Even though most state legislatures are done for the year, Americans can expect the government to keep interfering with their lives. Starting July 1, many new state laws take effect. Here are 10 of the most ridiculous. 

1. Florida Requires Schools To Call the Gulf of Mexico the ‘Gulf of America’

On Inauguration Day, President Donald Trump signed an executive order renaming the Gulf of Mexico the “Gulf of America.” In response, Florida passed House Bill 549, which, effective July 1, requires state agencies to update geographic materials to reflect the new federal designation. The law also requires “each district school board or charter school governing board” to adopt “instructional materials…and library media center collections that reflect” the new designation of the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America.

H.B. 549 is not only intrusive to local school districts’ authority over what their students should learn but also costly to the taxpayers who are funding the purchase of all new materials.

2. Minimum Wage Hikes Across 3 States

Across the country, minimum wage increases will take effect on July 1. In Alaska, the minimum wage is increasing from $11.91 per hour to $13 per hour. In Oregon, the standard minimum wage will rise from $14.70 per hour to $15.05 per hour. And in Washington, D.C., the minimum wage will hike from $17.50 per hour to $17.95 per hour. 

Proponents of raising the minimum wage argue that an increase is necessary to ensure everyone is given a “living wage.” But these actions can have unintended consequences, like causing overall employment to decrease, increasing prices for consumers, or causing businesses to close. In D.C., a minimum wage increase for tipped workers was paused until October due to many restaurants being unable to afford the increase from $10 per hour to $12 per hour for these employees.

3. Alabama Bans Smokable Hemp Products

Under a new Alabama law, H.B. 445, it will be illegal to sell or possess smokable hemp products. While consumable hemp products like gummies or drinks will be allowed, smokable products are specifically excluded and banned. “Possession or sale of those products on or after July 1, 2025 could subject an individual to prosecution for a Class C felony,” the attorney general’s office said. In Alabama, a Class C felony is punishable by one to 10 years of imprisonment.  

The remainder of the legislation, which sets requirements for the sale of edible hemp products, dosage limitations, and enforcement by the Alabama Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, won’t take effect until 2026. 

4. Vape Registration in Wisconsin

Starting July 1, vape product manufacturers must certify with the Wisconsin Department of Revenue that their products have been authorized by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or have submitted a premarket tobacco product application annually. The goal of the law is to deter tobacco shops from selling harmful products, but few vapor products have received FDA approval. Critics say the legislation will hurt small business owners and their employees. “Pretty much every vapor product across the board is effectively banned,” Amber Crawford, a Wisconsin vape shop owner, told WQOW, an ABC News affiliate. “It’s about 70% of my revenue,” Crawford said. “We’re going to lose dozens of jobs of people that care about it deeply. Chances are I will get laid off and the store will close.” 

5. Cellphones Banned in Virginia Public Schools

Beginning July 1, Virginia school boards will be required to implement policies restricting cellphone possession and use by students during school hours. The bill aims to reduce learning disruptions, like bullying and harassment, while carving out exceptions—like to address a health concern—and dictates that punishments for cellphone possession alone shall not include a school resource officer, suspension, or expulsion.

Such bans have increased in popularity in part because smart devices have been blamed for causing more depression, anxiety, and bullying among kids and teens, but implementing state-wide policies could backfire. The data are unclear on whether devices are the cause of concerning mental health trends among school-age children, and parents aren’t sold on banning devices. A survey earlier this year found that most parents believe cellphones have a positive effect on their kids’ lives. Regardless of their impact, there is no clear one-size-fits-all solution. 

6. Virginia Expands Cyberbullying Prevention Policies in Public Schools

Public schools in Virginia must also include procedures for preventing and prohibiting cyberbullying both on and off school property in their guidelines and codes of conduct starting July 1. The legislation defines cyberbullying as “bullying that occurs through the use of technology…capable of accessing the internet.” It also mandates that schools provide protections so that students aren’t deterred from reporting bullying and provide resources and support for student victims of cyberbullying. Forcing schools to regulate speech outside of school property introduces First Amendment concerns if policies are overly broad or vague. 

7. Prohibiting Gender Transition Treatments for Minors in Kansas

Under the Help Not Harm Act, minors will be restricted from certain gender treatments beginning July 1, after the Legislature successfully overrode Gov. Laura Kelly’s (D–Kan.) veto in February. Under the new law, gender transition treatments, including hormone blockers and surgery, are prohibited, and state funds, including Medicaid, cannot be used to pay for these treatments. Providing such treatments is defined under the law as unprofessional conduct, and those who violate the law can have their license revoked and be held strictly liable if sued.  

