Proponents of evidence-based policymaking advocate developing and applying evidence as a way for the federal government to ...

The Supreme Court limits judicial remedies and increases deference to executive power in immigration enforcement.

The San Francisco decision is troubling because it shifts the burden of pollution prevention from the permit holder to the ...

That’s why behavioral economics can be so useful in tackling pernicious health problems. It allows us to preserve people’s ...

Scholars reflect on the continuing impact of the No Surprises Act.

The Supreme Court weighs public safety concerns surrounding ghost guns in recent Second Amendment decision.

Authorization for FEMA’s search and rescue response to the Texas floods took over 72 hours, and some teams arrived a week ...

The Supreme Court validates political control over public health decisions.

The Supreme Court’s recent unanimous decision on FDA’s tobacco-authorization authority is utterly unremarkable.

It is time we introduce “Humanity’s Best Exam”—a benchmark that strives to capture a model’s capacity to address public ...

The Supreme Court preserves preventive services coverage but emboldens the HHS Secretary.

When a project like the rail line has significant environmental impacts, NEPA requires a “detailed statement” that discusses the project’s negative environmental effects and reasonable alternatives.