isomin at gmu.edu
Tue Dec 21 22:21:28 PST 2010
A small correction:
I should have said "absurdly claiming that fairly modest limitations on congressional Commerce Clause will lead to a situation resembling the Soviet Union" rather than "absurdly comparing fairly modest limitations on congressional Commerce Clause authority to the Soviet Union."
Associate Professor of Law
Editor, Supreme Court Economic Review
George Mason University School of Law
3301 Fairfax Dr.
Arlington, VA 22201
e-mail: isomin at gmu.edu
SSRN Page: http://ssrn.com/author=333339
----- Original Message -----
From: Ilya Somin <isomin at gmu.edu>
Date: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 1:18 am
Subject: Re: Lopez Exception
> I'm all in favor of "peeling the onion deeper" and considering the
> underpinnings of different views. But such statements as accusing
> people of wanting to create a "new capitalist man" and absurdly
> comparing fairly modest limitations on congressional Commerce
> Clause authority to the Soviet Union do not advance the
> Most of the rest of the post I was criticizing is an exercise in
> name-calling (e.g. - claiming that libertarians "argue Free
> Speech everytime anyone spends money" or want to expand "CJ
> Rehnquist's beloved "Free Not to Associate"") rather than serious
> analysis of competing views. I'm all in favor the latter. But it
> can't be done unless we restrict the former.
> Ilya Somin
> Associate Professor of Law
> Editor, Supreme Court Economic Review
> George Mason University School of Law
> 3301 Fairfax Dr.
> Arlington, VA 22201
> ph: 703-993-8069
> fax: 703-993-8124
> e-mail: isomin at gmu.edu
> Website: http://mason.gmu.edu/~isomin/
> SSRN Page: http://ssrn.com/author=333339
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Robert Sheridan <rs at robertsheridan.com>
> Date: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 1:06 am
> Subject: Re: Lopez Exception
> > I'm not sure that it's very kind to thus denigrate a comment
> > seems to address some of the deeper issues underlying the
> > views of the cases, although I must say I've derided views that
> > don't admire, as well, mea culpa.
> > I would agree that getting into the competing philosophies which
> > give rise to competing politics may tend to get us some distance
> > from the cases, but in any worthwhile discussion of cases that
> > I've seen, some care has been taken to understand the deeper
> > Marshall's more central federalism, vs Jefferson's less central
> > agriculturalism, for example, or how the British colonial
> > mercantile system was supplanted by the newly recognized (by
> > Smith and others) market economy or capitalist system. During
> > lifetimes, the capitalist system was locked in deadly embrace
> > Soviet and Chinese, and Cuban, and Vietnamese, etc., communism.
> > Unless we peel the onion deeper in our discussions, we may be at
> > risk taking comfort in a shallow understanding of the theory of
> > the important cases, indeed.
> > Deeper views, I say. :)
> > rs
> > On Dec 21, 2010, at 6:07 PM, Ilya Somin wrote:
> > > The remainder of Prof. Buzan's post does not, I think, rise to
> > level that merits a response.
More information about the Conlawprof