The legislation is meant to protect children “from the irreversible harms of experimental gender transition surgeries and medicines,” according to a joint statement from Republican state Reps. Chris Croft, Dan Hawkins, and Blake Carpenter regarding the veto override. But whether these treatments are deemed beneficial or harmful, the practical implication of this new law is that parents now have less authority over the care their children receive.

8. Wyoming Restricts Access to Bathrooms and Other Public Facilities

Joining 18 other states with public bathroom restrictions, Wyoming’s H.B. 72 requires persons to use the bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers in public facilities that correspond to their biological sex. Rather than punish individuals either civilly or criminally for using the wrong facility, it is up to the government body operating the facility to enforce the law, or face civil liabilities. But like other states that have tried to enforce bathroom use based on sex, the law creates fear and uncertainty about what is permissible use and what the consequences of any violations may be. 

9. Gender Identity Removed From Iowa Civil Rights Act

Under Iowa Senate File 418, gender identity is no longer protected from discrimination in housing, employment, wages, and public accommodations under the state’s civil rights code. Additionally, Iowans can no longer change their sex designation on a birth certificate after undergoing a medical gender transition. Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds stated that before the bill was signed, “the Civil Rights Code blurred the biological line between the sexes” and put commonsense protections for women and girls at risk. Iowa will be the first state in the country to take away civil rights from a group it previously protected since 2007.  

10. The Sunshine State Expands Death Penalty Executions 

Florida has carried out seven executions in 2025, with an eighth scheduled for July. To continue these executions, Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis signed H.B. 903, authorizing the state of Florida to use any execution method “not deemed unconstitutional,” including firing squads, nitrogen gas, and hanging. There are 269 inmates currently on death row. 

Since the reinstatement of the death penalty in 1976, Florida has executed 113 people by either electrocution or lethal injection. In that same time, 30 people sentenced to death in the state have been exonerated. The death penalty remains controversial for many reasons, not least of which is the significant risk of executing an innocent person.

The post 10 of the Worst State Laws Going Into Effect in July appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2kte6sZ
via IFTTT

This week, Reason editors Peter Suderman, Katherine Mangu-Ward, and Matt Welch are joined by Republican pollster Kristen Soltis Anderson to analyze Zohran Mamdani’s primary win over Andrew Cuomo in New York City’s mayoral race and what it signals about the future of Democratic politics. They also discuss the Senate GOP’s version of President Donald Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” and how Republican views on gay marriage have shifted since the Obergefell decision in 2015. Finally, a listener question prompts a discussion on Modern Monetary Theory and the risks it poses from a libertarian perspective.

0:00—What does it mean to be a party pollster?

2:53—Socialist Mamdani wins NYC Democratic primary

11:59—The politics of the housing crisis

15:18—The abundance agenda and Mamdani

21:15—Mamdani as the Trump of the left

27:07—Listener question on Modern Monetary Theory

37:15—Senate GOP version of Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill”

42:45—Republican voters shift on gay marriage

48:28—Is the GOP more libertarian under Trump?

50:28—Chances Trump might prove us wrong on Iran strategy

54:22—Weekly cultural recommendations

Mentioned in the podcast

“On Housing, All New York Politicians Are Socialists,” by Christian Britschgi
“Libya, End Zone Taunting, and the Success Curse,” by Matt Welch
“Sovereignty Is Such a Lonely Word,” by Matt Welch

Upcoming Reason Events

The Reason Roundtable Live in NYC!, July 15

The Soho Forum Debate: Jacob Hacker vs. David Goldhill, July 16

Today’s Sponsors:

Future of Freedom: If you’re tired of cable news debates and Twitter shouting matches, and you’re looking for serious, good-faith conversations between people who actually care about liberty, then it’s time to check out the Future of Freedom podcast. Each episode dives deep into a single topic—tariffs, campus speech, the Department of Government Efficiency—and brings together two guests who disagree on the best path forward. But here’s the twist: This isn’t a debate show. No interrupting. No dunking. If you believe the future of freedom depends on more than just winning arguments and you’re ready for something deeper than the usual echo chambers, check out the Future of Freedom podcast. Real disagreement. Real ideas. Real conversations. Subscribe to Future of Freedom wherever you get your podcasts.

• Producer: Paul Alexander
• Video Editor: Ian Keyser

The post Did NYC Vote for Socialism or Against the Establishment? appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/ZbexQBs
via IFTTT

Last week I speculated what would happen to the ACLU’s cert petition in Skrmetti that raised the Due Process issue. I wondered if the Court would GVR the parental rights issue in light of Mahmoud.

Today’s order list denied review in L.W. v. Skrmetti. There were no recorded dissents. It seems the Due Process claim is now dead. The Tennessee law, and others like it, will now go into effect.

