You shouldn’t need a law degree to start a barber shop, but entrepreneurs across the country face steep fees, delays, and confusing requirements before they ever even open. That’s why, in addition to suing cities when they violate people’s rights, IJ works with cities to make it cheaper, faster, and simpler to start a small business. 

Today we’re joined by Assistant Director of IJ’s Activism Team Jennifer McDonald, and Senior Policy Advisor Chad Reese to discuss how IJ makes Cities Work.

Are you looking for a rewarding and consistent way to support IJ’s work?  Become a member of our Merry Band of Monthly Donors and stand shoulder to shoulder with our clients every month of the year.

The Constitution requires a warrant before police can search you or your property. But what if that warrant is based on third-hand information? That’s what happened to IJ client Michael Mendenhall, and it happens across America every day. 

We recently spoke with IJ attorneys Patrick Jaicomo and Jared McClain to discuss how warrants are often just rubber stamps, and what IJ is doing to fix that. 

Are you looking for a rewarding and consistent way to support IJ’s work?  Become a member of our Merry Band of Monthly Donors and stand shoulder to shoulder with our clients every month of the year.

A new financial surveillance dragnet is sweeping up ordinary cash transactions at small businesses near the US-Mexico border. The federal government has placed onerous new requirements on businesses that help people without bank accounts cash checks or send money to family members. It’s demanding reports on all transactions involving at least $200 in cash, subjecting innocent people to warrantless surveillance and burying small businesses in paperwork. 

Today we chat with IJ attorneys Rob Johnson and Betsy Sanz to talk about how IJ is fighting back against financial surveillance and the government’s war on cash. 

Are you looking for a rewarding and consistent way to support IJ’s work?  Become a member of our Merry Band of Monthly Donors and stand shoulder to shoulder with our clients every month of the year.

You might think constitutional lawsuits work like this: Find an unconstitutional law, challenge it in court, and if the law is truly unconstitutional, the court will strike it down. But in reality, a web of legal doctrines and ingrained attitudes mean judges have enormous leeway to avoid ruling against the government. 

On this episode, we talk with IJ attorneys Josh Windham and John Wrench on judicial deference and why courts protect some rights better than others. 

Are you looking for a rewarding and consistent way to support IJ’s work?  Become a member of our Merry Band of Monthly Donors and stand shoulder to shoulder with our clients every month of the year.

In 2017, FBI agents, with guns drawn and a flashbang grenade, burst into the Atlanta home of Trina Martin, her then seven-year-old son Gabe, and her then partner Toi. Turns out, they had the wrong address. In April, Trina’s yearslong fight for accountability is heading to the U.S. Supreme Court. 

Today we chat with IJ client Trina Martin and IJ attorney Patrick Jaicomo about wrong house raids, what it’s like have the Supreme Court hear your case, and what victory will mean for Trina and all Americans. 

Are you looking for a rewarding and consistent way to support IJ’s work?  Become a member of our Merry Band of Monthly Donors and stand shoulder to shoulder with our clients every month of the year.

First enacted to ensure southern states respected the rights of newly freed slaves, the 14th Amendment is indispensable to modern civil rights litigation. But what does the amendment say and how does IJ use it to challenge everything from harassment by police to undue burdens on hair braiders? 

Today we’ll discuss all that and more with IJ attorneys Bob McNamara and John Wrench.

Are you looking for a rewarding and consistent way to support IJ’s work?  Become a member of our Merry Band of Monthly Donors and stand shoulder to shoulder with our clients every month of the year.

$29,000 for overgrown grass. $16,000 for cracks in the driveway. $100,000 for parking incorrectly on your own property. These are some of the outrageous fines IJ’s clients have faced, often for harmless violations. The prohibition on excessive fines is one of our oldest rights, but governments, from small towns to federal agencies like the IRS, still issue ruinous fines and courts still rubberstamp these fines. 

IJ attorneys Sam Gedge and Michael Greenberg join us for the discussion. 

Most people accept that the government can fine you a small amount for parking illegally. But can the government cripple you financially for how you park your car on your very own driveway? In Lantana, Florida, that is exactly what happened to local homeowner Sandy Martinez. The city fined her more than $100,000—at a rate of $250 per day—for violating an ordinance regulating how one can park their car on their own driveway.

Are you looking for a rewarding and consistent way to support IJ’s work?  Become a member of our Merry Band of Monthly Donors and stand shoulder to shoulder with our clients every month of the year.

For centuries, people have helped their neighbors by providing food, shelter, and more to people in need. But all too often, the creativity and generosity of ordinary people conflicts with government regulations. That’s why IJ defends those providing private solutions to public problems. I’m Kim Norberg of the nonprofit civil liberties law firm the Institute for Justice, with IJ senior attorney Jeff Rowes.  

Are you looking for a rewarding and consistent way to support IJ’s work?  Become a member of our Merry Band of Monthly Donors and stand shoulder to shoulder with our clients every month of the year.

In Pasco County, Florida, the Sheriff’s Office thought it had a great idea: make lists of who might commit crimes in the future and hound them and their families until they end up in jail or move away. Under Pasco’s so-called intelligence-led policing program, hundreds of people, many of them minors, were deemed “prolific offenders” based on a crude algorithm and subjected to relentless night-time visits, citations for minor code infractions, and other harassment. So, IJ sued, and in December we secured an agreement that will end the program for good and get justice for some of its victims. 

Today we are joined by IJ attorneys Ari Bargil and Will Aronin. 

In 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court issued one of its most reviled decisions in modern history, in Kelo v. City of New London. By a vote of 5-4, the Court said governments could use eminent domain to take private property and give it to private developers who might pay more in taxes. As Justice Sandra Day O’Connor said in her dissent, “The specter of condemnation hangs over all property. Nothing is to prevent the State from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory.” Now, IJ has submitted a petition asking the Supreme Court to overturn that infamous decision. Today we talk with IJ Deputy Litigation Director Robert McNamara, and IJ President Scott Bullock, who argued Kelo at the Supreme Court.

Are you looking for a rewarding and consistent way to support IJ’s work?  Become a member of our Merry Band of Monthly Donors and stand shoulder to shoulder with our clients every month of the year.