Abstract
In sum, a variety of odd and dramatic consequences counsel that the constitutional explanation should be abandoned. There exists already an extensive body of law to deal with the problem of legal retaliation against political conduct-namely, Speech Clause jurisprudence-which is designed to accommodate the fact-rich, policy-laden, and inherently subjective contexts in which such matters inevitably arise. Indeed, the constitutional explanation really has nothing going for it but good intentions, and ranged against it are all sorts of problems. Therefore, I think the petitioning immunity should be recognized for what it is: an interpretation of a peculiar and uncommonly vague body of federal statutes that by their nature require a lot of interpretation.
Recommended Citation
Sagers, Christopher L.
(2002)
"The Legal Structure of American Freedom and the Provenance of the Antitrust Immunities,"
Utah Law Review: Vol. 2002:
No.
4, Article 8.
Available at:
https://dc.law.utah.edu/ulr/vol2002/iss4/8