Source: The Dispatch
by Jonah Goldberg

“Not all concerns about data centers are so crazy or even unreasonable. They do use a lot of water, though not nearly as much as some claim. They can cause electricity rates to go up. They’re ugly. And, if you’re freaking out about what AI will do to your job or to American society, taking it out on data centers makes a certain amount of sense. Politicians, as a class, tend to indulge moral panics. Which is why it’s no surprise that Republicans and Democrats alike are racing to get on the ‘right’ side of the issue.” (08/26/26)

https://thedispatch.com/article/data-centers-artificial-intelligence-moral-panic/

Source: Show-Me Institute
by Avery Frank

“A few weeks ago, the City of St. Louis issued a proposal that would require new data center developments to use renewable energy for their operations, among many other requirements. There is now a conditional waiver process to sidestep the renewable requirement if the developer can prove they and Ameren can’t meet it, which is a slight improvement. From a free-market perspective, the flaws of the proposal are clear. The city would be selecting certain types of energy (in this case solar and wind) in the name of ‘clean air’ while excluding from consideration not only energy from coal and natural gas, but even nuclear energy, which also has zero emissions.” (08/25/26)

https://showmeinstitute.org/article/energy/government-intervention-in-the-energy-market/

Source: The American Prospect
by Eleanor Davis-Diver

“‘In casinos, the house always wins. With Kalshi, there is no house. We don’t win when our customers lose,’ the nation’s leading prediction market states on its FAQ page, differentiating itself from traditional sports betting. According to its proponents, prediction markets operate on a ‘peer-to-peer’ structure where, instead of a house, the ‘counterparty’ on a bet is another regular person, just like you or me. ‘Unlike sportsbooks Kalshi doesn’t set the odds, other users do’, claims an ad spot currently playing across television and digital platforms, featuring the world’s longest sandwich. These other ‘users’ are known as market makers, a common feature of financial markets, who continuously quote prices for everyone else to ensure consistent liquidity and smooth trading. But contrary to what the advertisement implies, most market makers are not ordinary people but highly advanced trading institutions.” (08/26/26)

https://prospect.org/2026/08/26/house-always-wins-kalshi-prediction-markets/

Source: Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression
by Isabelle Brito

“Parents and community members have every right to criticize what their schools make available and ask officials to reconsider particular books. That’s free speech, too. The problem arises when one individual or group’s political views determine which ideas students can explore in their school library. Massachusetts’ Freedom to Read Law offers a promising solution, one that FIRE has long called for: due process for books. That means fair and clear procedures for reviewing challenged library materials.” (08/25/26)

https://www.fire.org/news/massachusetts-has-better-approach-book-challenges-due-process

Source: Libertarian Institute
by Patrick Carroll

“A considerable portion of libertarian infighting seems to stem from the largely unrecognized fact that there are two different ways to interpret the non-aggression principle (NAP). On the surface, the NAP seems clear: aggression is wrong. But there is a deontological way to interpret this and a consequentialist way, and these interpretations are mutually exclusive. Deontological reasoning argues people should refrain from acts of aggression, even if that leads to a less free society. Consequentialist reasoning argues people should act to create as free a society as possible, even if that means using aggression.” (08/25/26)

https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/whose-nap-anyway