Mala Prohibita

This category includes variables that relate to individual actions that harm no one.
Choose a dimension of freedom below to see rankings on the map, or use the map to explore results by state.

Accessibility guide for tree .

Navigate the tree with the arrow keys. Common tree hotkeys apply. Further keybindings are available:

  • enter to execute primary action on focused item
  • f2 to start renaming the focused item
  • escape to abort renaming an item
  • control+d to start dragging selected items

Mala Prohibita

The term mala prohibita refers to acts defined as criminal in statute, even though they are not harms in common law (mala in se). This category is a grab bag of mostly unrelated policies, including raw milk laws, fireworks laws, prostitution laws, physician-assisted suicide laws, religious freedom restoration acts, rules on taking DNA samples from criminal suspects without a probable cause hearing, trans-fat bans, state equal rights amendments, mixed martial arts legalization, and bans on racial preferences in the public sector.1

Of these, the policies with the greatest potential cost by our method are racial preferences in the public sector (more than half of this category), prostitution prohibition, and trans-fat bans, which are now federal and nationwide.

The biggest effect of state affirmative action bans appears to be in public university admissions.2 White and Asian enrollment appears to grow by about 5 percent when affirmative action is banned. The annual benefit to these students of attending a preferred college is probably on the order of, say, $5,000—that is, a fraction of typical public tuition. Since the closing date of our study, a Supreme Court decision (Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard3) has nationalized this policy, but it remains to be seen what impact the decision will have on admissions decisions given the possibility of administrative evasion.

If Nevada-style policies legalizing but regulating brothels were in effect nationwide, the industry would garner an estimated $5 billion in revenue, a comparatively small sum compared with other vice industries, such as alcohol, gambling, tobacco, and even marijuana.4

After racial preferences in the public sector and prostitution prohibition, the next most important is the trans-fat ban, which may have cost consumers—at a reasonable estimate—more than $3.5 billion worth of pleasure a year.5 Next is the legalization of raw milk, then legalization of mixed martial arts, followed closely by fireworks laws. Then comes physician-assisted suicide, which receives the “times 5” constitutional weighting factor, since the Montana Constitution has been held to protect a right thereto. Rounding out this category, in order, are state equal rights amendments, state DNA database laws, and religious freedom restoration acts.

Footnotes

1. To be clear, we do not necessarily condone prostitution, but we defend the rights of willing adults to engage in consensual exchange of sex. We completely condemn all nonconsensual sex trafficking as unjust and deserving of legal prohibition.

2. Hayley Munguia, “Here’s What Happens When You Ban Affirmative Action in College Admissions,” FiveThirtyEight, December 9, 2015.

3. Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, 600 U.S. ___ (2023).

4. Daria Snadowsky, “The Best Little Whorehouse Is Not in Texas: How Nevada’s Prostitution Laws Serve Public Policy, and How Those Laws May Be Improved,” Nevada Law Journal 6, no. 1 (2005): 217–19.

5. Gary Becker, “Comment on the New York Ban on Trans Fats—Becker,” Becker-Posner Blog, December 21, 2006.