Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 12

December 2010

Volume 19 Issue 6

Inside This Issue

IJ’s Time to Shine

IJ Wins
Major Free Speech IJ’s New City Studies:
Want to Create Jobs?
Victory

3
Remove Red Tape.
Freedom for Farmers

The Institute for Justice’s city studies feature real-world entrepreneurs from eight different cities across the nation. Chicago entre-
preneur Dee Busch, left, says requiring her to obtain a landscape architecture license would only raise the cost to consumers; it
Arizona Tax Credit
would not raise the quality. When Nick Harris started Nick’s Towing Service, he could work anywhere in the city of Houston.
Goes to U.S. Supreme Court But the city gave just 11 towing companies the exclusive right to freeway tows, and now Nick is shut out of the freeway market.

9 By Dana Berliner Since our founding in 1991, the Institute for


Let’s face it: American government at every level Justice has litigated to free would-be entrepreneurs
works diligently to stop entrepreneurs from ever getting from arbitrary and abusive government action. In that
their small businesses off the ground. Sure, government span, we have represented hairbraiders, casket sellers,
officials claim they support entrepreneurship. But in computer repair techs, book peddlers, florists, vacuum
Published Bimonthly by the reality, they often just support a few hand-picked or politi- vendors, interior designers, bagel and doughnut shop
Institute for Justice cally connected businesses, granting virtual monopolies owners, eyebrow threaders, taxi drivers, limo drivers,
to favored businesses while shutting out newcomers. van drivers, tour guides, people who file horses’ teeth
visit us online: They do not support true freedom or entrepreneurship. City Studies continued on page 4
www.ij.org
&LAW

Need for Judicial Engagement


Makes IJ More Critical Than Ever
By Chip Mellor Constitution that provide any meaningful power is an ever expanding constitution-
limit on government authority. That is al trump card they can play whenever it
Although the recent election where the Institute for Justice comes in suits them, overreaching is inexorable.”
brought a welcome rebuke of the statist and why we look to the next year with He wrote that if courts defer such that
juggernaut and fiscal irresponsibility, it eager anticipation. the legislature has limitless power to
will not be enough to ensure that federal All of our cases involve constitu- declare its actions justified by the police
and state legislatures refrain from busi- tional provisions that must be restored if power, “At that constitutional tipping
ness as usual. Only constraints imposed we are to have the freedom envisioned point, adjudication more resembles
on government by the Constitution by the Founders. IJ is already preparing abdication.”
will do that. This means courts must a bumper crop of cases we will launch That makes eminent sense, but
fulfill their role, which James Madison in the next year vindicating economic because of the precedents that are the
described as acting as “bulwarks of liberty, property rights, free speech and legacy of decades of judicial deference,
liberty.” Unless the judiciary fulfills this school choice. Each case will serve it will require tenacious and long-term
role and upholds constitutional limits on as a civic alarm clock for the judge it advocacy.
government, we will be left to rely on comes before, urging judicial engage- The good news, however, is that
the self-restraint of government officials. ment on vital constitutional issues to the recent excesses of the federal gov-
History and common sense show that to replace the blind deference judges have ernment have made all but the most
be no limit at all. too often given to the other branches obstinate disciples of judicial “restraint”
For too long the courts have of government when those branches recognize how dangerous unchecked
deferred to legislative and executive exceed their constitutional authority. legislative and executive power can
authority, effectively amending the Simply put, the Institute for Justice be. Thus, the country is ready like
Constitution in the process. The result intends to forcefully, persuasively and never before for a concentrated effort
is that today, key provisions of the persistently make the case that the to revitalize the Constitution through the
Constitution designed to limit govern- courts must strike down laws and gov- courts. And no one is better equipped
ment power have been negated (includ- ernment actions that exceed the consti- than IJ to do that. IJ’s program com-
ing the Privileges or Immunities Clause, tutionally enshrined limits on the power bines cutting-edge litigation, award-win-
and the Contracts Clause) or trans- of government. ning media relations, in-depth strategic
formed into Orwellian grants of greater Texas Supreme Court Justice Don research, energetic grassroots mobiliza-
government power (as we have seen Willett described what this means in a tion and expert legislative counseling to
with the Commerce Clause, the General recent opinion: “There must remain maximize the real-world impact of every
Welfare Clause and the Takings Clause). judicially enforceable constraints on case we take on.
It is no exaggeration to say that to the legislative actions that are irreconcilable As the Institute for Justice enters
extent that there is debate, it is over with constitutional commands. If leg- its twentieth year, that time-tested
whether there are provisions of the islators come to believe that the police approach gives us confidence and
optimism about meeting the challenges
“The Institute for Justice intends to forcefully, persuasively ahead.u
and persistently make the case that the courts must strike Chip Mellor is IJ’s
down laws and government actions that exceed the consti- President and General
Counsel.
tutionally enshrined limits on the power of government.”

