Town Wants Mural Torn Down Because it Shows ... Donuts Institute for Justice 2023-01-31 | Town officials in Conway, New Hampshire, are trying to force a local bakery to paint over a mural made by local school students.In June, students from Kennett High School painted a colorful mural above the front door of Leavitt’s Country Bakery on White Mountain Highway. The mural features a New England mountain landscape made entirely of baked goods, such as donuts, scones and muffins. Leavitt’s owner Sean Young said at the time, he thought the mural “would be a fun project for kids and good for the community.”But no good deed goes unpunished. Two months later, town officials decided that they would treat the students’ mural as a “sign” subject to strict size and location restrictions. Why? Simply because the mural’s mountainscape depicts baked goods like those sold at the bakery. Thus, officials believe the sign should be treated as an advertisement.But Conway’s treatment of Leavitt’s mural as a “sign” is discriminatory and contrary to the First Amendment. The Institute for Justice is helping the bakery fight back.Learn more about this case here: ij.org/case/new-hampshire-donut-mural
IRONY: Citizen Arrested for Calling Mayor Fascist at Council Meeting Institute for Justice 2023-10-12 | The right to criticize the government is a pillar of our constitutional republic—embodied in the text and history of the First Amendment. And yet, across the country that right continues to be violated by unaccountable government agents. One particularly blatant example of this abuse happened recently in the small town of Newton, Iowa, where a resident named Noah Petersen was arrested for criticizing his mayor and police department.ij.org/case/iowa-retaliationPetersen, frustrated by the behavior of a local police officer and the police department’s treatment of residents, chose to express his concerns at city council meetings during the public comment period. However, instead of being heard—as was his right—he was arrested twice for “disrupting a lawful assembly.” When the city brought these charges to trial, a judge ruled in Petersen’s favor and confirmed that Petersen had a constitutional right to voice his concerns at the meeting. Petersen, who has partnered with the Institute for Justice, has now filed a lawsuit against the mayor, the police chief, and the City of Newton. The lawsuit claims violations of his First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights, arguing that his arrest was without probable cause and that he was unfairly singled out for his public comments. Petersen’s case also challenges the city’s rules against criticizing government officials, asserting that they infringe upon the First Amendment. His fight forms part of IJ’s mission to protect free speech against government retaliation. The lawsuit is also part of IJ’s Project on Immunity and Accountability, which aims to ensure that government officials are not above the Constitution.
Huge Victory for Renters Privacy Rights Institute for Justice 2023-09-28 | Learn more here: ij.org/press-release/in-win-for-privacy-rights-court-strikes-down-orange-citys-mandatory-rental-inspection
IJ Helped Save James Browns Radio Station Institute for Justice 2023-09-26 | Learn more here: ij.org/press-release/fcc-judge-rules-that-knoxvilles-only-black-owned-radio-station-should-keep-its-license
Innocent Forfeiture Victim Beats the FBI Institute for Justice 2023-09-08 | We are thrilled that Linda finally had her money returned but the forfeiture battle continues! IJ is fighting to vindicate the rights of all owners whose property is wrongfully seized. Learn more about our efforts here: ij.org/press-release/the-fbi-finally-returned-her-life-savings-after-holding-it-for-two-years-without-pressing-charges
A License to Talk About Death?? Institute for Justice 2023-09-07 | Lauren Richwine is part of a nationwide movement rethinking the practices, customs, and expenses of passing away.Lauren wants to encourage people to engage in the uncomfortable conversations about death. The government wants to silence them.ij.org/case/indiana-end-of-life-guidance #FreeSpeech #FirstAmendment #Licensing #OccupationalLicensing
$68 BILLION Seized by U.S. Law Enforcement Institute for Justice 2023-08-16 | Civil forfeiture reform is long overdue.
