|William J. Olson, P.C., Attorneys At Law
SCOTUScare (June 25, 2015)
Today, we were asked to participate in an on-line symposium sponsored by Casetext on today's King v. Burwell decision.
"Journalist Shield Laws:
A Constitutional Conundrum" by Bill Olson, Herb Titus, and Robert Olson (June 1, 2015)
Today, the American Thinker published our article entitled "Journalist Shield Laws: A Constitutional Conundrum." The article was prepared at
the request of the United States Justice Foundation in connection with a Symposium it is
co-sponsoring on the First Amendment which is taking place later today at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. At the Symposium, more
than a dozen journalists will assemble, each of whom at one point in his career has chosen to spend time in jail rather than divulge the
identify of a source.
To address the problem of government efforts to force the disclosure of sources, members of Congress over the years have introduced several
variations of a federal "shield law" designed to protect persons considered to be "journalists." However, there is a thorny Constitutional
problem as to who qualifies as a "journalist." In the case Branzburg v. Hayes, the Supreme Court refused to recognize a "reporters' privilege,"
for several reasons, including its concern that it could not grant special First Amendment press protections to a limited class of persons that
was denied to everyone else.
Indeed, every Supreme Court case that had addressed the scope of the First Amendment's protection of "the press" makes clear that it applies to
everyone - not just members of the institutional media.
Our article stressed the flaw in a federal shield law which protects only the institutional media and then leaves it up to federal judges to
decide on a case-by-case basis when free press principles will be applied and when they will be ignored.
Brief Filed Opposing
Deliberate IRS Misreading of Obamacare Statute (March 5, 2015)
In this article, we reviewed our arguments in the Supreme Court in King v. Burwell.
Jackson v. San
Francisco: Lawyers File Brief Standing Up for Gun Owners in San Francisco (July 22, 2014)
Bill Olson's article for Western Journalism Center explained the status of the Jackson v. San Francisco case and the brief our firm filed in
support of rehearing by the Ninth Circuit.
American Thinker publishes article ---
The Wurie Case: Restoring the Property Basis of the Fourth Amendment (April 28, 2014)
This morning, the American Thinker published an article by Robert Olson, Herb Titus, and Bill Olson about the property rights basis of the Fourth
Amendment and how it bears on the U.S. Supreme Court's consideration of warrantless searches of cell phones. We previously filed an
in the case addressing this issue -- United States v. Wurie.
Our American Thinker Article Rebutting U.S. Department of Justice White Paper Supporting Presidential Authority to Kill American Citizens Off the Battlefield (February 7, 2013)
This morning, the American Thinker published an article by Herb Titus and Bill Olson refuting the President's
claims of authority to kill American citizens off the battlefield.
Our article is a legal rebuttal of the U.S. Department of Justice's White Paper purporting to defend President Obama's position.
U.S. v. Jones: Reviving the Property Foundation of the Fourth
Amendment (January 14, 2013)
Case Western Reserve University School of Law Journal of Law, Technology & the Internet
Herb Titus and Bill Olson co-authored a law review article which explains the importance of the victory won in the Supreme Court case,
U.S. v. Antoine Jones. This law review article is based on an amicus brief our firm filed in that case, urging the court to return to its
traditional property basis of the search and seizure language of the
Fourth Amendment, and the Court's decision in that case.
We urged the Court to reject modern case law involving a right of privacy, which has proven a flimsy barrier to government
snooping. This article was published in Volume 3, No. 2 of the Case Western Reserve University School of Law's Journal of Law, Technology
and the Internet. http://law.case.edu/journals/JOLTI/
Bill Olson & Herb Titus Article Explains Fourth Amendment Significance of Clapper v. Amnesty International (October 29, 2012)
Today both the U.S. Justice Foundation and the Western Center for Journalism published an article by Bill Olson & Herb Titus on the implications of Clapper v. Amnesty International which was argued this morning in the U.S. Supreme Court. On September 24, 2012, our firm filed an amicus brief in the case, which involves the FISA Amendments Act of 2008.
Our firm has been focused for some time on the critical need to return to the historic meaning of the Fourth Amendment as a means to re-establish the authority of the people over their government. This article explains how the Clapper case could build on the property principles argued in another amicus brief we filed, which were articulated on January 23, 2012 by the Supreme Court in its decision in U.S. v. Antoine Jones.
