Ashley Baker joins Dr. Vance Ginn on Let People Prosper to discuss Trump v. Slaughter, FTC power, antitrust enforcement and the cost of regulation.

In Truth on the Market, we argued that a brain-injury blood test's 20-year road to patients shows why Congress must fix patent eligibility law.

Video: Joshua Wright and Ilya Shapiro on Trump v. Slaughter, the end of Humphrey's Executor, and what it means for the FTC and agency independence.

In a statement on Chatrie v. United States, we argued that the Fourth Amendment doesn't vanish because records sit on a company's servers.

In a statement on Trump v. Slaughter, we welcomed the end of Humphrey's Executor and its fiction that the FTC wields no executive power.

In an amicus brief with the Manhattan Institute and Buckeye Institute, we urged the Supreme Court to hear Newman v. Moore.

In IPWatchdog, we argued that by taking Hikma v. Amarin, the Supreme Court chose a narrow drug-pricing fight over the patent questions that matter.

In Truth on the Market, we argued that Hikma v. Amarin reflects a fatal conceit: that courts and regulators can engineer cheaper drugs.

Amicus brief of the Committee for Justice filed in Epic v. Google antitrust appeal argues that the lower court injunction violates longstanding antitrust precedent, will result in irreparable harm and is against the public interest.