Case Updates

Putting Words in Their Mouths

On June 26, CIR filed a reply brief in support of its motion for a preliminary injunction to stop the enforcement of Section 3550, a California law that prohibits public employers from criticizing public employee unions.  CIR is challenging Section 3550 as unconstitutional, but while litigation is in progress, public

Loosening the grip of the administrative state

In Seila Law LLC v. CFPB, the Supreme Court voted 5-4 to take an important first step in restraining the nearly unchecked power of independent agencies by ruling that the structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is unconstitutional.  The CFPB is an independent agency in charge of regulating consumer

Terms of Ensnarement

In Barke v. Banks, CIR is challenging California law Section 3550, which directly prohibits public employers from criticizing government unions.  But legislatures around the country are silencing union criticism in other ways—namely by mandating labor peace agreements.  An LPA is a contract that an employer signs with a union before

I’ve got news for you…

CIR is starting off the decade with two major new cases!  In California, CIR is fighting a gag-law that prohibits public employers from criticizing unions.  At the federal level, CIR is challenging a race-based set-aside law for government contracts.

You can read all about CIR’s latest work in the newest issue

You want me to intervene?

On May 7, the US District Court for the Central District of California granted five unions’ motion to intervene as defendants in Barke v. Banks.  Earlier this year, CIR sued members of California’s Public Employment Relations Board to declare unconstitutional and stop the enforcement of Section 3550, which prohibits public

Dave Davis Wins the Day

The Supreme Court has denied Guam’s petition for certiorari, in Davis v. Guam, bringing a successful close to CIR’s nine-year fight to overturn the territory’s racially restrictive plebiscite law.  With this order, CIR’s recent Ninth Circuit victory will stand in its entirety, and Guam will not be allowed to conduct

Guam Files Reply to CIR’s Opposition Brief

On April 13, Guam replied to CIR’s brief opposing Guam’s Supreme Court appeal.  CIR and Dave Davis’ lead counsel at Gibson Dunn argued that the Ninth Circuit correctly found Guam’s plebiscite law was a race-based voting restriction in violation of the Fifteenth Amendment.

In response, Guam has argued that its planned

Defendants File Motion to Dismiss in Gag Law Case

The defendants in Barke v. Banks — members of the Public Employment Relations Board — have filed a motion to dismiss CIR’s complaint, challenging California’s union gag law.  The defendants argue that the plaintiffs — seven city council and school board members — lack standing to challenge Section 3550, which

CIR Files Suit Challenging Racial Set-Aside Law

The Center for Individual Rights has filed suit challenging a racial set-aside program for federal government contracts.  Section 8(a) allows the Small Business Administration to set aside contracts for companies owned by “socially and economically disadvantaged” individuals.  The SBA presumes that companies owned by members of certain racial and ethnic

CIR files challenge to California Gag Rule

The Center for Individual Rights and the California Policy Center have filed suit challenging a California law that prohibits public officials from making statements that might “deter or discourage” public employees or applicants from membership in a public employee union.

Section 3550 unconstitutionally censors viewpoints that are critical of