Camouflaged Game Warden Spies w/o a Warrant Institute for Justice 2023-08-04 | #Shorts #OpenFieldsDoctrine #Virginia #hunting #trailcamera
Governments Permanently Punish People for Old Crimes Institute for Justice 2023-08-01 | When the government judges someone’s integrity, it should do so based on who they are today—not who they were 20 years ago. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), however, imposes a permanent ban from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) on food retailers who have committed any offense related to alcohol, drugs, or firearms.ij.org/case/maryland-grocery-fresh-startAltimont Mark Wilks is one of the many entrepreneurs impacted by the USDA’s lifetime ban. Altimont served time in prison after he was arrested for dealing drugs back in 2004. By the time he came home, he was in his late 40s and wanted a fresh start. His mother, Carmen, helped him get back on his feet and fulfill his dream of owning his own business. Altimont opened a community-focused convenience store by his home in Hagerstown, Maryland, with the goal of providing affordable food to the people in his neighborhood. He named it Carmen’s Corner Store to honor his mother’s commitment and generosity. More than one in every five households near Altimont’s Hagerstown store depends on SNAP benefits to buy their groceries. As Altimont would soon learn, though, the USDA prohibits lots of business owners with a criminal record from accepting SNAP benefits at their stores. But the USDA doesn’t just punish crimes like fraud or business-related offenses that might suggest that an owner could steal from SNAP. For some unknown reason, the USDA reserves its harshest punishment for business owners who’ve previously committed offenses related to alcohol, drugs, or firearms. That policy prevents Altimont from ever accepting SNAP benefits at his store—something that makes it difficult for his business to compete in the market and effectively serve his community. There’s nothing Altimont could ever do in his lifetime that would convince the USDA that he is more than the mistakes he made two decades ago. But Altimont is undeterred. With growing community support for Carmen’s Corner Store, Altimont opened a second location in Frederick, Maryland. He once again applied to be a SNAP retailer, and the USDA once again imposed a permanent ban on his new store. This time, Altimont was ready. He teamed up with the Institute for Justice (IJ) to file a lawsuit challenging the USDA’s permanent ban in federal court. The government cannot exclude businesses from its programs for irrational reasons. Permanently banning Altimont from being a SNAP retailer doesn’t make sense—it just deprives people in his community of access to affordable groceries, which defeats the entire purpose of SNAP. That’s why Altimont and IJ are asking the court to rule that the USDA’s permanent ban is invalid. A victory will vindicate the simple truth that old and irrelevant criminal convictions should not prevent anyone from getting a fresh start.
SWAT Destroys Business During Standoff, Refuses to Pay Institute for Justice 2023-07-20 | For thirty years, Carlos Pena ran a print shop in North Hollywood. His world was turned upside down, however, in August 2022, when a fugitive forced his way into Carlos’s shop and barricaded himself inside. After a prolonged standoff, the City of Los Angeles’s SWAT team stormed the shop, launching dozens of grenades that tore through the walls, windows, and ceilings, destroying most of Carlos’s expensive printing equipment. In total, the damage from the assault alone exceeded $60,000. ij.org/case/los-angeles-swat-destruction Carlos’s insurance—as is common—does not cover destruction committed by the government. Meanwhile, Carlos couldn’t afford to repair his shop and replace his equipment. He twice requested compensation from the City, which ignored his pleas. Unable to re-open his shop, Carlos has lost out on tens of thousands of dollars in revenue. Carlos had hoped to pass the business on to his son; now, he can hardly afford to pay his own bills. This is not merely unfair; it’s unconstitutional. When the government deliberately destroys an innocent person’s property for some public benefit, it must pay for it. In this case, the City’s officers determined that the public benefit of apprehending a fugitive outweighed the costs of destroying Carlos’s shop. That was their decision to make, but, under the United States Constitution, they must pay for it.
