The White House announces a “daft” rent control proposal, a California family appeals a First Amendment case over their first-grader’s drawing, and Rhode Island property owners celebrate a victory over a beach access law.

Here’s what’s on The Docket. 

California school punished student for ‘any life’ drawing—and court sided with school 

B.B., a seven-year-old, learned the phrase “Black Lives Matter” at school. As a gesture to a friend who is black, B.B. drew a picture of them and two other friends, wrote “Black Lives Mater” (sic) across the top, and added the phrase “any life” underneath. It was an innocent drawing—but the school forced B.B. to apologize to her friend, banned her from drawing at school, and banned her from recess for two weeks. Worse, when B.B.’s parents filed a First Amendment lawsuit against the school district, the federal district court sided with the school, reasoning that elementary school students have no First Amendment rights.

Now Pacific Legal Foundation is representing B.B.’s family free of charge in an appeal.  

Read More

President Biden proposes to inflame the housing crisis with rent control

There comes a time in a politician’s campaign when the most he can muster is to throw candy into the crowd. President Biden has reached that time. This week, the president announced his plan to cap rent raises by “corporate landlords” at 5 percent. No exceptions, even where a rent increase is merely to keep up with inflation.

Calling it a “daft proposal,” PLF legal fellow Ethan Blevins explains how national rent control is absolutely sure to worsen the housing crisis.  

Read More

Victory! Judge rules Rhode Island’s beach access law violates property owners’ rights  

Last year, Rhode Island lawmakers moved the boundary of the public beach area 10 feet inland—giving the public an extra strip of land at the expense of private property owners. Coastal landowners were suddenly stuck paying taxes on property enjoyed by countless strangers who could enter, occupy, and use their private shoreland however and whenever they wished. Pacific Legal Foundation represents Stilts, LLC, which owns a small house on the beach, in a lawsuit against the state. Last week, a judge agreed with PLF’s argument that Rhode Island’s law is an unconstitutional taking of private property. (Of note: In the ruling, the judge cited PLF’s 2021 Supreme Court victory Cedar Point Nursery, which affirmed property owners’ right to exclude trespassers from their property, in the ruling.)  

Read More

Victory against CPSC: Oklahoma entrepreneur successfully defends ‘Podster’  

When Jamie Leach got the news that the Consumer Product Safety Commission was coming after her business, she imagined a years-long legal battle in the Commission’s in-house tribunal, enormous legal fees, and a devastating blow to her company’s otherwise-sterling reputation. The adjudication process at the CPSC and other agencies is notoriously unfair. But Pacific Legal Foundation represented Jamie at the CPSC’s in-house tribunal—and against all odds, Jamie won. 

Read More

Reparations Roundup  

PLF attorneys are tracking proposals around the country to provide race-based reparations in the form of direct cash payments, grants, and government programs. For example, the City of Berkeley is currently considering race-based payments to students—and to fund these payments, the City has proposed filing lawsuits against “private entities whose historic activities [are] connected to the legacy of chattel slavery, particularly redlining,” noting that lawsuit settlements “could generate a significant amount of revenue.”

Read More

Individualism: The complete answer  

Individual rights are the answer to a just society. But individualism—the belief in the inherent worth and dignity of each person—is more than a policy solution, PLF legal fellow Ethan Blevins writes. It’s a way of life. America’s drift toward tribalism is worth resisting for everyone who cares about individual freedom. We can start by recognizing our common humanity.

Read More

Overcriminalization and the rule of lenity  

In recent decades, the scope of federal law has grown massively. And with that growth has come the risk that Americans will be ensnared in criminal or civil proceedings for activities they had no idea were illegal.

Most people probably aren’t familiar with the “rule of lenity,” a rule derived from English common law, but it’s one crucial way of dealing with this problem: Under this rule, ambiguities in penal laws are interpreted in the way most beneficial to the accused.

Read More