North Carolina’s courts have ruled it is legal for local governments to use taxpayer resources to lobby the General Assembly on legislation, and that’s exactly what some cities and counties are doing now that the legislature is back in session. John Locke Foundation Vice President for Outreach Becki Gray explains the role of lobbyists and why she’s concerned that taxpayer funds are being used to, in some cases, lobby against the views of some citizens. Then we turn to property rights. A legal dispute involving beachfront property at Emerald Isle has attracted interest from the N.C. Institute for Constitutional Law. The institute’s Jeanette Doran explains why both the facts of the case and the town’s legal maneuvers raise constitutional concerns. In more property rights news, state lawmakers have been working on reforms of North Carolina’s laws governing extraterritorial jurisdiction, the power cities and towns have over development just outside their boundaries. But you’ll hear how the legal fight over a 2011 annexation law is hampering efforts to address ETJ concerns. That’s followed by a debate over the intent of the constitution. When judges interpret the U.S. Constitution, how important is the original meaning or original intent of the constitutional provision at issue? Northwestern law professor John McGinnis and UNC-Chapel Hill law professor William Marshall debated that topic recently for the John Locke Foundation and the Campbell Law School Federalist Society. You’ll hear highlights. And finally, John Locke Foundation Director of Research Michael Sanera brings us up to speed on a boondoggle project that used taxpayers subsidies to open and operate a restaurant in downtown Raleigh. The Mint has now closed. While city officials defend the subsidy, Sanera explains why local governments should never engage in this activity and why it puts local businesses at a disadvantage in the marketplace.