2
December 2010

IJ Scores Major Free Speech Victory


For Parker North Neighbors

By Steve Simpson
In November, a federal appellate
court ruled that six neighbors in the
tiny subdivision of Parker North, Colo.,
should not have been forced to regis-
ter with the government and comply
with burdensome campaign finance
laws simply for opposing a ballot issue
involving the annexation of their neigh-
borhood.
In Sampson v. Buescher, a
“No one should be afraid to speak about issues or
panel of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of politics for fear of being sued, and no one should
Appeals unanimously recognized the have to hire a lawyer to put up yard signs.”
severe burden Colorado’s campaign —IJ client Karen Sampson
finance laws imposed on grassroots
political activists. The court ruled, of Parker. The group talked to neigh- sued by their political opponents. The
“The average citizen cannot be bors, circulated postcards and planted Court recognized that states have
expected to master on his or her yard signs. But in Colorado and other little or no interest in requiring groups
own the many campaign financial- states, when two or more people that simply wish to speak out for and
disclosure requirements set forth in spend more than $200 to speak against ballot issues to register and
Colorado’s constitution, the Campaign out about a ballot issue, they must comply with complicated disclosure
Act, and the Secretary of State’s Rules register with the state as an “issue rules.
Concerning Campaign and Political committee” and comply with rules Freedom of speech means that
Finance.” and regulations that rival the tax laws citizens, not government, get to decide
IJ client Karen Sampson said, in their complexity. Issue committees whether to disclose their identities
“This ruling is a complete vindication of must appoint a registered agent, open when they speak out about ballot
what we’ve said all along. Campaign separate bank accounts, and disclose issues. For those who don’t trust
regulations and red tape serve no all contributions and expenditures of anonymous speech, the solution is to
purpose in local ballot issue elections more than $20 for things like yard not listen to it.
other than to make political participa- signs and fliers. Because Sampson The court’s decision is supported
tion more difficult for ordinary citizens.” and the others failed to register with by IJ’s strategic research. Campaign
For a brief and funny video the government before speaking, the Finance Red Tape, Dr. Jeffrey Milyo of
discussing this lawsuit, visit IJ’s site: principal proponents of the annexation the University of Missouri asked 255
www.ij.org/2504. used Colorado’s campaign finance people to fill out the registration and
Sampson and her neighbors first laws to sue them. disclosure forms for a small political
learned about Colorado’s campaign This ruling means that grassroots group. Not one participant man-
finance laws when they organized political activists in Colorado and the aged to do so correctly. The average
to oppose the annexation of their other states in the 10th Circuit can correct score was just 41 percent.
neighborhood into the adjacent town speak freely without fear of being Parker North continued on page 10

3
&LAW

IJ’s New City Studies:


Creating New Jobs is Easier
When Government Gets out of the Way

City Studies continued from page 1


and even a person who massages horses for
a living.
Watching the alarming growth of regula-
tion and red tape imposed on small business-
es, we recognized that even more needs to be
done to protect the rights of small business-
people. IJ launched a nationwide campaign
to promote economic liberty, which, of course,
includes more litigation. But we also thought
www.ij.org/CityStudiesVideo
WASHINGTON, D.C.: Edward Lobban, who runs
it was vital to expose how government barri-
Fireside Restaurant in Southeast D.C., was frustrated Watch IJ’s video, “Why Can’t Chuck Get His Business
with the entire permitting process to which he said, ers affect individual entrepreneurs throughout
Off the Ground?” which has already earned more than
“If it was my money alone, I would have given it up.” the country. And so, thanks to a grant from 100,000 views.
the Diehl Family Foundation, the Institute for
Justice spent the past year conducting studies government. These are individuals like Laura
identifying barriers to entrepreneurship in eight Sue Mosier, who transformed an historic build-
cities around the nation—Chicago, Houston, ing in Milwaukee into a bed and breakfast
Los Angeles, Miami, Milwaukee, Newark, only to be socked with more than $100,000 in
Philadelphia and Washington, D.C. extra operating expenses due to government
The studies found entrepreneurs who are mandates, and Jim Purtee, who created a
sources of boundless energy, bursting with vibrant new market for inflatable advertising in
ideas for new businesses and the determina- Houston, Texas, until the city rewarded him by
tion to put their plans into action. These banning such ads altogether.
people act as engines for job creation, eco- Cities and states throughout the country
NEWARK: Having sunk everything they have into their nomic growth, and new products and services. hamper entrepreneurship and job creation at
business, Sadie Galarza and Michelle Rosado Unfortunately, all too often, their pursuit of an virtually every turn, burying them in mounds
depend on getting people up to the window of their honest living is burdened or banned by big of paperwork; lengthy, expensive and arbitrary
food truck at lunchtime. Red tape, however, threat-
ened to stop their business before it ever got started.

4
December 2010

Philadelphia entrepreneur, Aaron Ultimo, left, has waited more than one year for a
government-issued license to serve beer. “Every week that goes by is less revenue in the
government’s pocket,” he points out. Nasir Kahn opened his dream business, a hot dog
restaurant, in Milwaukee, investing his and his wife’s savings, only to have a city alderman
arbitrarily shut it down on his first day.

permitting processes; pointless educational dictate every aspect of a person’s small busi-
requirements for occupations; or even just out- ness. Government officials want to choose who
right bans. can go into which business, where, what the
In every city we studied, overwhelming business should look like and what signs will
regulations destroyed or crippled would-be busi- be put in the windows. And if that means that
nesses at a time when they are most needed. businesses fail, or never open, or can operate
For example, to operate a used bookstore in only illegally, or waste all their money trying to
Los Angeles, the government demands that the get permits so they have nothing left for actual
owner get a permit from the police; record the operations, that’s just too bad. This attitude
personal information of everyone who brings would be bad enough in prosperous times, but
LOS ANGELES: Jill Bigelow’s most frustrating
in books for exchange or resale, including their in a period of financial strain and high unem- experience while trying to open her restaurant was
names, addresses and book titles; and make ployment, it’s also incredibly foolish. when an inspector would not allow her to open
this information available to the police. In some The studies were released in October and because her previously approved wall tile did not
cases, the bookstore owner even has to thumb- have already received significant media cover- have enough “reflective value.”
print patrons who bring in books and file daily age, including an editorial from The Wall Street
reports with the police. In Washington, D.C., Journal, an op-ed I co-authored with Chip Mellor
to give sightseeing tours for compensation, for USA Today online, and op-eds and news
the city requires you to first get a government- pieces in the cities studied.
issued license. Similar requirements exist in In the coming months, we will use these
Philadelphia and elsewhere. So, as tour guides studies as a source for new litigation, to
pass the National Archives, which houses origi- advance the cause of entrepreneurs nationwide
nals of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and to remove some of the barriers that crush
they don’t have the freedom to describe those entrepreneurs struggling to start
charters of freedom without first getting the gov- or grow their businesses.u
ernment’s permission. MIAMI: Little Havana’s historic character comes
Time and again, these reports document Dana Berliner is an IJ with a price for local businesses, which must get
senior attorney. government permission for minor alterations to their
how local bureaucrats believe they should
buildings. Marta Ismail waited seven months for
permission for an awning outside her gallery.