[Dash Cam] Illegal Traffic Stop in Texas Institute for Justice 2023-07-06 | If the Fourth Amendment means anything, it’s that police can’t just pull you over, interrogate you, and ransack your car without a good reason to suspect you of a crime. But that’s exactly what happened to Alek Schott in 2022.Learn more here: ij.org/case/texas-traffic-stop
Railroad Attempts To Take Families’ Property Using Eminent Domain Institute for Justice 2023-07-01 | A group of Sparta, Georgia, property owners announced they have teamed up with the Institute for Justice (IJ) to challenge a private railroad’s attempt to take their land for a rail spur that would benefit a private business. IJ will represent Don and Sally Garrett, Blaine and Diane Smith, and Marvin and Pat Smith in a legal proceeding before the Georgia Public Service Commission against Sandersville Railroad’s attempt to use eminent domain to condemn and take their land. ij.org/case/sparta-georgia-eminent-domainIn March 2023, Sandersville filed a petition with the Georgia Public Service Commission to obtain the authority to condemn the land owned by the Garretts and the Smiths to build a rail spur to haul materials used for making concrete out of the Hanson Quarry, owned by Heidelberg Materials. The taking of the land—which would require parcels from some 18 properties nearby—would serve no public interest. It would simply allow Heidelberg to export materials via train instead of trucks. “Taking people’s private land and handing it over to a private company for the benefit of a private business isn’t just wrong, it’s unconstitutional and against Georgia law,” said IJ Senior Attorney Bill Maurer. “The power to use eminent domain is limited to public uses and the public is not going to use this railroad—a private business is. Neither the Constitution nor Georgia statutes permit this kind of abuse of the eminent domain power.” Sandersville Railroad is a powerful business with political connections. Meanwhile, the landowners in rural Sparta are fighting to save properties that have been in their respective families for generations. The Garrett family, for example, has owned the land since the 1800s. “This is more than just land to our family – it’s where we’ve shared memories and built a life for ourselves for generations,” said Don. “We’re not going to let Sandersville just go in and take it from us.” As for the Smiths, Marvin and Blaine’s great grandmother was born a slave on the property, which was then a cotton plantation. In the 1920s, their grandfather and grandmother were able to obtain part of the land as their own. They farmed the land, and always told their children to hold onto it—and they have. The property has been in the Smith family ever since. While the Smiths now live in Maryland, they routinely come back to visit the house they grew up in and they plan to continue keeping this land in their family for future generations. “Our family has owned this land for 100 years, and we plan to continue owning it for generations to come,” said Blaine. “We refuse to let a private company come take the land that we hope to leave for our children and our children’s children.” “It’s clear to anyone that Sandersville’s attempt to take land from the Garretts and Smiths serves no legitimate public interest,” said IJ Litigation Fellow Betsy Sanz. “We look forward to standing up for these property owners in their fight against this unconstitutional land grab.” The Institute for Justice (IJ) is the national expert on defending property owners against eminent domain abuse and other property rights violations. It represents the property owners in Sparta whose land would be seized by this eminent domain taking. Those property owners include Don and Sally Garrett, Blaine and Diane Smith, and Marvin and Pat Smith.
