Summary: Justice Holmes' dissent in Lochner v. New York is well-known for the statement, "[A] constitution is not intended to embody a particular economic theory, whether of paternalism and the organic relation of the citizen to the State or of laissez faire." But is this belief consistent with the original Constitution? To what extent did the ideas of thinkers such as Adam Smith shape the founders' understanding of human nature and public virtue? In what ways do their economic and philosophical commitments continue to shape our constitutional government today? Are capitalism and a commitment to civic virtue complementary or antagonistic? Does the Constitution promote a virtuous citizenry or is it simply a set of political structures that can accommodate a pluralistic society? At a time when the virtues of capitalism are often called into question, it will be useful to examine the precise place of this theory in the foundational structures of our government. The Federalist Society's Student Division presented this panel at the 2011 Annual Student Symposium on February 25, 2011. Panelists included Prof. James Ely of Vanderbilt University Law School; Prof. Renee Lettow Lerner of The George Washington University Law School; Prof. Nelson Lund of George Mason University School of Law; Prof. G. Edward White of the University of Virginia School of Law; and Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Introduction by Mr. Brinton Lucas, Symposium Vice Chair for the University of Virginia Federalist Society.
