Law in Contemporary Society
Cohn and Frank have given us some interesting ways to assess the value of legal arguments. Since we are all stuck reading the same cases in other classes, I thought it would be interesting if we could put what we have learned from these authors to work.

On that note, here is the most beautiful piece of nonsense legal reasoning I have seen so far:

“Therefore the pricing order is constitutional, because it is merely the combination of two independently lawful regulations . . . if the state may impose a valid tax on dealers, it is free to use the proceeds of the tax as it chooses; and if it may independently subsidize farmers, it is free to finance the subsidy by means of any legitimate tax.”--West Lynn Creamery, Inc. v. Healy (Stone, Constitutional Law, p. 247).

Interestingly enough, the Court adopted what Cohn would call a functional view of the law and viewed the law in terms of what it did and not what it was called. As a result, the state lost despite some great nonsense reasoning.

-- StephenClarke - 31 Jan 2008



Webs Webs

r2 - 22 Jan 2009 - 02:05:47 - IanSullivan
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
Syndicate this site RSSATOM