Gov’t Caught Stealing Game Camera to Spy on Owner Institute for Justice 2023-06-22 | Josh Highlander’s son is afraid of the boogeyman. While playing with his mother in the yard, their basketball rolled toward the woods. She was shocked to see a figure standing in their woods wearing a camouflage “leafy jacket.” She quickly brought her son back in the house and alerted Josh.By the time Josh came out, the stranger was nowhere to be seen. But Josh soon discovered that a camera he used to monitor game on his property was missing. He called police to report the theft. They responded that the camera was in the possession of the Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources (DWR). In the weeks following, Josh did not receive a warrant nor was he given any hunting citations. Josh’s son was afraid to go outside alone for weeks afterward and continues to talk about the scary man in the woods.Josh is an avid hunter and has grown a food plot on his property to attract game. Growing food plots isn’t just legal, it’s encouraged on the DWR’s own website. The camera was posted on a pole in the middle of the plot, which is about 100 yards through the woods from the house.The 30 acres Josh owns outside Richmond is private land. When he built his home a few years ago, he purchased and posted more than 100 “private property” signs so that he could make that clear.Virginia is one of many states where government officials conduct warrantless searches of “open fields” under a century-old U.S. Supreme Court precedent. That precedent leaves most private property in the U.S. unprotected by the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures.But the DWR did more than just trespass on his property and observe his family. It took Josh’s camera in order to spy on him. Now, Josh and the Institute for Justice are suing in state court to get his camera back, to protect his home, and to restore the right of all Virginians to be secure on their land. Whatever the U.S. Supreme Court may have said about the Fourth Amendment, the Virginia Constitution does not tolerate these kinds of warrantless intrusions.LINKS:Read more about Josh Highlander's lawsuit against the Virginia DWR for invading his privacy and taking his property: ij.org/case/virginia-open-fieldsWatch IJ Attorney Josh Windham's argument at the Tennessee Court of Appeals here: youtube.com/live/t8uiFAU4IcA?feature=share&t=869
Bakery Owner Says Donut Censor Students Art Institute for Justice 2023-06-15 | Watch the case video to learn more: youtube.com/watch?v=0BFeWnQa_OI
Georgias Supreme Court Decision is a Win for Women Institute for Justice 2023-06-14 | Read more here: ij.org/press-release/georgia-supreme-court-rules-lactation-licensing-law-unconstitutional
WATCH an Illegal Traffic Stop Start to Finish. Bogus Dog Alert. Institute for Justice 2023-06-06 | If the Fourth Amendment means anything, it’s that police can’t just pull you over, interrogate you, and ransack your car without a good reason to suspect you of a crime. But that’s exactly what happened to Alek Schott in 2022.ij.orgAlek was driving home from a work trip on I-35 near San Antonio when a Bexar County sheriff’s deputy pulled him over for allegedly drifting between lanes. What should have been a momentary delay quickly turned into an unconstitutional fishing expedition.After interrogating Alek for ten minutes, the deputy who detained him called a drug dog to search his truck. The dog allegedly “alerted” to the presence of drugs, and police proceeded to tear apart Alek’s truck. But they found nothing because there was nothing to find.From the very beginning, the traffic stop was unconstitutional. Footage from Alek’s own dashcam shows he never drifted lanes. Bodycam footage from the deputy shows Alek gave the officer calm, mundane answers about a run-of-the-mill work trip. Nothing about what he said was suspicious, but the deputy called a drug dog anyway. And moments before the dog alerted by jumping on the truck, the handler’s bodycam shows that he signaled the dog.The Fourth Amendment prohibits stop-first, justify-later policing. Police must have a fact-based suspicion of a crime before making a stop, a valid reason to extend that stop, and either a warrant, consent, or an objective reason to believe there’s contraband inside to search a vehicle. In Alek’s case, the deputy failed to meet any of these criteria and instead used an unjustified traffic stop to probe into crimes Alek hadn’t committed.Alek is partnering with the Institute for Justice to sue the deputies and Bexar County for violating his Fourth Amendment rights. Because if we the people must follow the law, government officials must follow the Constitution.
PRIVATE Company Tries to SEIZE Land thru Eminent Domain Institute for Justice 2023-05-23 | #Shorts #EminentDomain #PropertyRights #Georgia
Why is starting a biz in NYC so difficult? Institute for Justice 2023-05-17 | For more guidance on New York can make it cheaper, faster, and simpler to start a small business visit ij.org/report/barriers-to-business/city-profile/new-york-city/.