The article appeared under two different titles:
"Supreme Court To Decide If President Can Watch Americans’ Every Move"
"SCOTUS to Decide if POTUS Can Cow Americans, Crush Their Spirit, and Put Terror in Every Heart"
"Arizona v. United States: Reading the Tea Leaves of Oral Argument" by Herb Titus and Bill Olson (April 29, 2012)
Herb Titus and Bill Olson wrote the article "Arizona v. United States: Reading the Tea Leaves of Oral Argument" published on AmericanThinker.com today. An excerpt from the article follows:
"Justices Scalia and Kennedy's questions seemed to track our brief's line of reasoning, asking whether Arizona had the power to exclude aliens who are not legally in the country. If so, then Arizona's policy of enforcement by attrition is perfectly permissible, General Verrilli's claims to the contrary notwithstanding. If Arizona has retained its inherent sovereign authority to defend its internal borders, except as specifically limited by the Constitution, then not one of the four contested provisions of the state's immigration law is preempted by federal law."
SCOTUSblog Online same-sex marriage symposium: Working to block the ongoing atextual judicial assault on Biblical Marriage by Bill Olson & Herb Titus (September 19, 2012)
"United States v. Jones Is Rebuilding The Property Foundation Of The Fourth Amendment" by Bill Olson and Herb Titus (January 23, 2012)
Bill Olson and Herb Titus wrote the article "United States v. Jones Is Rebuilding The Property Foundation Of The Fourth Amendment" published by the Western Center for Journalism today. The article discusses today's Supreme Court decision in the case of United States v. Antoine Jones, which re-examined the foundations of the Fourth Amendment, and did much to reverse several decades of erosion of the people's protection against unlawful searches and seizures. Our firm filed two Supreme Court amicus briefs in this case, an amicus brief on the petition for writ of certiorari and an amicus brief on the merits.
"The Proposed Enemy Expatriation Act: Sending American Citizens into Exile" by Herb Titus and Bill Olson (January 20, 2012)
Herb Titus and Bill Olson wrote the article "The Proposed Enemy Expatriation Act: Sending American Citizens into Exile" published on AmericanThinker.com today. An excerpt from the article follows:
"Introduced as S. 1698 in the Senate and as H.R. 3166 in the House of Representatives, the Enemy Expatriation Act is expressly designed to 'add engaging or supporting hostilities against the United States to the list of acts for which United States nationals would lose their nationality.' These bills are inconsistent with current law and Supreme Court precedent. They appear to be tailored to cow the American people, without regard for the 14th-Amendment guarantee prohibiting Congress from divesting an American citizen of his citizenship."
Herb Titus Law Review Article, "The Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal: Breaching the Constitutional Ramparts" (December 27, 2011)
In a hard hitting essay first published in the Fall 2011 issue of the William & Mary Journal of Women in the Law, Herb Titus critically tracks the process by which the 111th Congress repealed "Don’t Ask Don’t Tell." Titus maintains that from start to finish, the Democratic leadership chose to bring about repeal, utilizing an unconstitutional strategy that breached House rules, divested Congress of its legislative powers, and upended the legislative process by entrusting unelected bureaucrats with the power to prescribe the rules of governing sexual behavior in the nation’s land and naval forces. Titus concludes that, by disregarding the constitutional principles of separation of powers, checks and balances, and federalism, an irresponsible legislature has set a precedent that will threaten powers reserved to the States over their own militia, and increase the unconstitutional law-making powers already usurped by the courts.
The article's first publisher, The William & Mary Journal of Women and the Law, was established in 1993 "to provide a forum for scholarly debate on gender-related legal issues."
"The Budget Control Act Of 2011 Violates Constitutional Order" by Herb Titus and Bill Olson (August 4, 2011)
Herb Titus and Bill Olson wrote the article "The Budget Control Act Of 2011 Violates Constitutional Order" published on AmericanThinker.com today.
"Feigning Powerlessness to Retain Power" by Bill Olson (July 22, 2011)
Bill Olson wrote the article "Feigning Powerlessness to Retain Power" published on AmericanThinker.com today discussing House Republicans and the "Cut, Cap, and Balance" proposal.
Articles on Iowa Supreme Court's Opinion Purporting to Redefine Marriage to Include Same-Sex Couples (May 3, 2009)
Herb Titus recently wrote two "op ed" articles arguing that the Iowa Governor has a constitutional duty not to enforce the Iowa Supreme Court's opinion that the state constitution requires that the state's law defining marriage must be redefined to include same-sex couples.
