Tags
Lochner
Doctrine
Unsupported
The movement claim that the Declaration of Independence functions as super-constitutional law that overrides statutes and constitutional provisions where they conflict is unsupported
The Declaration is foundational political philosophy, not enforceable law that overrides statutes or constitutional provisions. But the natural-law constitutional tradition (Arkes, Jaffa, Sandefur, Barnett) treats the deeper question — whether constitutional interpretation may draw on Declaration principles — seriously, and the question is not foreclosed at the scholarly level. Engaged in good faith rather than dismissed.
Doctrine
Unsupported
The movement claim that Nebbia v. New York's broad liberty definition is the Supreme Court's majority holding, not a dissent, is unsupported
The broad 'liberty' language movement literature quotes as Nebbia's holding is actually from McReynolds's dissent. The majority opinion upheld New York's milk-price regulation as a valid economic regulation under the police power. Reading the dissent as the holding inverts the case's actual significance.