> I agree with Sunstein about Roe. It was
> wrongly decided, poorly reasoned, and
> counterproductive. The abortion fight
> should have been legislative, not a matter
> of judicial creativity. I would fight like
> a demon to keep Rose/Casey now, of course.
> On legal grounds as well as political ones:
> it is now entrenched. I'm a judicial
> minimalist on legal as well as political
> grounds, and so's Sunstein. He's probably
> more supportive of creativity than I am.
>
> I guess I also like Sunstein's use of
> behavioral economics -- he's not nearly
> even as much of a fan of rational choice
> theory as I am, and has pioneered what
> they call "behavioral" law and economics,
> which is using in law an economics with
> realistic, psychologically grounded,
> empirically supported assumptions. What's
> wrong with that?
Andie, where did the bulk of the post just go? The threat of the internet to democracy, the glories of the Federal Society, the defense of John Roberts and Samuel Alito, and praise for the work of John Yoo. I am a dirty layperson, so there is only one part John Yoo's work I care about. What has Sunstein written against torutre?
And isn't Sunstein a major intellectual champion of goo-goo bipartisanship in this two-party state? If you're going to lock-out whatever challengers remain in America today, this way is perhaps the best.
As for challenging the law and economics crowd, why not James Galbraith?
http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/columns/2006/05/predator_state.html
Galbraith will have a book out next month fixating, as Dean Baker has for years, on the duplicity of self-regulating markets and those who love them (in theory if not in practice). Kathy G's claimed that Sunstein is complicit with this shtick. Granted, complicity is the norm, and it probably doesn't distinguish even a centrist from a "progressive." (scare quotes because I give up trying to understand what it means)
Behavioral economics is still playing out, and the contributions by economists are real, but how great a revelation is it to those of us who _didn't_ believe the broader claims of rational choice? I mean, Herbert Simon (for one) has already been dead for over seven years. How new is the new?
http://cepa.newschool.edu/het/profiles/simon.htm
> Sunstein's The Partial Constitution is a
> quietly very radical book, attacks the
> notion of "property rights"a s given by
> God or Nature by pointing out that the
> choice of baseline makes all the difference.
That, certainly, cannot be said enough.
Shane