In a recent post, I discussed our amicus brief in Vong v. Aune, a case of occupational licensure run amok. We partnered with the Cato Institute to support an entrepreneur's plea to be heard at the United States Supreme Court. You can now read the Cato Institute's take at their blog, Cato @ Liberty:
Ms. Vong has now filed a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear her case and vindicate her right to earn an honest living. Cato and North Carolina’s Civitas Institute have filed a brief supporting her petition. We argue first that the Court should take the case to clarify that lower courts need not be willfully blind to the actual motives of state economic regulations. Second, this case offers the Court an opportunity to resolve a pressing circuit split regarding the use of total bans on certain kinds of economic activity. Finally, occupational licensure may deserve heightened scrutiny under the infamous Footnote Four of the New Deal case of Carolene Products (1938), which aims to protect against laws that rig the political process. Occupational licensing regulations rig the system by monopolizing state-licensed businesses, leaving no realistic political redress for individual entrepreneurs who go against the grain.
Read the entire post here.