Antitrust

stephen bryer was an architect of de regulation in the 19 seventies under jimmy carter. He even talked about getting rid of mandates for seat belts because he believed in cost benefit analysis, which is a very technocratic fiddling. It really is just about allowing economists to have a veto point over democratic choices on what kind of rules they want to live by. When he was a district court judge, he never ruled against a large corporation in an anti trust case. And then when he went on the court, he signed on two unanimous decisions in the two thousands that evicerated antitris law. So i don't get what you're coming from. Likeike,