Bursting the Speech Bubble: Toward a More Fitting Perceived-Affiliation Standard
- Share The University of Chicago Law Review | Bursting the Speech Bubble: Toward a More Fitting Perceived-Affiliation Standard on Facebook
- Share The University of Chicago Law Review | Bursting the Speech Bubble: Toward a More Fitting Perceived-Affiliation Standard on Twitter
- Share The University of Chicago Law Review | Bursting the Speech Bubble: Toward a More Fitting Perceived-Affiliation Standard on Email
- Share The University of Chicago Law Review | Bursting the Speech Bubble: Toward a More Fitting Perceived-Affiliation Standard on LinkedIn
For helpful comments on earlier drafts, many thanks to Tomiko Brown-Nagin, Jessica Bulman-Pozen, Christine Desan, Einer Elhauge, Elizabeth F. Emens, Marie-Amélie George, Noah Glass, Jeffrey Gordon, Annette Gordon-Reed, Jamal Greene, Ariela J. Gross, Hendrik Hartog, Bert I. Huang, Freya Irani, Olatunde C. Johnson, Jeremy Kessler, Ryan Liss, Kenneth W. Mack, Jane Manners, Henry P. Monaghan, Shaun Ossei-Owusu, Christina Duffy Ponsa-Kraus, Vlad Perju, David Pozen, Alex Raskolnikov, Martha A. Sandweiss, Carol Sanger, Matthew A. Shapiro, Emily Stolzenberg, Sarah L. Swan, Sean Wilentz, and Rebecca E. Zietlow, as well as the editors of The University of Chicago Law Review and participants in the Columbia Law School Associates and Fellows Workshop, the Harvard Legal History Workshop, and the American Society for Legal History.
In the midst of a New England winter long ago, young people of Boston filed into a drafty meeting hall up the road from the harbor. They had assembled on that January morning in 1839 for the seventh annual meeting of the New England Anti-Slavery Society.
Thanks to John Brinkerhoff, Abbe Gluck, Ted Lee, Daryl Levinson, Scott Levy, and Mike Showalter for helpful comments and conversations. Thanks also to the careful editors at the University of Chicago Law Review. All errors are our own.
Political sociologist Claus Offe has diagnosed the participatory deficit in North Atlantic democracies as the product of an imbalance in state–market relations. When the market is supreme, public policy can do little to constrain the market’s ever-expanding realms.