April 24, 2009 in the Des Moines Register
May 3, 2009 in the Sioux City Journal
Evaluating Negotiated Services Agreements for Market Dominant Products Under PAEA (May 15, 2008)
Bill Olson co-authored “Evaluating Negotiated Services Agreements for Market Dominant Products Under PAEA,” a paper presented by co-author John Haldi, Ph.D. at the 27th Annual Eastern Conference, Advanced Workshop in Regulation and Competition, Skytop, Pennsylvania (May 15, 2008).
The Constitutional Case Against Congressional ‘Earmarks’ (April 4, 2008)
The unconstitutional practice of congressional earmarks as a violation of the separation of powers and the prohibition against titles of nobility was the topic of an article by Herb Titus, published in the April 2008 issue of the Perspective, a monthly public policy journal of the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs, headquartered in Oklahoma City.
USA Today Op-Ed Defending Second Amendment (March 19, 2008)
Today, the day after oral argument in the Heller case in which we filed an amicus brief, Herb Titus and Bill Olson were asked to write an op-ed piece for USA Today.
The USA Today editors wrote an editorial entitled "Our View: Preserve limits on guns" and our counterpoint is entitled "Opposing view: An unambiguous right."
Herb Titus article "Oklahoma at 100: Thanks be to God" Tulsa Today (August 5, 2007)
Tulsa Today reprinted an edited version of Herb Titus' article originally published in the August 2007 issue of Perspective, a publication of the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs.
BATF Firearm Civil Forfeiture Procedures and Policies: An Attorney's Guide (July 4, 2007)
On behalf of Gun Owners Foundation, our firm authored “BATF Firearm Civil Forfeiture Procedures and Policies: An Attorney's Guide.” The guide is intended to provide a procedural overview for attorneys unfamiliar with civil forfeiture law as it applies to firearms, including what to expect from the BATF, and how to go about recovering seized assets.
This manual has been revised as of January 30, 2009.
"The Constitution and the High Court: The Case for Constitutional Fidelity" (Fall 2006)
A paper by Herb Titus, "The Constitution and the High Court: The Case for Constitutional Fidelity," was published in the Fall 2006 edition of The Christian Lawyer. (The paper begins on page 5 of the PDF.)
Paper Demonstrates Threat to Second Amendment Rights Posed by Recent Supreme Court Reliance on International Law (July 2006)
In July, 2006, our firm prepared a paper entitled “Assessing the Threat to Second Amendment Rights Posed by the U.S. Supreme Court's Use of Foreign Law In Constitutional Interpretation” which was published by Gun Owners Foundation.
The paper critically analyzes two recent Supreme Court cases (Roper v. Simmons, and Lawrence v. Texas) in which the Court has relied on international law to sustain constitutional challenges. In Roper, the Court overturned a Missouri law permitting capital punishment for 16 and 17 year olds, and in Lawrence, the Court overturned a Texas law prohibiting certain homosexual acts primarily because of foreign authorities. Additionally, the paper reviews the pros and cons of relying on such foreign sources in other areas. Recently, the United Nations has been pursuing a goal of eliminating all private ownership of firearms world-wide.
If the Court continues to base its constitutional decisions on foreign law, the American people may find their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms seriously undermined because of trends in countries which have had historic hostility to private firearms ownership and because of the U.N.’s penchant to restrict firearms possession and use to government officials.
Birthright Citizenship Study Re-Released: "Children Born in the United States to Aliens Should Not, by Constitutional Right, Be U.S. Citizens" (December 13, 2005)
A legal analysis of Birthright Citizenship, written by Bill Olson, Herb Titus and Alan Woll, was re-released by U.S. Border Control today. The paper, "Children Born in the United States to Aliens Should Not, by Constitutional Right, Be U.S. Citizens" was originally published in January 2001,and then updated in March 2003. The House of Representatives is expected to be considering legislation on this topic in the near future.
Enhancing Competition By Unbundling the Postal Administration (June 2005)
Bill Olson co-authored a paper with postal economist Dr. John Haldi (of Haldi Associates, Inc.) entitled "Enhancing Competition By Unbundling the Postal Administration" which was published in Crew & Kleindorfer, Progress Toward Liberalization of the Postal and Delivery Sector, Springer Science+ Business Media, Inc., 2006, and presented at the Thirteenth Conference on Postal & Delivery Economics, Antwerp, Belgium, June 1 4, 2005. http://crri.rutgers.edu/post/index.html The paper presents a possible solution to a recurrent problem associated with reforming postal administrations.