5
&LAW
First amendment • Free Speech • First amendment • Free Speech • First amendment • Free Speech • First amendment • Free Speech • First amendment

IJ Launches Nationwide Defense


Of Citizen Speech
By Paul Sherman
Under the First Amendment, the only
thing you should need to talk about politics
is an opinion. After all, as the U.S. Supreme
Court has recognized, the First Amendment
was designed to protect a marketplace of ideas
that is “uninhibited, robust, and wide-open.”
Yet across the country, ordinary Americans
find their right to associate with one another
and speak out on the most important political
issues of the day stifled by burdensome regu-
lations.
Consider Nathan Worley, Pat Wayman
and John Scolaro. At least once a week, these
three talk politics as part of a Sarasota-area
political group. But when a controversial IJ client Nathan Worley filed suit in Florida, which demands that he and his politically minded friends
constitutional amendment made it onto the register with the government and comply with other burdensome requirements before they speak.
Florida ballot, they decided it was time to take
political action. Supreme Court in Citizens United v. Federal silenced, Nathan and the others will continue
Nathan, Pat and John were worried Election Commission ruled that identical federal their legal fight to ensure that they and all
about proposed Amendment 4 to the Florida laws are unconstitutionally burdensome even for Floridians can speak freely in future elections.
Constitution, which, if passed, would require corporations and unions. In addition to filing this lawsuit, IJ
municipalities to submit all changes to their Laws that are unconstitutionally burden- released a groundbreaking report on how
comprehensive land-use plans to a referen- some for well-heeled institutions like General burdensome campaign finance laws stifle
dum. Nathan and the others feared that this Motors and the AFL-CIO are unconstitutionally grassroots speech (see next page) and sent
costly and time-consuming requirement would burdensome for ordinary Americans. That is letters to government officials nationwide
devastate Florida’s economy, prolonging and why Nathan, Pat and John are fighting back. urging them to bring their states’ campaign
deepening the current recession. To prevent On September 29, they joined with the finance laws in line with Citizens United, so
this, they wanted to pool a modest amount Institute for Justice to file a federal lawsuit that grassroots groups of citizens can enjoy
of money to run a simple radio ad before the seeking to strike down Florida’s unconstitu- the same freedom to speak in elections as cor-
November election, urging Florida voters to tional campaign finance laws. Their lawsuit, porations and unions.
reject Amendment 4—an amendment that ulti- Worley v. Roberts, is the first in the Institute for Participation in political debate is not a
mately was defeated. Justice’s new nationwide effort to ensure that privilege reserved for political insiders who can
Unfortunately, Nathan and the others groups of ordinary Americans have the free- afford to retain lawyers and accountants; it is a
could not simply call up the radio station and dom to band together to amplify their voices right that belongs to all Americans. We aim to
place their ad because Florida made doing so without having to deal with burdensome red restore this fundamental principle and ensure
illegal. Under Florida’s campaign finance laws, tape. that all Americans can speak freely about the
these three could not join together and spend Although Nathan and the others never issues that matter most to them.u
more than $500 to speak to the public unless had the opportunity to make their voices heard
they first registered with the state as a “politi- before the election—a federal judge denied a Paul Sherman is an IJ
cal committee” and complied with all of the motion that would have allowed them to speak staff attorney.
regulations that political candidates hire law- while their lawsuit was pending—Florida voters
yers and accountants to deal with. These laws nonetheless resoundingly rejected Amendment
are so onerous that earlier this year the U.S. 4 on November 2. Despite having been

6
amendment • Free Speech • First amendment • Free Speech • First amendment • Free Speech • First amendment • Free Speech • First amendment • Free SPEECH