Journalist Arrested for Exercising His Press Freedom Rights Institute for Justice 2023-05-15 | Learn more about this case here: ij.org/case/fort-bend-retaliation #Dashcam #Retaliation #PressFreedom #freedomofthepress
FDA Says Oat Milk Can Call Itself Milk... For Now Institute for Justice 2023-05-12 | To learn more, read IJ's press release: ij.org/press-release/public-interest-law-firm-encourages-fda-to-allow-plant-based-milk-producers-to-call-their-products-milk
Supreme Court to Hear Case: TX Floods Farm, Refuses to Pay Institute for Justice 2023-05-10 | Learn more about Richie's case here: ij.org/case/devillier-cert-petition#Shorts #Texas #Legal #law #supremecourt
AZ Gov. Hobbs VETOES Popular Food Bill Institute for Justice 2023-05-09 | Learn more here: ij.org/press-release/attempt-to-override-governors-veto-of-food-freedom-bill-narrowly-fails-public-interest-law-firm-vows-to-keep-fighting-for-food-freedom#Arizona #Shorts #FoodFreedom #Vendors #Tamales
SCOTUS Rejects Appeal, Immunity for Corrupt Prosecutors Institute for Justice 2023-05-03 | Learn more about this case here: ij.org/press-release/supreme-court-declines-to-hear-case-against-corrupt-former-prosecutors-who-brought-bogus-charges-against-group-of-nurses-their-attorney#Shorts #immunity #QualifiedImmunity
Archie the Goat Needs Your Help Institute for Justice 2023-04-27 | Fairytale Farm Animal Sanctuary is a refuge for abused and neglected donkeys, goats, rabbits, ducks, and more. The sanctuary is also the home of Kimberly Dunckel and her family. But when the Dunckels invite visitors to their home, they risk being cited by city officials for running afoul of the zoning code.ij.org/press-release/north-carolina-animal-sanctuary-fights-back-against-crushing-zoning-restrictionsWinston-Salem’s zoning code would allow the Dunckels to operate a home day care or teach music lessons. But because operating a nonprofit animal shelter is not explicitly allowed, the city says that the sanctuary cannot have events, teach classes, or host groups of volunteers. Because engaging the community at their home is critical to supporting Fairytale Farm, the Dunckels teamed up with the Institute for Justice (IJ) to file a lawsuit in state court challenging the restrictions on visitors.“Winston-Salem’s zoning power does not trump Kimberly Dunckel’s right to use her property to serve the community,” said Institute for Justice Attorney Anna Goodman. “She’s not hurting anyone, she’s only helping. And the city cannot prohibit her and her family from using their property as an animal sanctuary just because it was not creative enough to consider that potential use.”In 2017, Kimberly and her husband Art began searching for a property that would serve both as a home and a place to host the Winston-Salem community. After purchasing and restoring their 3.3-acre lot, they started caring for animals, many with special needs and some referred to the sanctuary by the local government animal control. In 2021, they registered Fairytale Farm as a non-profit. They hosted groups of Girl Scouts and homeschoolers, held themed events for people to meet with the animals, and welcomed groups of volunteers to help with care and upkeep of the sanctuary.But earlier this year, the city ordered the Dunckels to close the sanctuary completely. After an outpouring of community support, the city changed its mind but gave the Dunckels new and confusing restrictions on the visitors they could host at their home. Those restrictions have made it difficult for the sanctuary to fundraise, threatening its long-term sustainability.“We hoped that the animals we invited to Fairytale Farm would have a happily ever after, but the city’s senseless restrictions are making it difficult to care for these rescues that have already been through so much,” said Kimberly. “We’ve been operating for over a year without complaint and taking in animals that local shelters don’t have a place for. It seems like we’re being singled out for doing something good that doesn’t fit neatly into the zoning code.”Zoning codes in the U.S. often seek to prohibit people from using their property in safe, reasonable ways. IJ is currently defending a Texas mother seeking to operate a home daycare, a Texas mechanic required to provide an impossible number of parking spots before he can open his shop, and an Idaho woman who can park her tiny home on wheels in her town but is banned from living in it.
