Predictably, lots of leftists have decided to protest the renaming of George Mason University’s law school to the Antonin Scalia Law School. Scalia, they declare, was “too polarizing” and therefore does not deserve to have a law school named after him (of probably even an alley). A common trope is that he was against poor people because of his solid devotion to the rule of law.
In this Forbes article, Professor Michael Krauss argues against that idea. Yes, Scalia was solid in his devotion to the rule of law, but that had nothing to do with the wealth of any party. And in truth, poor people benefit every bit as much from the rule of law as do wealthy people.
It’s too bad that the left can’t understand that poor people do best when they are free to act in a setting of secure rights for all.