- About the Current Issue: What Is Due Process?
Lead Essay
- Why Substantive Due Process Makes Sense by Timothy Sandefur
Timothy Sandefur argues that the phrase "due process of law" is a promise of regular, non-arbitrary treatment by the government. That promise certainly entails procedural elements, but we would be hard-pressed to justify any of them without reference to a deeper, implicit, and ultimately substantive guarantee. "Citizens are entitled to procedures only because they are entitled to lawful treatment," Sandefur writes. Arbitrary, irrational, or merely self-serving government acts are not lawful acts, properly speaking, and they should be overturned on substantive grounds. The process of law that is due to citizens is more than just a ritual or a procedure; it also requires judges to ask whether the law serves public or merely private ends.
Response Essays
- Not So Fast, Mr. Sandefur by Lawrence Rosenthal
Professor Rosenthal sympathizes with the idea that the Constitution protects us against unjust majorities. But he holds that the Due Process clause does not act as Sandefur claims. "The First Amendment expressly limits the scope of legislative power," he writes, "[but] the Due Process Clause does not." Even were we to grant that laws must be in the service of a general, public principle, substantive due process wouldn't necessarily yield the results we predict or desire. Instead, it would amount to an unreviewable judicial veto.
- Response by Ryan Williams, coming February 10
- Response by Gary Lawson, coming February 12
The Conversation
- Conversation to Follow February 13
Related at Cato
- Daily Commentary: A Cheer for Judicial Activism, by Clint Bolick, April 3, 2007
- Podcast: Beachfront Property and Substantive Due Process by Ilya Shapiro, June 28, 2010
- Book Forum: Rehabilitating Lochner: Defending Individual Rights against Progressive Reform by David Bernstein, May 2, 2011
- Book Forum: The Right to Earn a Living
How Government Stifles Initiative and Harms Economic Growth by Timothy Sandefur, September 20, 2010 - Legal Brief: Lawrence v. Texas, amicus curiae brief of the Cato Institute, June 1, 2003
» By The Editors on January 9th, 2012
» Print Article