Last week, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in what had the potential to be a landmark decision concerning the NRC’s authority...

Forwarded this email? Subscribe here.

The Docket from Pacific Legal Foundation

An Arizona business owner takes his fight for a jury trial to the state’s Supreme Court; PLF’s Will Yeatman explains a “depressingly common” procedural trick used by regulatory agencies; and PLF’s legal policy team highlights our 2025 legislative wins.

Arizona’s agency tribunal dodges essential jury trial and due process rights

When the Arizona Corporation Commission—the Grand Canyon State’s securities regulators—filed a complaint claiming EFG America sold securities without proper registration, EFG founder Douglas Fimrite asked the Commission to transfer his case to an actual court where his trial would be decided by a jury. But the Commission’s administrative law judge presiding over the case refused—effectively stripping Douglas of his rights under both the U.S. and Arizona Constitutions.  

Last week, we joined EFG and its co-counsel in filing a petition with the Arizona Supreme Court to restore Douglas’ rights and the rights of all Americans who find themselves in similar situations facing unaccountable agencies in sham tribunals.

Read More

What the Court got wrong in NRC v. Texas

Last week, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in what had the potential to be a landmark decision concerning the NRC’s authority to license storage of “spent nuclear fuel” (known colloquially as “nuclear waste”). However, instead of reaching the merits of the case, the Court held that the NRC’s challengers had no right to sue to begin with—known as a “jurisdictional” ruling, in legalese.  

As PLF’s Will Yeatman explains, these kinds of procedural tricks are “depressingly common” for regulatory agencies seeking to evade legal challenges. On the bright side, the amicus brief PLF filed in support of the State of Texas—addressing only the jurisdiction question, not the merits of the case—was cited in a dissenting opinion by Justice Neil Gorsuch, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

Read More

We need to sell more federal land

Utah Senator Mike Lee stepped onto a political land mine recently when he proposed the federal government sell a tiny pinch of the 640 million acres that it owns, most of it west of the Rockies. Politicos from left and right condemned the proposal as a betrayal of a grand heritage.  

PLF’s Ethan Blevins had his issues with Senator Lee’s proposal, too: “It doesn’t go far enough.”

Read More

As state legislative sessions close, what did we accomplish in 2025?

In the 2025 legislative session, PLF partnered with state legislators and allies across the country to bring America back to its constitutional first principles—and we’re proud to have played a key role in securing major legislative victories along the way. 

Check out some of our biggest wins for liberty this year, including protecting property rights, ensuring equal treatment under the law, promoting economic freedom and opportunity, and ushering in major regulatory reforms—and don’t hesitate to reach out to our legal policy team if PLF can be of assistance in your state.

Read More

Illinois law allows brazen squatters to extort Chicago property owner

Squatting, simply put, is criminal trespassing. But as PLF’s Kyle Sweetland explains, Illinois and many other states treat these trespassers as if they’re simply overstaying tenants—stripping property owners of their rights and often forcing them to take matters into their own hands.

Read More

The Seventh Amendment doesn’t protect you at the state level. That must change.

Echoing the merits of EFG America’s fight for a jury trial, PLF editorial director Nicole W. C. Yeatman walks us through the history of selective incorporation of the Bill of Rights to the states. Ultimately, as she points out, it’s high time for the Seventh Amendment to be incorporated at the state level.

Read More

What is birth freedom?

One of the most personal healthcare decisions a woman can make is how she brings her babies into the world. Whether she chooses to deliver in a hospital with a doctor, or with a midwife in a birth center or at home, a mother has the fundamental right to make that choice for herself.  

And yet, in many states, governments routinely interfere in this decision-making process. In her latest, PLF editorial writer Brittany Hunter explains exactly what birth freedom means—and why we still have a long way to go in securing these fundamental rights for women across the country.

Read More