Forwarded this email? Subscribe here.

The Docket from Pacific Legal Foundation

A Denver homebuilder challenges the City’s unconstitutional permit scheme; a family-owned mining company defends its right to a jury trial; and Carol Roth joins PLF’s Anastasia Boden to discuss individualism, protectionism, and more.

FIGHTING DENVER’S INCLUSIONARY ZONING EXTORTION TO BUILD NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING

Nathan Adams founded redT Homes with a commitment to developing sustainable, attainable housing. He and his award-winning team are exactly the kind of builders that you’d expect Denver to welcome with open arms—considering that the City faces a critical housing shortage.

Instead, he is being hit with $70,000 in unconstitutional permitting fees for two small-scale development projects—one that includes four single-family homes and another that consists of two duplexes. Now, Nathan’s firm, redT Homes, is fighting back with a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Denver’s permitting scheme with PLF’s representation.

FEDERAL MINING TRIBUNAL UNDERMINES FAIRNESS AND RULE OF LAW

The right to a jury trial has been a cornerstone of our legal tradition for more than 800 years. But in recent decades, thanks to federal agencies’ use of in-house tribunals, many Americans are seeing their right to a jury trial stripped away.

Now, PLF’s newest client Russell Tidaback, owner of Missouri-based mining company American Tripoli—is taking a stand and demanding that his rights be restored.

IS IT LEGAL TO KEEP CHICKENS IN YOUR BACKYARD? IT DEPENDS

In the United States, about 11 million households currently keep chickens in their backyards, but for many Americans—like PLF client Kathy Sarkisian—navigating the local regulatory framework can be a nightmare. As PLF editorial writer Brittany Hunter points out, too often “the rules are scrambled, [and] the process is fried.”

CAROL ROTH WISHES AMERICANS WOULD BE MORE INDIVIDUALIST

Carol Roth—the entrepreneur and best-selling author of You Will Own Nothing and The War on Small Business—recently dropped by for a wide-ranging discussion with PLF senior attorney Anastasia Boden. You can catch a few of the highlights or find the full 45-minute conversation below.

SUPREME COURT ENDS THE ABUSE OF NEPA—AND ENCOURAGES THE ABUNDANCE AGENDA

Fifty-five years ago, Congress passed and President Richard Nixon signed the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) into law—requiring federal agencies to prepare an environmental impact statement, or EIS, for certain infrastructure projects.

In the decades since, partisan advocacy groups, NGOs, and activists have turned NEPA into a tool used to delay and, in many cases, altogether prevent development and innovation in the United States. As PLF’s Sam Rutzick explains, last week’s Supreme Court ruling in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County restores common sense to the process—affirming that agencies are only required to assess the environmental effects of the projects they actually regulate, not hypothetical downstream impacts beyond their authority.

AMERICAN BANKER: FEDERAL SNOOPING ENABLED BY THE BANK SECRECY ACT HAS GONE TOO FAR

Under the Bank Secrecy Act, federal authorities can turn any bank account into a window on private spending. The law authorizes the Treasury Department to require banks—and any other business it labels a “financial institution”—to report transactions to the government, in a sweeping breach of Americans’ right to privacy.

Fortunately, as PLF’s Ethan Blevins explains in American Banker, a new lawsuit by a small, family-owned title company seeks to end this unconstitutional surveillance and restore Americans’ financial privacy.

Support Our Mission

Pacific Legal Foundation

555 Capitol Mall, Suite 1290
Sacramento, CA 95814

Manage your communication preferences here.