States have passed 80 AI-related measures and 762 AI measures are pending in 45 states, according to one legislative tracking system.

The Supreme Court’s momentous decision in SEC v. Jarkesy provides us with a rare glimpse into the murky realm of…

The rapid emergence of high-profile applications for Artificial Intelligence—including advanced search engines, recommendation systems, and generative tools—has given rise to a wide-ranging discussion and often...

On March 4, 2024, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) finalized “without changes” an interim final rule (IFR) entitled “Reproductive Health Services.” (You can read my summary of the...

Abortion is before the Supreme Court once again. This month, the Court granted certiorari in consolidated cases Moyle v. United States and Idaho v. United...

On December 5, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion by Justice Amy Coney Barrett in Acheson Hotels LLC v. Laufer dismissing the case as moot. Acheson...

A panel of distinguished legal scholars and practitioners will provide an overview of the current landscape of litigation surrounding climate…

Please join the Oklahoma City Lawyers Chapter for a luncheon and discussion on Regulatory Reform.  Featuring: Reeve Bull, Director, Office…

Kathryn Ciano Mauler and Eric Wang join the podcast to discuss the FEC rules behind campaign funds, particularly in the…

Legal experts Jonathan Butcher and Jon Riches discuss the debate between parental rights and children’s privacy in education under the…

In Explainer Episode 71, Alex J. Adams, Director of Idaho’s Department of Health and Welfare is joined by Reeve T….

Federal regulators were busy in April 2024, with agencies publishing a record-breaking 66 significant new regulations; more than half of…

On July 2, 2024, the US Supreme Court granted certiorari in the case, Food and Drug Administration v. Wages and…

On June 26, 2024, the Supreme Court issued their opinion in Murthy v. Missouri. Originally filed as Missouri v. Biden,…

The authors of this paper provide insights on the Biden Administration’s proposed revisions to the Office of Management and Budget’s Circular A-4 and highlight opportunities for reforming the regulatory process based on the success of Idaho and Virginia’s models for regulatory modernization.

As education freedom expands, teacher freedom will expand as well. Reforms to the teacher workforce – namely, hiring practices largely dictated by state certification laws – will need to accompany the growth of school choice, so that private providers will have a large hiring pool of qualified teachers who align with their schools’ missions and values. A failure to reform existing certification practices that have served neither schools nor students well will risk replicating the existing public school model over time.

The American legal profession, as well as those it serves, would benefit from lowering the barriers to entry to the practice of law. Several licensing barriers unnecessarily contribute to the high cost of legal services, which inhibit access to justice for ordinary Americans. In some respects, legal licensure is categorically distinct from the licensure of other highly regulated professions. This suggests that a particular focus on legal licensure may be appropriate. We therefore explore the implications of modest reforms that would advance the public interest, with an eye to the encouragement of competitive markets in legal services, and the protection and preservation of the fiduciary nature of legal services.

The authors of this paper assert that the proposed compulsory licensing by states threatens the well-founded principle of a uniform federal copyright law established by the U.S. Constitution and its designation of Congress as the body responsible for securing to authors their exclusive rights. 

The authors of this paper examine the growth of “algorithmic fairness” regulations at the federal, state, and international level, and discuss ramifications for administrative state regulation and innovation in markets. 

The authors of this paper examine how healthcare laws and regulations were adjusted to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic, and argue that some of these changes should be made permanent.