In response to President Trump’s executive order titled “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation,” HHS (in consultation with the Attorney General) published new guidance for “whistleblowers on the...

On April 11, 2025, the Trump Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a “clarification” document “out of an abundance of caution” to “clarify and emphasize”...

DOGE has enjoyed enormous success right out of the gate. It has already achieved significant savings by cancelling unnecessary contracts, shelving government programs that provide...

Almost four years ago now, Arizona and Utah joined D.C. in authorizing nonlawyers to own law firms.

As soon as he took office, President Trump issued several Executive Orders aimed at bringing the administrative state in line…

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court hears Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, a case that could help decide the fate of vital energy infrastructure projects.

On January 17, the Biden-Harris Administration added 15 new drugs, including Ozempic, to the list of drugs covered by the Medicare…

On April 23, President Trump signed E.O. 14281, Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy, declaring that “disparate-impact liability is wholly inconsistent with the Constitution…

In a recent RTP webinar, experts examined how artificial intelligence (AI) is fundamentally upending existing data protection laws and reshaping…

President Trump’s budget bill, having recently passed the House of Representatives, is headed for the Senate with a proposed 10-year…

In a little over 100 days, the Department of Government Efficiency, or “DOGE,” has fundamentally remade the federal bureaucracy by…

Shortly after taking office, President Trump reportedly removed two Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) commissioners and the general counsel. While…

Short-term rentals—popularized by Airbnb and Vrbo—have been given modern platforms for the customary alternative to hotels: in-home stays. Yet their…

In this paper, authors argue that—as a matter of law and policy—individual and familial rights are being violated when information about a child’s identification with some particular gender is withheld from parents.

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.