December 2010

Keep Out!
Campaign Finance Laws Camp Politics Video
as Barriers to Entry
Teaches with Humor
By Lisa Knepper
Public policy and legal issues may start out as boring
Entrepreneurs bring vitality to the and complicated topics, but no one ever said they must
marketplace, driving innovation and stay that way.
change. But all too often, established So, to better help the public understand the dangers
interests respond to such competition of government-imposed campaign finance restrictions, the
not by competing in turn, but by collud- Institute for Justice breathed some life and humor into this
ing with government to pass laws like often dry and complicated subject. Through a video called
occupational licensing rules that keep “Camp Politics,” which was written by IJ Senior Attorney
upstarts out of the market. Bert Gall, the Institute for Justice showed how politicians
In the political arena, campaign
finance laws have the same effect,
KEEP use campaign finance laws to silence their political oppo-
nents. As part of the Institute’s broader Citizen Speech
as University of Missouri economist OUT initiative, IJ is working to illustrate how these laws harm
and campaign finance expert Jeffrey How State Campaign Finance Laws Erect ordinary people who want nothing more than to speak to
Barriers to Entry for Political Entrepreneurs
Milyo shows in a new IJ strategic By Jeffrey Milyo, Ph.D.
September 2010
their friends and neighbors about politics.
research report, Keep Out: How Our tongue-in-cheek video (available at www.ij.org/
State Campaign Finance Laws Download the report: www.ij.org/KeepOut. CampPolitics) focuses on the dirty little secret behind
Erect Barriers to Entry for Political Florida ties them up in red tape if they campaign finance laws: Incumbent politicians like them
Entrepreneurs. (For a copy of the speak out on their own. because they make it harder for those outside the politi-
report, visit: www.ij.org/KeepOut.) Or consider SpeechNow.org. The cal establishment to speak out against their reelection.
“Whether it is the civil rights group wanted to defeat candidates Camp Politics offers a mock advertisement for a children’s
movement of the 1960s or today’s tea who favor campaign finance laws, but summer camp that trains aspiring politicos. At Camp
party movement, outsiders in American federal contribution limits made large Politics, kids learn how to kiss babies, survive scandals,
politics have always played a crucial donations to its efforts illegal. Milyo dine on pork, and—most importantly—circumvent the First
role in challenging the status quo by shows that such new groups in particu- Amendment in order to remain in office.
pushing new ideas to the fore and lar need large contributions—political Although we want the video’s viewers to laugh, our
inspiring newcomers to run for public venture capital—to get off the ground primary goal is to show them that there is nothing funny
office,” writes Milyo. and attract support. With help from about the damage these laws do to Americans’ First
Such political entrepreneurs bring the Institute for Justice and the Center Amendment rights.
vibrancy to American democracy and for Competitive Politics, SpeechNow.org So far, 20,000 viewers have enjoyed their trip through
keep the political establishment on its defeated the federal limits, but similar Camp Politics. If you have not visited yet, be sure to enjoy
toes. Yet campaign finance laws in all laws remain in nearly two dozen states. this video today and share it with your friends. And while
50 states erect barriers to entry that To political pros, these laws are you are at it, check out the Institute’s videos on other
effectively tell newcomers to keep out. barely nuisances. But to would-be cases, too.u
Milyo shows how contribution limits political entrepreneurs, they are barri-
and campaign finance red tape make it ers to the political arena. That is how
harder for political entrepreneurs to form campaign finance laws lead to fewer
new groups and reduce the resources new voices and cement the status quo.
available for political advocacy. Indeed, that is entirely the point.u
Consider IJ’s clients in our Citizen
Speech case in Florida (see previous Lisa Knepper is IJ’s
page). They wanted to make their voic- director of strategic
research.
es heard with their own message—not
donate to support some other more- www.ij.org/CampPolitics
established group’s message. But

7
&LAW

Thanks to a legislative amendment spurred by IJ litigation, the Bergmann family of Lake Elmo, Minn., may now
sell pumpkins from Wisconsin and Nebraska, and Christmas trees from North Carolina on their Minnesota farm.

An IJ Victory
Down on the Farm
By Anthony Sanders tion. Three months after filing our suit, a a patchwork of zoning regulations forbids
Farmers and consumers in Lake Elmo, federal magistrate judge issued an opinion farmers from freely selling their own prod-
Minn., and across the nation recently won recommending that our motion for a prelim- ucts to each other and their customers.
a victory for interstate trade and farming inary injunction be granted. He stated that Some jurisdictions allow farmers to sell only
freedom. Thanks to pressure brought to the city’s ordinance likely “unconstitutionally products they grow while others require that
bear by an IJ lawsuit filed in May of this discriminates against interstate commerce” no more than a certain percentage of their
year—as detailed in the August 2010 edi- because it “squelches competition . . . sales be grown elsewhere. As IJ demon-
tion of Liberty & Law—the Lake Elmo City altogether, leaving no room for investment strated in this case, many of these restric-
Council repealed its ban on farmers selling from outside.” Recognizing that the law tions have an adverse impact on interstate
produce grown outside the city. Now, farm- could have a devastating effect on inter- commerce and unconstitutionally favor local
ers may make those sales once they apply state trade, he stated that the result from interests over America’s nationwide market-
for a simple permit. enforcement of the law “will be the oblitera- place. The Institute for Justice will be on
The change is an important victory tion of the Lake Elmo markets in pumpkins the lookout for similar challenges that help
not only for our clients, the Bergmann and Christmas trees. . . . In fact, Plaintiffs us preserve our nation’s long history of free
family, who may now keep selling produce have shown that the markets will be wiped and open trade among the states.
grown outside the city as they have done out.” Because of this victory, the Bergmanns
for almost 40 years, but it also protects With a likely defeat staring them in and our other clients will not only help their
the right of our out-of-state clients from the face, city officials made sure that they customers celebrate the holidays, but they
Wisconsin, Nebraska and North Carolina, passed a new ordinance allowing sales of themselves can celebrate the important
who merely wanted to sell their pumpkins interstate produce, such as the pumpkins role they played in vindicating the kind of
and Christmas trees to the Bergmanns. IJ and Christmas trees our clients sell, without free and open marketplace that America’s
helped the city of Lake Elmo better appre- discriminating in favor of produce grown in- Founders envisioned.u
ciate that the right to interstate trade is state rather than out-of-state.
protected by the Constitution’s Commerce IJ’s victory in this case will help Anthony Sanders is an
IJ Minnesota Chapter
Clause. farmers in future legal fights tear down
staff attorney.
The case demonstrates how pressure government-imposed restrictions on what 8
from principled litigation can shape legisla- they may sell on their land. Nationwide,

