Class Legislation/WalMart

[Malla Pollack]

Logical error. Under your reasoning, a law banning homicide is aimed at only
those persons in the population who have (or are in the middle of ) killing
someone.

 

Malla Pollack

Professor, American Justice School of Law

Visiting Univ. of Idaho, College of Law

mpollack at uidaho.edu

208-885-2017

 

-----Original Message-----
From: conlawprof-bounces at lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:conlawprof-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of
DavidEBernstein at aol.com
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 6:32 AM
To: marty.lederman at comcast.net; Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: Class Legislation/WalMart

 

Marty is taking an unusually formalistic position here: the other three
employers were already in compliance with the legislation, and the
proponents of the legislation, both inside and outside the legislature, did
not disguise the fact that the law was meant to affect Wal-Mart and only
Wal-Mart.

 

In a message dated 1/13/2006 9:19:34 AM Eastern Standard Time,
marty.lederman at comcast.net writes:

Actually, according to the story, the law is not designed to cover only
Wal-Mart:  It applies to all employers with more than 10,000 workers in
Maryland.  There are four such employers now -- Johns Hopkins University,
Giant Food, Northrop Grumman and Wal-Mart -- and could certainly be others
in the years to come.  That certainly passes rational-basis muster.

 

No constitutional issue at all, as far as I can see.

 

David E. Bernstein
Visiting Professor
University of Michigan School of Law
Professor
George Mason University School of Law
http://mason.gmu.edu/~dbernste

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/private/conlawprof/attachments/20060113/e281646c/attachment.htm