Indeed, the Court GVR’d several related cases. First, West Virginia excluded treatment for gender dysphoria from Medicaid. The Fourth Circuit held this exclusion violated the Equal Protection Clause. Second, North Carolina excluded treatment for gender dysphoria from the state employee health plan. The Fourth Circuit likewise ruled against the state. Third, Idaho denied Medicaid coverage for sex-reassignment surgery. After Skrmetti was argued, the Ninth Circuit found this ruling was unlawful.

These issues will bubble back to the Court in a year or so. Let’s see if the Fourth Circuit can see the writing on the wall. Speaking of which, guess which Circuit was the “Biggest Loser” at the Court this term? No, it was not my beloved Fifth Circuit.

David Lat explains (based on Adam Feldman’s Stat Pack):

Some circuits got reversed a lot. Subjectively and anecdotally, it felt to me that the Fifth Circuit took it on the chin this Term in terms of reversals. But if you look at reversals in percentage terms, the First, Fourth, Ninth, and Tenth Circuits were the most reversed, all with a 100 percent reversal rate—based on two, eight, four, and five cases decided by SCOTUS, respectively. So with a 0-8 record before the justices, the Fourth Circuit was the “biggest loser,” in terms of the court with the highest reversal rate and the highest total number of cases. (The Ninth Circuit had three cases that were dismissed as improvidently granted.)

The Fifth Circuit didn’t do that badly. The Fifth Circuit had the most total cases reversed (10), and some were high-profile—such as Bondi v. VanDerStock (a statutory-interpretation case about “ghost guns”), Kennedy v. Braidwood Management (an Appointments Clause challenge to an Affordable Care Act-created task force), and FCC v. Consumers Research (a nondelegation challenge to the FCC’s “universal service” scheme). But the Fifth Circuit wound up with a 77 percent overall reversal rate, since it was also affirmed in three appeals—including the closely followed Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton (a First Amendment challenge to an age restriction for pornography websites).

I think the reversal rate should include GVRs as well.

Stay tuned for more.

The post SCOTUS Puts <I>Skrmetti</I> SDP Case Out Of Its Misery appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/36yZ87j
via IFTTT

Amazon, the tech and online retail juggernaut, is expanding its physical footprint, with a little help from Pennsylvania taxpayers.

“Amazon plans to spend $20 billion to build two data centers in Pennsylvania, a move that state officials say will generate thousands of jobs over the next decade and stoke considerable economic activity,” wrote Stephen Caruso and Kate Huangpu of Spotlight PA, an independent media outlet. “But many key details, like the centers’ full impact on electricity supply and prices, and the amount of tax revenue the state will forfeit to Amazon, are still unknown.”

“In March 2024, Talen Energy sold its 960-megawatt (MW) data center to Amazon Web Services (AWS) for $650 million,” Jeff Luse wrote in November 2024 for Reason. “The data center is a co-located facility, meaning it will draw electricity directly from Susquehanna Steam Electric Station—a nuclear power plant that generates 2.5 gigawatts of power annually—rather than from the grid.” The other facility will be located in a former U.S. Steel mill and hook into the state’s existing power grid, and there is the possibility of a third facility later on.

The data centers will support Amazon’s artificial intelligence and cloud computing, which require substantial processing power. Rick Siger, secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development, said the project “will drive enormous positive tax impacts for our Commonwealth, counties, and municipalities, and will create at least 1,250 high-paying, high-tech jobs as well as thousands of construction jobs.”

Unfortunately, that’s not a guarantee. “The data center industry has grown rapidly in recent years, and state governors have touted the jobs it would create,” Ellen Thomas wrote at Business Insider. But “once built, data center facilities don’t employ large numbers of permanent employees, and the economic development contracts they sign in exchange for tax incentives often reflect that.”

Data centers do initially create plenty of work for construction crews, but once operational, they require only a small permanent staff for general upkeep. “Most permanent data center jobs are in security and landscaping, alongside a handful of technicians who monitor the facilities’ computers,” write Caruso and Huangpu, citing Greg LeRoy of public subsidy watchdog organization Good Jobs First.

In fairness, Pennsylvania is spending considerably less taxpayer money than most states do to attract new businesses. Officials in St. Joseph County, Indiana, voted last year to give Amazon tax breaks and incentives worth $4 billion or more, to build a data center in the area. Arlington County, Virginia, offered Amazon as much as $750 million to build its second corporate headquarters there.

On the other hand, Pennsylvania’s “only direct financial investment” in its Amazon data centers will come in the form of “$10 million for ‘targeted workforce development efforts,'” Caruso and Huangpu write. But that doesn’t mean Keystone State taxpayers are otherwise off the hook: “Pennsylvania didn’t offer a new, targeted incentive package to Amazon, but the tech giant has already been approved for a tax break that the commonwealth gives to companies that build data centers here.”

A state program exempts large data centers from paying sales tax on any purchases of certain “computer data center equipment.” Any company that spends at least $75 million of “new investment” to create a data center that “creates 25 new jobs” in a county with no more than 250,000 residents, and pays at least $1 million in annual payroll at the site, can apply for an exemption from all sales taxes paid to purchase equipment to operate servers, including software, cooling systems, and security and monitoring equipment.

“The law requires neither the buyer nor the seller to report the cost of exempt transactions to the state,” Caruso and Huangpu add. “That means the exact cost is unknown. Still, the state estimates the lost tax revenue in budgets.” In his budget proposal for the 2025–26 fiscal year, Gov. Josh Shapiro estimated $43.1 million in lost tax revenue from the program, growing to $51.1 million by the end of the decade. Former Gov. Tom Wolf predicted in his proposal for the 2022–23 fiscal year that by 2025, the program would cost nearly $75 million in lost revenue. “Jeffrey Johnson, a spokesperson for the Department of Revenue, said the original projection was reduced after lower-than-expected use in early years,” Caruso and Huangpu write.

Still, it’s worth remembering that Amazon—the world’s second-largest company by revenue, behind only Walmart—committed to spend $20 billion on data centers in Pennsylvania alone. Clearly, the tech giant is not hurting for cash, and Pennsylvania taxpayers should not be on the hook for a potentially unlimited cash giveaway to a private company.

The post Pennsylvania Gives Amazon Potentially Unlimited Sales Tax Exemption appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/O7XJvFC
via IFTTT

A study by Stanford’s Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR) on the effects of social media went viral on X over the weekend. While the post represents the results as “shocking,” the study itself found little evidence that social media use hurts its users.

The SIEPR study was published as a working paper in April with the National Bureau of Economic Research. Of the 27 co-authors, most of whom are associated with American universities, eight are researchers from Meta, the parent company of Instagram and Facebook. The researchers recruited 19,857 Facebook users and 15,585 Instagram users to carry out “the largest-ever experimental study on the effect of social media deactivation on users’ emotional state.”

More than a quarter of the Facebook and Instagram users were assigned to treatment groups and were paid to deactivate their respective accounts for six weeks leading up to the 2020 presidential election. (All other users were part of the control group, which required users to deactivate their accounts for only the first of the six weeks.) Researchers conducted surveys on self-reported happiness, depression, and anxiety before and after the experiment. These metrics were combined to make a joint “emotional state index” (ESI).

The X post emphasizes that users who deactivated Instagram enjoyed an improvement of about 0.04 standard deviations in their ESI while users who deactivated Facebook enjoyed an improvement of roughly 0.06 standard deviations. But the authors themselves reported that the effect of deactivating Instagram on ESI is statistically insignificant after adjusting for multiple hypothesis testing. Moreover, the effect of deactivating Instagram on anxiety and depression was statistically indistinguishable from zero.

In the second case, the effect of deactivating Facebook on anxiety was also indistinguishable from zero. However, the effects on depression and ESI were statistically significant. The authors contextualize their results by explaining that the average of the six effects—Facebook deactivation on happiness, anxiety, and depression and Instagram deactivation on happiness, anxiety, and depression—is 0.038 standard deviations, which is “equivalent to 3.8 percent of people saying they feel happy ‘often’ instead of ‘sometimes.'”

Statistical significance does not necessarily imply substantial real-world differences. In this case, it does not. Christopher Ferguson, a professor of psychology at Stetson University, says that the threshold for distinguishing real psychological effects from statistical noise is much higher (0.21 standard deviations) than what was measured in the study. The standard for clinical significance, which he defines as “an effect people might actually begin to notice in the real world,” is higher still (0.41 standard deviations). Ferguson cautions that “a high proportion of nonsense relationships become ‘statistically significant’ with large datasets” and that “false positives…shouldn’t be interpreted as hypothesis supportive.” Ferguson also says that while the survey questions appear direct, they “are not clinically validated measures of depression or anxiety.”

The study suffers from additional methodological constraints. The fact that the study focuses on a specific historical time period—the six weeks leading up to the 2020 U.S. presidential election—raises questions about external validity; it “tells us very little about day-to-day interactions on social media,” says Ferguson. The authors themselves urge caution about generalizing results outside their sample because “less than one percent of the people who were invited to the study completed the experiment.”

Ferguson says the study is being widely represented as “supporting the idea that reducing social media time improves mental health outcomes when…it found no reliable evidence for such a relationship.”

The post No, That Viral Study <i>Doesn't</i> Show You Can Improve Your Mental Health by Deactivating Instagram appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/sl4qIhS
via IFTTT