8
December 2010

IJ attorneys Dick Komer, left, and Tim Keller, right, look on as IJ client Glenn Dennard
speaks after the U.S. Supreme Court argument in Garriott v. Winn to defend Arizona’s school
choice tax credit program.

School choice showdown at


U.S. Supreme Court
By Tim Keller Christina Walsh and the graphic design wizardry a small handful of Arizona taxpayers
On a bright, clear and cold November morn- of IJ’s Production and Design team members Don who oppose school choice even have
ing in the heart of our nation’s capitol, 800 smiling Wilson and Robyn Patterson—the children were “standing” to challenge the program.
Arizona children faced out from the U.S. Supreme there when we unfurled a 50-foot banner featuring The standing question asks whether
Court while the Justices inside questioned lawyers photographs representing many of the 27,000 chil- the plaintiffs have been harmed by the
about the constitutionality of a tax credit scholarship dren who depend on the scholarship program. The program. Through our litigation and
program those children rely on to attend private banner declared in simple and stark terms: “Faces briefing, IJ has consistently argued that
schools—schools chosen by their parents. And IJ of School Choice in Arizona: Real Children, Real these plaintiffs have not been harmed
was in the thick of the battle to save these children’s Consequences.” because they have not paid a single
educational futures. IJ represents parents and chil- Inside the courtroom, months of intense penny in taxes to support private or
dren in the case who use these scholarships and briefing and preparation played out in a dramatic religious schools. In fact, everybody
hope to preserve this educational lifeline. and intense oral argument. benefits from increasing parental liberty
The children outside the There are two to choose the school that best fits their
courtroom were not legal ques- child’s individual learning style. And
physically pres- tions at issue the government benefits financially from
ent, but—thanks in Garriott v. being relieved of the obligation to pay
to the creativity Winn. The for the education of those children who
of IJ’s Director first question participate in the scholarship program.
of Activism is whether AZ School Choice continued on page 10
and Coalitions

D.C. Parents for School Choice spokesperson Virginia Walden-Ford and other
parents were in attendance to support the Arizona families. They held up a ban-
ner featuring the faces of 800 children who benefit from the choice program.
9
&LAW

