Legal System

The Supremes rules today (Kelo v.

The other day I somehow started thinking about various quirks in a private legal framework, and (unfortunately perhaps for you, dear reader) this i

This is a difficult issue. Most of the controversy is from Section One. What exactly does the first sentence mean? If the Fourteenth Amendment was in fact intended to bind the states to the Bill of Rights that the federal government could enforce, then it dramatically increases the police power of the federal government.

Interviewed by Jeffrey Tucker at the Mises Institute; June 13, 2005. 

The medical marijuana case decided June 6th (Gonzales v Raich, et al.) in favor of the government (6-3) was an easy slam dunk, writes D.T. Armentano. Still, there are many problems with the majority opinion.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act, passed into law after the Andersen case was filed, gives the feds the powers they improperly used against Andersen.

We went from tariffs being the major source of federal government revenue to what we have today under the income tax and payroll taxes.

On the face of it, who can object to the Supreme Court's decision that permits wine consumers to buy directly from out-of-state wineries? This is just the free market at work. The state laws that prohibited the practice were nothing but a legal leftover from prohibition days and a mercantilist privilege granted to politically powerful distributors who thought only of their monopoly.

Presented as part of the Brown Bag Seminar Series. Recorded at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, on 12 May 2005.

Presented as part of the Mises Institute’s Brown Bag Seminar series on May 5, 2005 in Auburn, Alabama.