Roger Pilon
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Roger Pilon is Vice President for Legal Affairs for the Cato Institute, and an American libertarian legal theorist. In particular, he has developed a libertarian version of the rights theory of his teacher, noted philosopher Alan Gewirth. These views are discussed in discourse ethics.
Contents |
[edit] Education
Roger Pilon has three philosophy degrees: a bachelor's degree from Columbia University and a masters and doctorate, both from the University of Chicago. He also earned a law degree at the George Washington University.
[edit] General background
Pilon is the publisher of the CATO Supreme Court Review. His writing has appeared in such newspapers as the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, and the Los Angeles Times. He also frequently appears on television shows and testifies before Congress. In addition, Pilon held five senior posts in the administration of Ronald Reagan.
He is married to Juliana Geran Pilon.[1]
[edit] Interpretation of the U.S. Constitution
Pilon believes that the government only has power to regulate conduct that violates other people's rights. This view is in the tradition of John Locke's view of natural rights. An example of this is the use of contraceptives. Pilon reasons that since people using contraceptives (see Griswold v. Connecticut) were not violating anyone's rights, the state had no authority to regulate such activity. However Pilon believes abortion is not a constitutionally protected right. He reasons that everyone - he hopes - would argee that killing a baby one day after it is born is murder. Then what is the difference between one day after and one day before? The answer is there is no principle difference. Then what about 2 months before or 3? This sort of line drawing, Pilon reasons, is meant to be left to the political branches.[2]
Pilon believes that Congress should be kept within its [[enumerated powers. He believes the U.S. Supreme Court has failed to limit Congress with the so-called spending power and the commerce power. He refers to it as the "so-called spending power" because nowhere in the Constitution is it an independent power. Therefore, Congress can only spend money to further its otherwise enumerated powers. One of those powers is the power to regulate commerce among the states, nations, and Indian tribes. Pilon believes that the court was incorrect in Wickard to assert that Congress can regulate activity that, aggregated together, has a substantial effect on interstate commerce. Pilon reasons that everything has some effect on commerce; therefore, the court's reasoning essentially makes Congress' power unlimited. He does state, however, that United States v. Lopez did fix this problem to a small degree, but then again, Gonzales v. Raich weakened that decision.
[edit] Works
- Roger Pilon, "Ordering Rights Consistently: Or What We Do and Do Not Have Rights To," Georgia Law Review 13 (1979): 1171–96
- Roger Pilon, A Theory of Rights: Toward Limited Government (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Chicago, 1979).
- Alan Gewirth, Reason and Morality (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978)
- Alan Gewirth, "The Basis and Content of Human Rights," Georgia Law Review 13 (1979): 1148)
