February 10, 2010

IN OTHER WORDS...:

The Scalia v. Stevens Smackdown: In President Obama's view, corporations are anathema. (DANIEL HENNINGER, 2/10/10, WSJ)

"The Framers thus took it as a given," in Justice Stevens's opinion, "that corporations could be comprehensively regulated (my emphasis) in the service of the public welfare."

In short, private corporations have not much, if anything, to do with the public good.

In his crack-back concurrence, Justice Scalia ridicules "the corporation-hating quotations the dissent has dredged up." He notes that most corporations back then had "state-granted monopoly privileges" (sort of like Fannie and Freddie today—columnist's footnote) and that modern corporations without these state privileges "would probably have been favored by most of our enterprising Founders—excluding, perhaps, Thomas Jefferson and others favoring perpetuation of an agrarian society."


...Justice Scalia concedes that Justice Stevens is right about how the Founders actually viewed corporations--as having received such privileges from the state that they couldn't also claim rights from the state--but can envision certain scenarios where they might have thought differently. And so he followed his imagination rather than the Founding. It's like he had Brennan or Blackmun as a ghostwriter.

Posted by Orrin Judd at February 10, 2010 8:36 PM
blog comments powered by Disqus
« WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO GO?: | Main | OCCUPYING IRAQ, NOT ACCEPTING HAMAS, TOPPLING THE COURTS IN SOMALIA AND LEAVING ASSAD IN PLACE...: »