Confronting government regulations

Fighting the good fight

[Reprinted from Issues & Views July 30, 2001]

In the late 1980s, and again in 1997 and 1998, Issues & Views reported on the work of the Institute for Justice, a public interest law firm. Described as "libertarian," IJ was founded to defend the constitutional rights of citizens who find themselves up against government roadblocks.

In our earlier articles about IJ, we focused on cases that dealt with biased Davis-Bacon laws, which impact disproportionately on the poor, and on issues related to school choice. Yet the Institute is about much more than just these types of cases.

In 1999, IJ won an important First Amendment case. Earlier, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) proposed a broad set of rules, which it tried to implement, that would have prevented average citizens from discussing and sharing information over the Internet about commodity and futures trading. The CFTC actually proposed that anyone publishing anything online on this subject should have to submit to government registration that, among other things, would entail the payment of fees and fingerprinting.

Such registration would be enforced even if the material in question was already in the public domain, and would apply to Internet users who simply compiled information for later use. Although some might have viewed this as a narrow issue affecting only a limited number of people, the Institute for Justice saw this proposal as the beginning of an ominous trend. Would the Food and Drug Administration be next to exert control over information about new medical treatments? Might not the Federal Trade Commission demand licensing and registration of all who offer products or services online?

In 1997, the Institute sued CFTC, claiming that its proposed regulations would violate the First Amendment's prohibition on government licensing of the press. In 1999, a federal judge agreed and struck down the CFTC's rules, claiming that a registration requirement "constitutes an attempt to regulate speech, not a profession." IJ won again.

Defeating unconstitutional Davis-Bacon laws is still a priority for the Institute. Every year, onerous government regulations (that were put on the books decades ago) overwhelm small-scale, budding entrepreneurs, often preventing the start-up of small businesses. Low-income men and women, who strive to initiate taxi companies, jitney services or hair-braiding salons find themselves confronted by laws designed to curb business competition. The Institute has won several cases in favor of these small business people, giving them a chance to create their own opportunities.

School choice continues to be a top agenda item, as IJ defends parents and families seeking alternatives to public schools. In Milwaukee, after years of litigation, the Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld the Milwaukee Parental School Choice Program and lifted an injunction against the program's expansion. At this date, more than 8000 children are enrolled in the program.

Visit the Institute for Justice website and get more information about this outstanding organization that works for the freedoms embodied in the Constitution and for true "civil rights."

Copyright © 2010 Issues & Views