"It most certainly does not get under anyone’s skin today." Well count me, along with you, among those it does. And count Peter Lawler and Richard Reinsch, channelling Wilmore Kendall: "Of course, narrow majorities on the Supreme Court or regulators in the executive branch agencies now frequently act apart from this deliberative process [that intended by the Founders], the former through insisting that controversial accounts of unnumerated rights are to recieve constitutional sanction, the latter by rewriting federal statutes through an informal rule-making process outside of even the Administrative Procedure Act. Kendall's republicanism opposes itself to both." (A Constitution in Full, p. 76) Lawler specifically called the abortion cases a new version of substantive due process (i.e., Lochernizing) in a number of other essays.
"It most certainly does not get under anyone’s skin today." Well count me, along with you, among those it does. And count Peter Lawler and Richard Reinsch, channelling Wilmore Kendall: "Of course, narrow majorities on the Supreme Court or regulators in the executive branch agencies now frequently act apart from this deliberative process [that intended by the Founders], the former through insisting that controversial accounts of unnumerated rights are to recieve constitutional sanction, the latter by rewriting federal statutes through an informal rule-making process outside of even the Administrative Procedure Act. Kendall's republicanism opposes itself to both." (A Constitution in Full, p. 76) Lawler specifically called the abortion cases a new version of substantive due process (i.e., Lochernizing) in a number of other essays.