"Attempts to bring the rigors of competition to postal authorities via de-regulation have stumbled repeatedly over the following dilemma: (i) the Universal Service Obligation ("USO") has powerful political support; (ii)the postal monopoly is asserted to be necessary to assure funding of the USO; and (iii)a fully de-regulated government monopoly is unacceptable. The unbundling model presented in this paper offers a solution to this dilemma. Although scope of the existing monopoly over delivery would not be reduced by this proposal, unbundling the upstream portion of the network would reduce substantially the amount of resources protected by the monopoly, while preserving the USO."
An Evaluation of Postal Service Worksharing: Postal Revenues and Costs from Workshared Activities (June 2003)
Postal economist Dr. John Haldi and Bill Olson have co-authored a groundbreaking evaluation of Postal Service Worksharing. Their paper contains the first comprehensive study of revenues and costs of the Postal Service generated from upstream activities. It was published in Crew & Kleindorfer, Competitive Transformation of the Postal and Delivery Sector, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004, and presented in Toledo, Spain in June 4-7, 2003, at the Eleventh "Conference on Postal and Delivery Economics" of the Center for Research in Regulated Industries at Rutgers University. http://crri.rutgers.edu/post/index.html#PAST
An executive summary of the paper is available here.
Their paper comparing revenues and costs draws from draws from two prior papers which they also co-authored which explain the methodology used in greater depth.
Postal Revenues Earned from Workshared Activities
Postal Costs of Workshared Activities
Making a Bad Law Worse (December 1, 2002)
Bill Olson and Mark Fitzgibbons wrote an article entitled "Making a Bad Law Worse New York's Amended Charitable Solicitation Law" published in Philanthropy Monthly, Volume 35, Nos. 1&2.
Protecting Anonymity in Advocacy (August 1, 2002)
Bill Olson and Herb Titus wrote an article entitled "Protecting Anonymity in Advocacy" published in Philanthropy Monthly, Volume 34, Nos. 3&4.
English Requirements for New Citizens (February 28, 2002)
One Nation Indivisible recently published a paper, co-authored by Bill Olson, which reviews the history of the requirement that new citizens speak English as part of the naturalization process.
Campaign Finance Reform Legislation is Unconstitutional (February 13, 2002)
A paper by Herb Titus regarding the unconstitutionality of campaign finance reform legislation was inserted into the Congressional Record by Congressman Ron Paul, who described Herb Titus as "one of America's leading constitutional scholars."
America: Republic or Democracy? (May 25, 2001)
Did our founding fathers intend to create a republic or a democracy? A misunderstanding of the original plan leads to all sorts of other errors, yet presidents, congressmen, and federal judges still view America as a democracy, almost never employing the term republic. Is the principal purpose of government to do the will of the people or to prevent the majority from doing injustice and violence to individuals who may disagree with the majority. The Liberty Committee has published a paper by Herb Titus on this topic of enduring importance.
Campaign Finance Reform: A Constitutional Analysis by Herbert W. Titus (2001)
Engage: The Journal of the Federalist Society's Practice Groups (2001 Edition)
Bill Olson co-authored "Clintonian Usurpation by Executive Order" published in Engage: The Journal of the Federalist Society's Practice Groups ― 2001 Edition.
The Art of Presidential Usurpation (November 2000)
Bill Olson co-authored an article on executive orders, "The Art of Presidential Usurpation," that was published in the November 2000 issue of USA Today magazine.
Cato Institute Policy Analysis
by William J. Olson and Alan Woll
October 28, 1999
Executive Orders and National Emergencies: How Presidents Have Come to "Run the Country" by Usurping Legislative Power
Full Text of Policy Analysis No. 358 (PDF, 29 pgs, 162 Kb)
Testimony on Executive Orders before the House Rules Committee's Subcommittee on Legislative and Budget Process (October 27, 1999)
Bill Olson was asked to testify before the House Rules Committee's Subcommittee on Legislative and Budget Process. The topic of the hearing was "The Impact of Executive Orders on the Legislative Process: Executive Lawmaking?" Bill Olson also submitted answers to questions before the House Rules Committee's Subcommittee on Legislative and Budget Process.
Memorandum for the President:
Presidential Powers To Use the U.S. Armed Forces To Control Potential Civilian Disturbances (May 1, 1999)
Defining Marriage and the Family by Herbert W. Titus William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal, Volume 3, Issue 1, Article 10 (1994)
Abe Lincoln Foundation Issues Bulletin:
A Legal Report: Executive Orders and National Emergencies Presidential Power Grab Nearly Unchecked