• Consumer Freedom
  • Education
  • ESG
  • Pension Reform
  • Transportation
  • Reason facebook
  • Reason twitter
  • Reason youtube
Reason Foundation
  • About
    • About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Email Newsletters
    • Events
    • FAQs
    • Jobs & Internships
    • Staff
    • Trustees & Officers
    • Shop
    • Savas Award
  • Experts

      Browse Our Experts

      • Aaron Smith
        Director of Education Reform
      • Adrian Moore
        Vice President of Policy
      • Baruch Feigenbaum
        Senior Managing Director, Transportation Policy
      • Geoff Lawrence
        Managing Director, Drug Policy
      • Guy Bentley
        Director of Consumer Freedom
      • Leonard Gilroy
        Vice President, Government Reform
      • Robert Poole
        Director of Transportation Policy
      • View All Experts
  • Topics

      Browse Our Topics

      • Air Traffic Control
      • Annual Highway Report
      • Consumer Freedom
      • Drug Policy
      • Education
      • ESG
      • Government Reform
      • Pension Reform
      • Privatization
      • Technology
      • Transportation
      • View All Topics
  • Publications
    • Amicus Briefs
    • Annual Highway Report
    • Annual Privatization Report
    • Aviation Policy Newsletter
    • Backgrounders
    • Commentaries
    • Data Visualization
    • Email Newsletters
    • Funding Education Newsletter
    • Pension Reform Newsletter
    • Policy Studies
    • Surface Transportation Newsletter
    • Testimony
  • Reason.com
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving

Amicus Briefs

  • Amicus Brief: Roberts v. McDonald
    Amicus Brief: Roberts v. McDonald

    The Supreme Court should take the case because "race-based distribution of antiviral treatments is plainly unconstitutional."

    March 13, 2023

  • Amicus Brief: Memmer v. United States
    Amicus Brief: Memmer v. United States

    The government’s argument would put landowners in a Trails Act-limbo where the government has denied them use and possession of their land but the owners are not entitled to compensation unless and until the railroad and trail-sponsor reach a trail-use agreement.

    March 8, 2023

  • Amicus Brief: Gonzalez v. Google
    Amicus Brief: Gonzalez v. Google

    For nearly three decades, Section 230 has served as the backbone of the Internet, precisely as Congress correctly anticipated and intended.

    January 19, 2023

  • Amicus Brief: Association Des Éleveurs De Canards Et D’oies Du Québec v. Rob Bonta
    Amicus Brief: Association Des Éleveurs De Canards Et D’oies Du Québec v. Rob Bonta

    Section 25982 of the California Health and Safety Code prohibits the sale in California of a wholesome food ingredient in violation of the dormant Commerce Clause and poses a grave challenge to the future of food and agriculture in the U.S.

    December 20, 2022

  • Amicus Brief: Ariyan Incorporated v. Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans
    Amicus Brief: Ariyan Incorporated v. Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans

    The Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans took private property from seventy owners.

    September 14, 2022

  • Students for Fair Admissions v. Presidents & Fellows of Harvard
    Students for Fair Admissions v. Presidents & Fellows of Harvard

    May 6, 2022

  • Amicus Brief: SEC v. Romeril
    Amicus Brief: SEC v. Romeril

    The condition that the Securities & Exchange Commission imposed on Barry Romeril’s settlement of its claims infringes on the First Amendment rights of all who wish to hear Romeril’s story.

    March 28, 2022

  • Amicus Brief: McDonald v. Firth
    Amicus Brief: McDonald v. Firth

    Subjecting mandatory bar associations to “the same constitutional rule” as public sector unions now means subjecting them to exacting scrutiny that reveals unjustifiable violations of attorneys’ First Amendment rights by the bar associations.

    January 14, 2022

  • Amicus Brief: Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina
    Amicus Brief: Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina

    The Equal Protection Clause prohibits the government from denying “any person . . . the equal protection of the laws.”

    December 17, 2021

  • Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • ...
  • 13
  • Next

Follow

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • RSS

Email Updates

Get weekly updates from Reason.

More About Reason Foundation

  • About
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Email Newsletters
  • Events
  • Jobs and Internships
  • Medical Disclosure Information
  • Policy Research
  • Reason magazine
  • Shop

Contact

Reason Foundation
5737 Mesmer Ave.
Los Angeles, CA 90230
(310) 391-2245

1747 Connecticut Ave NW
Washington, DC 20009
(202) 986-0916

Privacy Policy
Accessibility

 
 
Copyright © 2023 Reason