Legal System

Judge Jackson's decision in the Microsoft case assumes that superior technology doesn't win out in market competition. Is he right?

Frank Michelman is famous among law professors for his acute critical intellect, and his powers of demolition are much in evidence in Brennan and Democracy. 

Like most readers of The Mises Review, Professor Tushnet is fed up with the Supreme Court. I doubt, though, that his complaint against the Court will have much resonance with most of my readers.

The shoe industry is under regulatory attack,  adding to the list of businesses punished for exercising the freedom to make contracts and compete in a market economy.

Greenspan recently said he is not sure what the money supply is. But money is like any commodity: it has a supply and it can be counted.

The judge in the Microsoft case says the company is like Standard Oil earlier this century. He's right, for the wrong reasons. 

The Japanese FTC used kid gloves, but still punished the firm for doing what competitors are supposed to do. 

The only secure foundation for the right of free speech is private property, but civil libertarians are loathe to admit it. 

So regulated, cartelized, and inefficient, the industry nearly qualifies as socialist by Misesian standards. 

The Justice Department wasn't just trying to curb one firm; it was sending a message to America's entire entrepreneurial class.