After six years of litigation, the Second Circuit has issued a major victory for NYC parents; attorneys reflect on Constitution Day; and manicurists fight for their right to a trial by jury. 

Here’s what’s on The Docket. 

Victory in the Second Circuit in NYC education case 

On Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued a major victory for New York City parents in the case of CACAGNY v. Adams. The court ruled the plaintiffs, represented by PLF, have successfully shown discriminatory effects of a school admissions policy started by former Mayor Bill de Blasio (and continued under Mayor Eric Adams). 

The case isn't over, but the Second Circuit's ruling is huge, affirming that an individual who is discriminatorily barred from an opportunity by a racially motivated law or policy can challenge it in court.  

Read More

Manicurists and nail salon owners fight for their right to a trial by jury

On September 19, Amy Cao and four other licensed cosmetologists and manicurists filed a lawsuit against the Louisiana State Board of Cosmetology for violating their right to a jury trial.  

When the Board accused Cao of allowing two unlicensed individuals to work as manicurists at her salon, they slapped her with a $1,350 fine, threatened to suspend her license, and placed her on probation—all without the benefit of a jury trial or any of the procedural protections from government abuse that we hold dear. Now we’re fighting back.

Read More

U.S. fishery management councils’ structure is unconstitutional, court rules in PLF victory

In a victory for fishermen, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that fishery management councils, which wield power over the fishing industry, violate the Constitution. PLF clients Raymond Lofstad and Gus Lovgren, two fourth-generation fishermen, had challenged the constitutionality of the Councils because their members are not properly appointed. In its ruling, the Third Circuit left the councils’ rulemaking power intact, but severed their veto powers. 

Read More

Washington Examiner: The FCC’s public DEI shaming is unconstitutional  

Some unconstitutional regulations are like zombies: A court can put them down, only to see them shamble back to life. The FCC’s recently resurrected race-and-sex-reporting rule is a prime example: It forces broadcasters to classify their employees by race and sex, just as they used to before courts struck down a previous rule. 

But a lawsuit filed against the FCC by Perry Atkinson, owner of a nonprofit radio station, could finally end the unconstitutional rule for good, PLF attorney Wilson Freeman says.

Read More

Fox News: The Constitution isn’t controversial...hating it is

On September 17, we celebrated Constitution Day. Or at least some of us did. The holiday largely goes unnoticed nowadays. In fact, hating the Constitution has even become mainstream, so much so that The New York Times recently suggested the document is “dangerous,” “broken,” and “should not be reclaimed.”  

PLF senior attorney Anastasia Boden asks: Why are universal and timeless principles like equality before the law, due process, civil rights, and limited, enumerated powers so controversial?

Read More

Fighting for the Constitution is a family business

Joseph Winston was a Revolutionary War hero who voted to ratify the Constitution in 1789 as a North Carolina delegate. He’s also the five-times-great-grandpa of PLF attorney Caleb Trotter, who reflects on his ancestor’s legacy—a legacy he continues by fighting for Americans’ constitutional rights in court.

Read More

The complex history of regulating ‘waters of the United States’

Federal oversight of American waterways began in earnest in 1899 with the Rivers and Harbors Act. In the decades since, the scope and authority of that oversight have evolved dramatically—to the point where property owners with water on their land—even puddles or soggy patches—are living in regulatory uncertainty. A new PLF report clears up confusion about which waters are federally regulated, going into history up through PLF’s 2023 victory in Sackett v. EPA to clarify what’s under the EPA’s purview and what isn’t.

Read More