Criminal charges for flying a drone?? Institute for Justice 2023-04-26 | Leanrn more about this case here: ij.org/press-release/north-carolina-drone-operator-to-appeal-in-first-amendment-lawsuit
Serve and Protect? More like Ticket and Collect Institute for Justice 2023-04-21 | Watch the full case video here: youtube.com/watch?v=-cil2gdCa-k
Texas Dam Turns Family Farm Into Lake. State Refuses to Pay Institute for Justice 2023-04-18 | “If you break it, you buy it” is a simple rule that anyone who has shopped at a Pottery Barn probably already knows. It means that if you cause damage to someone else’s property, you are responsible for paying for that damage. And yet, the state of Texas argues that this basic tenet does not apply to state governments when they take private property for public use. Unfortunately, in direct defiance of decades of Supreme Court precedent, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed, and now the Institute for Justice (IJ) is helping a fourth-generation family farm appeal their case to the U.S. Supreme Court. ij.org/press-release/texas-farmer-asks-supreme-court-to-adopt-pottery-barn-rule-if-the-government-breaks-something-it-buys-it“There is not an asterisk next to the Fifth Amendment that says the government doesn’t have to pay just compensation if it doesn’t want to,” said Institute for Justice Deputy Litigation Director Robert McNamara. “The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed Americans’ right to just compensation is an inherent part of the Constitution. It cannot be ignored or circumvented by the government or the courts.”Richie Devillier is a farmer who has lived on his family’s land in Winnie, Texas, for generations. For as long as anyone can remember, the Devilliers’ land has never flooded—that is, until the early 2000s, when the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) renovated a nearby highway. In an effort to make sure the eastbound lanes of the highway would be available as an evacuation route in the event of a major flood, TxDOT raised the highway’s elevation and built an impermeable concrete barrier down the median. Now, whenever a major storm hits, the Devillier family farm and many of the surrounding properties are inundated. The effects have been devastating. When Hurricane Harvey hit the Houston area, countless acres of crops were ruined. For days their farmland resembled a lake. Innumerable cows and horses died—drowned, or just killed by the cumulative effects of standing chest-deep in water for days on end. The damage was enormous. Two years later, while the Devillier family was still recovering, Tropical Storm Imelda hit the area, and once again their land flooded. When they complained, the state did next to nothing and refused to pay for the damage caused by its public works project. “My family has farmed this land for generations, and we’ve never seen anything like this flooding before,” said Richie. “It destroyed our crops, killed our animals, and caused untold damage to our property. I don’t know if we’ll ever be able to farm this land again without worrying that we’ll lose everything in an instant. When we talked to the state, they basically said ‘tough luck.’ That’s not right. We shouldn’t have to pay the price for a public works project that benefits the entire community. We’re not asking that they get rid of the wall. The only thing we’re asking for is the right that is guaranteed to us by the Constitution—the right to be compensated for the damage done to our property.”Their only option was to take the state to court, which they did in 2020. Texas courts allow property owners to file lawsuits for takings of their property, but Texas’ lawyers asked to have the case moved to federal court. Once they were there, they asked the federal judge to throw the case out because Congress has never passed a law allowing people to sue states for taking their property. That’s true—federal civil-rights laws only allow lawsuits against people, not against states—but courts across the country have held that, when it comes to takings, people do not need a law giving them a remedy. Instead, the Constitution, which guarantees “just compensation” for takings, guarantees the remedy. Shockingly, though, the Fifth Circuit sided with Texas, holding that property owners whose land is taken by the state don’t have any federal remedy at all. The Devilliers’ claim did not exist at all.That ruling is wrong, and it conflicts with rulings of both the Supreme Court and other courts nationwide. That is why the Institute for Justice has filed a petition for certiorari asking the Supreme Court to take up the Devillier family’s case and affirm that states cannot ignore the Constitution.“Federal courts are supposed to be places where citizens go to have their constitutional rights vindicated,” said IJ Litigation Fellow Trace Mitchell. “This ruling turns them into places where the government can run to hide when they have violated people’s rights.”“This case is about holding the government accountable and ensuring that the Constitution’s protections for property owners are respected,” said Scott Bullock, chief counsel and president of the Institute for Justice. “The Institute for Justice will continue to fight for the property rights of all Americans, and we believe that this case will be a critical turning point in that ongoing struggle.”
