Category Archives: Law

CEI Podcast for January 31, 2013: The Recess Appointments That Weren’t

Judges-gavel
Have a listen here.

Federal judges recently struck down four recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board, claiming the Senate was in pro forma session when President Obama made the appointments. Senior Fellow Matt Patterson talks about the case and its far-reaching consequences for the labor market, as well as the separation of powers.

CEI Podcast for January 17, 2013: Fighting Class Action Abuse

Have a listen here.

Lawyers are clever creatures, but they rarely use their powers for good. CEI General Counsel Sam Kazman is an exception to the rule. He is involved in a lawsuit, Kazman v. Frontier Oil, that could set a needed precedent for reining in outrageous attorney fees in groundless class action suits.

CEI Podcast for September 13, 2012: CEI Sues the EPA


Have a listen here.

The EPA has been stonewalling a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request from the Competitive Enterprise Institute since 2010. Since the EPA has no intention to comply with the law, CEI has sued the EPA in a case that could set a major precedent in government transparency. Energy Policy Analyst William Yeatman explains how agency officials have been using private email accounts to conduct official business, arguing that non-governmental email accounts are exempt from outside scrutiny. CEI argues that basic transparency demands that public information be made public.

In Praise of Judicial Activism

Judicial activism is a dirty word in politics. It shouldn’t be. Over at The American Spectator, David Deerson and I try to rehabilitate a term that has been sorely missing from a passive judiciary. Judges shouldn’t legislate from the bench, of course. But nor should they let the other branches’ excesses stand:

No matter which party is in power, Congress and the White House often overstep their constitutional authority. From the political speech restrictions in McCain-Feingold to the Washington, D.C., handgun ban, examples of the Supreme Court striking down unconstitutional legislation are not hard to find. That is the kind of judicial activism we need more of.

Of course, we’re not that optimistic about this changing anytime soon:

No president would nominate a judge who might nullify his administration’s signature achievements. No senator would vote to confirm a judge who might strike down an important bill that she wrote. There is a selection bias favoring judges who will defer to the political branches of government. As Georgetown University law professor Randy Barnett told The Wall Street Journal, “If I want to bet actual money, I’ll always bet the court upholds anything Congress does.”

Read the whole thing here.

CEI Podcast for August 9, 2012: Getting TSA to Follow the Law


Have a listen here.

When the TSA installed full-body scanners in airports across the country, it did so illegally. More than a year after a court ordered TSA to open up its full-body scanner policy to public comment, the agency has refused to do so. Land-use and Transportation Policy Analyst Marc Scribner explains how a related lawsuit could force TSA to follow the law, and calls for de-nationalizing airport security.

CEI Podcast: June 28, 2012: The Health Care Decision


Have a listen here.

General Counsel Sam Kazman shares his thoughts on the Supreme Court’s health care decision, the Commerce Clause, Congress’ taxation power, and more.

CEI Podcast for June 21, 2012: Free Speech for Me, and for Thee


Have a listen here.

Labor Policy Counsel Vinnie Vernuccio explains why today’s 7-2 Supreme Court decision in the Knox v. SEIU case is an important victory for free speech. The heart of the ruling is that people should not be compelled to pay for political speech with which they disagree. Just as people may not be forcibly silenced, nor can they be forced to speak.

CEI Podcast for April 19, 2012: Right to Work Laws and Compelled Speech


Have a listen here.

Indiana is becoming a right to work state, which means unions will no longer be able to force workers who don’t want their representation to pay dues. Labor unions argue that this violates their right to free speech. Labor Policy Counsel Vinnie Vernuccio argues that taking away the power to collect mandatory dues is actually good for workers and unions alike. Workers will no longer be forced to pay for representation they don’t want, or political agendas they don’t support. Unions will also have to pay more attention to representing their members’ interests so workers will want to pay dues.

Supreme Court Hears the Health Care Case


Over at CNN, law professor Ilya Somin explains why he believes the health care bill is unconstitutional, and the Supreme Court should strike it down. He argues on commerce clause grounds:

[E]very previous case expanding the commerce power involved some sort of “economic activity,” such as operating a business or consuming a product. Failure to purchase health insurance is neither commerce nor an interstate activity. Indeed, it is the absence of commerce.

If Congress could use that clause to regulate mere failure to buy a product on the grounds that such inaction has an economic effect, there would be no structural limits to its power.

In other words, the real question being decided is whether or not there are limits to Congress’ power. If Congress has unlimited power, the insurance mandate stands. If there are limits to Congress’ power, it has to be struck down. It’s pretty easy to see that this case will have consequences far beyond the piece of legislation that sparked the case.

It’s too early to tell how it will turn out. Today is the first of three days of oral arguments, and the Court probably won’t release its decision until June.

In the meantime, a bit of advice to court watchers of all ideological stripes: don’t confuse the Constitution with constitutional law. They are very different things. That’s why this case really could go either way.

How to Build a Democracy


It is the height of hubris to claim that one knows how to build a democracy from scratch. The U.S. has learned this from its attempts in Iraq, Afghanistan, and countless other countries. But there are a few common themes that can help. One lesson is that it has to come from within, not imposed by foreign countries. Another is that new institutions have to evolve out of old ones, and have to suit local conditions and cultures.

Over at the Daily Caller, I trace out two other themes that emerging democracies should keep in mind: simpler is better, and rely on negative rights, not positive rights. Here’s a taste:

The Arab Spring is over a year old now. It’s too early to tell if that movement will bring liberal democracy to countries that badly need it. But if it does succeed, it will be right in line with a decades-long global trend. According to Freedom House, 41 percent of the world’s countries in 1989 were democracies. By 2011, 60 percent were democracies.

There are still a few monarchies here and there, and plenty of dictatorships. Cuba and North Korea are even keeping the last dying embers of communism alight. But more and more, democracy is seen as the way to go.

This is a wonderful development. But not all democracies succeed. Without the proper institutions, democracy can be very temporary, as Russia has found out.

Read the whole thing here.