You may have noticed a paucity of recent posts of late, even though legal issues have dominated much of the news.  The Supreme Court has a near-monopoly on legal developments, but of course there are the legal battles of Donald Trump, the Boston drama of a weeks-long televised criminal trial, and numerous court determinations about abortion, curtailment of the powers of various Federal agencies such as the SEC and FTC, and restrictions on the President forgiving student debt, just to mention a few.

My view has been that  major themes are well-covered in the general or business press, and do not need my repetitive posts as an echo chamber; those people with an interest in such things will find sufficient information to satisfy their needs.  I try to post about important things that might not get either full coverage elsewhere or with respect to which the coverage is not crystal-clear as to major take-aways.

I did want to comment generally, however, about what is a clearly emerging legal trend in American case law, and its overall impact.  This impact is sometimes seen as a swing towards  conservative viewpoints, or as a swing to traditional law, or as a political or socio-political movement, and each such analysis bears consideration.  But from a technocratic standpoint, the trend is best seen, I suggest, as the dismantling of the liberal administrative state.

On the operational level, as relates to the conduct of American business, this is a process of substantial deregulation.  Until recently, government regulation was seen either as pro-active for the protection of people or, alternatively, as meddling with individual freedoms, with the pro-active viewpoint often reflected in growing governmental policy both at the federal and state levels.  However, many courts recently are consistently cutting back on the exercise of power by  governments to impede business practices.  The activism of the current federal administration is very robust, but against this back-drop the decisions of many courts stand highlighted in contrast.

While the upcoming election  season will define which approach will control the White House, the Congress and state governments, the composition of the courts (appointed at all levels and with an  increased  anti-regulatory streak in many cases) will remain relatively constant (most judges don’t get re-elected every few years), and those courts will continue to exercise power towards less governmental regulation.

Each side of the argument proceeds from a desire to provide the greatest good for the population at large.  But the manner of establishing that “greatest good” is radically different: government protection vs individual freedom to decide for oneself. The popular and business press is highly attuned to reporting this ongoing battle, and you will be spared much regurgitation of such matters   in this blog site.  But one last thought: you will see much impassioned rhetoric on both sides, a growing number of court cases trying  to negative governmental activism, and a set of business opportunities  which may well alter our understanding of  the social compact.

Stay tuned….