Absolute Immunity for Absolutely Guilty Prosecutors Institute for Justice 2023-04-14 | #qualifiedimmunity #absoluteimmunity #lawyersofinstagram #criminaljustice
Huge Civil Forfeiture Victory After 2.5 Year Battle Institute for Justice 2023-04-12 | #CivilForfeiture #Arizona #Forfeiture #AssetForfeiture #LawyersofInstagram #AttorneysofInstagram #Phoenix #PhoenixAirport #policereform #criminaljusticereform #policing
It’s Time to Hold Oath-Breaking Police Accountable Institute for Justice 2023-04-05 | #Shorts #criminaljustice #qualifiedimmunity #police
Gov’t Censors Are Stifling Facts on Health Food Institute for Justice 2023-03-28 | #lowfodmap #fodmap #dietfood #censorship #shorts #USDA #FDA
Immunity for Cops Who Beat, Choked Innocent Student?? Institute for Justice 2023-03-21 | #Shorts #qualifiedimmunity #justiceAs part of IJ’s Project on Immunity and Accountability, James King and IJ are asking the Supreme Court to strike down immunity for police task force officers who brutally beat an innocent college student.If you'd like to make a contribution to help IJ fight for Americans’ rights, please visit ij.org/support/give-now/james-king-cert-2/.
Govt Seized Fathers House Over Sons Crime Institute for Justice 2023-03-18 | Learn more about the class-action lawsuit that stopped Philadelphia’s forfeiture machine here: ij.org/press-release/class-action-lawsuit-that-stopped-philadelphias-forfeiture-machine-ends-with-victims-compensated-and-unclaimed-funds-donated-to-charities#CivilForfeiture #Philadelphia #Justice
Detroit Police Took a Man’s Car, then Retaliated when he Sued Institute for Justice 2023-03-09 | #Shorts #Detroit #Retaliation #CivilForfeiture
FBI Robs Innocent Property Owner in Raid Institute for Justice 2023-03-08 | Learn more about Linda's case here: ij.org/press-release/the-fbi-hasnt-said-what-this-couple-did-wrong-but-is-taking-their-savings-anyway#Shorts #dashcam
Its almost impossible to hold govt officials accountable Institute for Justice 2023-02-21 | #shorts #qualifiedimmunity
Cops Seized a Retired Marines $85,000—Now Hes Fighting Back Institute for Justice 2023-02-09 | #Shorts #CivilForfeitureCheck out our latest press release for Stephen Lara's case:ij.org/press-release/nevada-supreme-court-affirms-that-government-officials-can-be-sued-for-violations-of-rights-in-the-state-constitution
Home Bakers Win Big Victory over Interest Groups Institute for Justice 2023-01-27 | #shorts Learn more details about this case at ij.org/press-release/victory-for-wisconsin-home-bakers/.
EXPOSED: Seattles Affordable Housing Law Institute for Justice 2023-01-24 | Seattle, like many cities, is experiencing a housing shortage—or what some city leaders call a “crisis.” But in an attempt to address it, Seattle has only made matters worse.ij.org/case/seattle-housing-affordabilityIn 2019, the city created the Mandatory Housing Affordability (MHA) Program, which places unique burdens on anyone building in certain zones throughout the city. In so doing, the city’s attempt to make housing more affordable has done just the opposite: it has made it more expensive to build affordable housing.The city was warned that this would happen. The city-commissioned report on MHA’s “economic feasibility” acknowledged that its burdensome costs would stall new housing construction in the bottom third of the housing market. Nevertheless, the city put MHA into effect—trumpeting it as a “grand bargain” with “major players,” including large developers. But for ordinary Seattleites, MHA is no bargain.Longtime Central District homeowner Anita Adams knows this firsthand. Anita wants to build a modest addition to house her two adult children. But before she can get a building permit, the city demands that she either build additional “affordable” housing units or pay nearly $77,000 into the MHA program. Those fees make Anita’s plans impossible—and leave the city with fewer affordable housing units.Anita is not alone. Across the city, anyone wishing to construct a home must face incomprehensibly high fees or burdensome and intrusive new housing mandates levied in the name of “affordable housing.” And yet, the laws of basic economics (and common sense) dictate that these costs result in higher rents and fewer housing options.Fortunately for Anita, the Constitution dictates that governments cannot use the permitting process as an opportunity to coerce money from property owners, and certainly not at the expense of the city’s middle- and low-income residents. Anita has partnered with the Institute for Justice to challenge Seattle’s counterproductive and unconstitutional MHA program and clear the way for homeowners to develop their own land without paying exorbitant fees.