School choice back at the


U.S. Supreme Court
AZ School Choice continued from page 9
If the Court determines the plaintiffs were not harmed, it will not
reach the second question, which asks whether the program violates
the Establishment Clause’s prohibition against laws “respecting an
establishment of religion.” The Court has consistently upheld school
choice programs—like Arizona’s—that are based on private choice,
where private individuals rather than government bureaucrats choose
www.ij.org/2504 where the aid is used. And private choice is the defining characteristic
of Arizona’s scholarship program.
But the Court’s liberal bloc—Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan
Watch IJ’s video, “Karen Sampson & Free Speech.”
and Sotomayor—asked questions that seemed generally hostile to the
Parker North continued from page 3 program. The questions Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia
Each person could have been subject to fines and and Alito asked suggested they believed the program operates like
penalties in real life. Like those in Parker North, the Cleveland school voucher program the Court upheld in its 2002
participants found the red tape was “worse than the Zelman v. Simmons-Harris decision (a decision in which Justice
IRS!” and said it would make them less likely to get Kennedy joined). Justice Thomas, as is his custom, asked no ques-
involved in politics. Milyo’s research was featured on tions, and the Court’s presumptive swing vote, Justice Kennedy, asked
ABC’s 20/20. probing questions of both sides.
This is yet another important victory in the Now comes the hardest part of all—waiting for a decision, which is
Institute for Justice’s efforts to protect free speech expected to be announced sometime this spring. When it does come,
from government-imposed restrictions in the guise we expect the Court will, even if by a narrow margin, reaffirm that the
of so-called campaign finance “reforms.” In March, Constitution permits school choice programs that empower parents to
IJ, working together with the Center for Competitive choose the school best suited to meet their child’s educational needs.
Politics, won in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals
on behalf of SpeechNow.org, a group of individu-
als who are now free to pool their money without
limits to run independent political ads for or against
candidates based on their support for the First
Amendment. As of last month, at least 50 new
SpeechNow-styled groups were established to
participate in the 2010 election. Last year, IJ suc-
cessfully challenged Florida’s “electioneering com-
munications” law—the broadest regulation of political
speech in the nation. And on November 23, the
www.ij.org/WinnVideo
U.S. Supreme Court will have considered whether Watch IJ’s video, “Arizona School Choice Fight Goes to U.S.
to accept the Institute for Justice’s challenge to Supreme Court.”
Arizona’s so-called “Clean Elections” system.
With all of this progress, plus the launch of IJ’s That will help set the stage for next year when we expect to see
Citizen Speech endeavor, IJ continues to set the a groundswell of new legislative initiatives for school choice across the
pace and the direction in the fight for free speech.u nation. IJ will be on call to help craft and defend those programs, too,
even if it means another long journey to the Supreme
Steve Simpson is an IJ senior attorney. Court.u

Tim Keller is the IJ Arizona Chapter


executive director.

10
10
December 2010

Quotable Quotes Freedom Needs IJ.


IJ Needs You.
Fox Business Donate Today!
Stossel

IJ Senior Attorney Dana Berliner: “City


and state governments, and the federal
Never in recent memory has
government, really see it as their role to
prevent people from going into and starting the need for constitutional
small businesses, really from doing anything
creative.” constraints on government
power been more painfully
obvious.
WTTG-TV (Fox)
Washington, D.C.

IJ Staff Attorney Robert McNamara: That’s where the Institute for


“In this country, we rely on people to decide
who they want to listen to. We don’t rely on
the government to decide who’s going to be
Justice comes in.
allowed to speak. The First Amendment pro-
tects your right to communicate for a living.
And that’s true whether you’re a journalist, a
stand-up comedian or a tour guide. ” We produce immediate,
real-world results for our
WTXL-TV (ABC)
Tallahassee, Florida clients and others like them,
IJ Staff Attorney Paul Sherman: “The while restoring constitutional
First Amendment protects the right of individ-
uals to speak and think for themselves. And limits on the power of
our clients’ political message has nothing to
do with their identity. ”
government.

Please give generously today.


Entrepreneur Magazine www.ij.org/donate
“This week, the nonprofit Institute for Justice in Virginia released a series of studies
of business conditions in eight major cities, including Chicago, L.A. and Washington, (703) 682-9320 ext 233
D.C. . . . In essence, the growing complexity of local and state laws about how and
whether you can operate a particular type of business in a particular place are chok-
901 N. Glebe Road, Suite 900
ing the life out of small business.”
Arlington, VA 22203

11
“Read the Institute Institute for Justice Non-Profit ORG.
901 N. Glebe Road U.S. POSTAGE
P A I D
for Justice study and Suite 900
Arlington, VA 22203 I nstitute F o r
J U S T I C E
you’ll better under-
stand why the busi-
ness of America is
no longer business.
It’s bureaucracy.”
—The Wall Street Journal

My home means everything to my family and me.


But my city wanted to take my property away
so a politically connected developer could build condos.

I fought to protect my property rights . . . and yours.

And I won.

I am IJ.

Lori Ann Vendetti


Long Branch, New Jersey www.IJ.org Institute for Justice
Private property rights

Вам также может понравиться