court will consider taking a case where trucks are regulated under the Mine Act; and a Pacific Legal Foundation attorney explains what exactly the Fourth Amendment protects. Here’s what’s on The Docket.
Malibu couple celebrates victory in ‘granny flat’ case
[link removed]
Jason and Elizabeth Riddick own a home in Malibu. They asked the city for permission to build a small new housing unit on their property for Elizabeth’s 82-year-old mother. Accessory dwelling units, or ADUs, are common in multi-generational households: Nicknamed “granny flats,” ADUs allow grandparents to live near family while protecting their independence and privacy. But even after the Riddicks spent $40,000 on geologic surveys and other permit requirements, the Malibu Planning Commission denied their application. Fortunately, the Los Angeles County Superior Court and California Court of Appeals disagreed with the city—and last week, the California Supreme Court declined to hear Malibu’s appeal, freeing the Riddicks to finally build.
Read More
[link removed]
Supreme Court considers trucking case
This month, Supreme Court Justices will consider whether to grant Pacific Legal Foundation’s cert petition for our client, KC Trucking, who is suing the Secretary of Labor. The family-owned trucking company in West Virginia and Virginia provides a variety of hauling services. Bizarrely, the Labor Department believes it can regulate KC Trucking as a mine, because their trucks often haul coal. Under the Labor Secretary’s reasoning, once a piece of equipment is used in any part of the mining process—even transportation—it falls under the federal government’s jurisdiction over mines. It’s a shockingly broad (and wrong) interpretation of the Mine Act that deserves the Supreme Court’s review.
Read More
[link removed]
How competitive high schools get away with race-based admissions
[link removed]
The Supreme Court has ruled that colleges cannot base admissions on race—so why are competitive high schools still manipulating their admissions processes in the name of racial equity? PLF attorney Alison Somin looks at discrimination cases in Boston, New York, and Maryland in which administrators use racial proxies to treat certain groups of students differently than others.
Read More
[link removed]
The Commerce Clause made easy
Everyone who loves liberty needs to understand the Commerce Clause of the Constitution—because it’s how the federal government asserts most of its modern regulatory power over the individual. According to the Supreme Court, what you do in your own home can fall under the government purview if it “substantially affects” interstate commerce—a vague test that departs from the original meaning of the Constitution and perverts the Commerce Clause into a national police power, PLF attorney Jeff Jennings says.
Read More
[link removed]
Explaining the Fourth Amendment: What counts as persons, houses, papers, and effects?
[link removed]
The Fourth Amendment protects privacy by securing private property. But what exactly is covered? Does your land count as your effect? Does a business count as a house? Does a facial recognition scan violate the protection of your person? PLF attorney Daniel Woislaw walks us through the amendment, looking at legal precedents to explain how the courts interpret the Fourth Amendment—and which questions are still left open.
Read More
[link removed]
share thoughts on Social Media:
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]
Copyright © 2024 Pacific Legal Foundation, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in via our website, at an event, or on Facebook.
Our mailing address is:
Pacific Legal Foundation
555 Capitol Mall Suite 1290
Sacramento, CA 95814
If you'd like to change your email preferences or unsubscribe, visit our email preferences center.
[link removed]
