Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Texas Federalist

That's a good question. The Lochner case was about equal protections and due process, as in it the Court annuled a State law that targeted a particular industry (home bakers).

We can guess where Thomas stands on "due process" as used by the moderns; to the progressives it was a dirty word. I wonder how Thomas and Scalia feel about that era. I heard a Ginsberg clerk actually praise Lochner... Strange world, indeed.


94 posted on 03/15/2005 12:30:06 PM PST by nicollo (All economics are politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies ]


To: nicollo

I had a law professor that argued the California medicinal marijuana case in 2001. He included an argument encouraging the justices to find an unenumerated privacy right in the Ninth Amendment. He said the only two justices that he perceived as being interested in the argument were Thomas and Stevens. Wierd is right.


96 posted on 03/15/2005 12:37:04 PM PST by Texas Federalist (If you get in bed with the government, you'll get more than a good night's sleep." R. Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson