StephanKinsella.com

For a while I toyed with the idea of writing corrections of Supreme Court opinions which are often wrong and, even when the results are right (e.g. A Libertarian Defense of Kelo and Limited Federal Power), the reasoning is typically often still confused, muddled, statist, legal-positivist, anti-decentralist (anti-antifederalist), and economically illiterate (other than that, it’s just fine). I would play Shadow Justice. Great use of my time. See, e.g., my short-lived blog The Shadow Justice which I discontinued because I was lazy too busy.

Anyway in a recent case, Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump (Feb. 2o, 2026),  ¹ the Supremes struck down Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs, holding that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs. (I also thought Roberts was basically right to conclude that Obamacare’s mandatory fees are permissible, by characterizing them as a “tax.” Unfortunately.) [continue reading…]

1. See Amy Howe, “Supreme Court strikes down tariffs,” SCOTUSBlog (Feb 20, 2026); Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump (Tariffs); Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, 607 U.S. ___ (2026) (Justia); pdf. [↩]

Related:

• Guy Kedem, “Dialogical Libertarianism: Ultimate Foundation of Ethics”: Hoppe’s Argumentation Ethics and Kinsella’s Estoppel Discussed in Hebrew
• “Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide” (2011) and Supplemental Resources

מדע אומלל (“Unhappy Science” (?); @guy_carmell; Guy Kedem), Hoppe’s Argumentation Ethics: A User Friendly, Neighborly Introduction, (Dec. 25, 2011).

As mentioned in Robert Pascal, R.I.P., after law school I became friends with retired Professor Emeritus Robert Pascal, a famous law professor at LSU that I never met until after I graduated (likewise, I also became friends and correspondent with LSU Law professor Saúl Litvinoff after graduation). ¹ We had a good deal of correspondence in the 1990s and even after, when I was an attorney in Houston and then Philadelphia, and would meet on occasion at his home in Baton Rouge when I would return home for visits. He passed away in 2018 at the age of 102.

Much of his correspondence with me was elegantly hand-written. It spanned from 1993 to 2011, and I have at least 75 pages worth. I may post it some day after reviewing it more closely, even though some of my youthful enthusiasm and desperation to find anyone intelligent to converse with is a bit embarrassing now (this was before the Internet starting making it easier to discourse with remote people in our Phyles). ²

But as I mention him in Herman, The Louisiana Civil Code: A European Legacy for the United States, I’ll post below some selected text from two of our interchanges in 1993–1994, concerning, in part, the “Tournament of Scholars” between Pascal and Batiza. As was clear in our first discussion, Pascal was a leftist and what he called a “catholic communist,” small-c catholic, he emphasized. But he was smart and courtly and decent and I really liked and admired him. [continue reading…]

1.  Saúl Litvinoff, R.I.P. [↩]
2. Phyles; se my note here: Re phyles, I am reminded of the idea behind “flag theory” discussed in Emile Phaneuf III and Rahim Taghizadegan, “Jurisdiction Shopping: The Forgotten Logic Behind Flag Theory,” The Daily Economy (February 2, 2026): “Harry Schultz, who coined the term “flag theory,” framed his thinking in an explicitly Austrian register, crediting Friedrich Hayek as his main economic inspiration and frequently citing Ludwig von Mises and Mises’s American student Hans Sennholz. The same pattern appears among other popularizers of international diversification such as Jerome Tuccille and WG Hill. In other words, the “flags” idea did not arise in a vacuum. It grew naturally from a worldview that treats institutions as constraints to compare, compete, and, when necessary, exit.”  [↩]

Thanks, Grok!

Prompts include:

“The Renaissance emphasized a “rebirth” (from the French word renaître, meaning to be born again) of classical Greek and Roman knowledge, arts, and culture.” Why was it dormant or lost?

list the top 10 enlightenment figures, and the top 10 classical liberal figures, and show overlap.

explain the difference between classical liberalism, libertarianism, and conservatism, and whether libertarianism is right or left, and what about the influence on libertarianism of both classical liberalism as well as the Old Right thinkers and the reason who there seems to be more of an affinity between libertarians and modern conservatives and Republicans than there does to be between libertarians and democrats. Consult https://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/09/hans-hermann-hoppe/smack-down/ and https://stephankinsella.com/2022/01/the-three-fusionisms/

what is the difference between the renaissance and enlightment. explain their significance and relation to classical liberalism

now combine all your previous answers into one final unified overall report. And include in this an analysis of the question of whether libertarianism is of the left, or of the right, and trace its progenitors, influences, and origins. Consult also the attached

[continue reading…]

Related:

• “All that is not permitted is forbidden”
• Robert Pascal, R.I.P.
• The Louisiana Civil Code of 1825: Content, Influences and Languages; Past and Future: Returning to my Louisiana Roots
• On the Role of Commentators and Codes and the Oracles of the Law
• Examples of Libertarian Law vs. Louisiana vs. French vs. Common Law: Consideration and Formalities
• Roman Law and Hypothetical Cases
• Watson, The Importance of “Nutshells”
• “Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society,” in Legal Foundations of a Free Society (Houston: Papinian Press, 2023) [LFFS]
• KOL020 | “Libertarian Legal Theory: Property, Conflict, and Society: Lecture 3: Applications I: Legal Systems, Contract, Fraud” (Mises Academy, 2011)
• Legislative Positivism and Rationalism in the Louisiana and French Civil Codes
• Logical and Legal Positivism
• Reading Suggestions for Prospective/New Law Students (Roman/Civil law focus)
• The Greatest Libertarian Books

In my libertarian and law school studies I was fascinated with law and legal history, reading books and articles touching on both topics, e.g. Bruce Benson’s The Enterprise of Law, Bruno Leoni’s Freedom and the Law, and so on. ¹ As an aspiring legal scholar and lawyer, and Louisiana-educated “civilian” lawyer, I was also interested not only in the common law but the Roman and European civil law, and in law reviews in general. Even footnotes. ² I also became interested in international law when pursuing an LL.M. in international law at King’s College London, and ended up publishing a lot in this area and melding it with my libertarian-related theorizing. [continue reading…]

1. The Greatest Libertarian Books. [↩]
2. All footnotes!; Webnotes. [↩]

Related:

• On the Role of Commentators and Codes and the Oracles of the Law
• Examples of Libertarian Law vs. Louisiana vs. French vs. Common Law: Consideration and Formalities
• Roman Law and Hypothetical Cases
• “Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society,” in Legal Foundations of a Free Society (Houston: Papinian Press, 2023) [LFFS]
• KOL020 | “Libertarian Legal Theory: Property, Conflict, and Society: Lecture 3: Applications I: Legal Systems, Contract, Fraud” (Mises Academy, 2011)
• Legislative Positivism and Rationalism in the Louisiana and French Civil Codes
• Logical and Legal Positivism
• Reading Suggestions for Prospective/New Law Students (Roman/Civil law focus)
• The Greatest Libertarian Books

In my libertarian and law school studies I was fascinated with law and legal history, reading books and articles touching on both topics, e.g. Bruce Benson’s The Enterprise of Law, Bruno Leoni’s Freedom and the Law, and so on. ¹ As an aspiring legal scholar and lawyer, and Louisiana-educated “civilian” lawyer, I was also interested not only in the common law but the Roman and European civil law, and in law reviews in general. Even footnotes. ² I also became interested in international law when pursuing an LL.M. in international law at King’s College London, and ended up publishing a lot in this area and melding it with my libertarian-related theorizing. [continue reading…]

1. The Greatest Libertarian Books. [↩]
2. All footnotes!; Webnotes. [↩]

Related:

• Kinsella’s Social Thought, Illustrated
• The Title-Transfer Contract Theory—Illustrated
• “Estoppel: A New Justification for Individual Rights” (1992)
• The Genesis of Estoppel: My Libertarian Rights Theory
• “Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide”
• “A Libertarian Theory of Punishment and Rights,” in Legal Foundations of a Free Society (Houston: Papinian Press, 2023), based on “Punishment and Proportionality: The Estoppel Approach,” Journal of Libertarian Studies 12, no. 1 (Spring 1996): 51–73

My estoppel theory of libertarian rights is illustrated graphically in the chart/poster below, prepared by Thiago @thiagovscoelho.

[continue reading…]

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 482.

Audio version of “A Tour Through Walter Block’s Oeuvre,” in Walter Block – Anarcho-Capitalist Austro-Libertarian, Elvira Nica & Gheorghe H. Popescu, eds. (Addleton Academic Publishers, 2025). Thanks to George Besada.

Made this audio version:https://t.co/dxc81hv00Z

— Jorge Besada (@hayekian) February 19, 2026

[continue reading…]

Podcast (kinsella-on-liberty): Play in new window | Download (39.4MB)

I recently added the text of this old chapter of mine to the post below on my legal blog. It was Appendix I to a book I co-authored with a colleague, but of course I wrote that appendix.

Economic Calculation Under Socialism, Appendix I to Protecting Foreign Investment Under International Law: Legal Aspects of Political Risk (1997)

By Stephan Kinsella, KinsellaLaw.com (Dec. 10, 2004):

Recently found this oldie but goodie: my “Economic Calculation Under Socialism,” Appendix I to Protecting Foreign Investment Under International Law: Legal Aspects of Political Risk (Dobbs Ferry, New York: Oceana Publications, 1997). Text below. It was not included in the successor treatise, Noah D. Rubins, Thomas N. Papanastasiou and N. Stephan Kinsella, International Investment, Political Risk, and Dispute Resolution: A Practitioner’s Guide, 2d ed. (Oxford University Press, 2020), as my co-authors there were less libertarian than me… [continue reading…]

Related:

• The problem of particularistic ethics or, why everyone really has to admit the validity of the universalizability principle
• Kinsella, “Argumentation Ethics and Liberty: A Concise Guide,” Mises Daily (May 27, 2011)
• Kinsella, “Dialogical Arguments for Libertarian Rights” and “Defending Argumentation Ethics: Reply to Murphy & Callahan,” both in Legal Foundations of a Free Society (Houston, Texas: Papinian Press, 2023)
• Hans-Hermann Hoppe, A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism (Laissez Faire Books, 2013), ch. 7
• idem, The Economics and Ethics of Private Property (Auburn, Ala.: Mises Institute, 2006), chs. 11, 13

I came across an interesting reference in Alessandro Fusillo, “Rothbard, Philosopher of Law,” in Rothbard at 100: A Tribute and Assessment, Stephan Kinsella and Hans-Hermann Hoppe, eds. (forthcoming 2026):

According to Giovanni Birindelli, the universalization test is the only criterion to distinguish arbitrary rules from an objectively founded legal system. He argues that the only rule that passes the test is the non-aggression principle which justifies coercion (self-defense) as a means to uphold self-ownership. Giovanni Birindelli, “L’etica dell’uguaglianza davanti alla legge” (“The ethics of equality before the law“), Giovanni’s Substack (Nov. 5, 2023).

Google’s English translation is below. [continue reading…]

Related

• KOL234 | Vin Armani Show: Live from London: Kinsella vs. Craig Wright Debate on Intellectual Property
• KOL267 | Sal the Agorist Interview: Bitcoin, Copyright, Craig Wright
• IP is Not “Not Property”
• Libertarian and Lockean Creationism: Creation As a Source of Wealth, not Property Rights; Hayek’s “Fund of Experience”; the Distinction Between Scarce Means and Knowledge as Guides to Action
• KOL274 | Nobody Owns Bitcoin (PFS 2019)
• Joshua Fairfield, “Property as the law of virtual things,” Front Res Metr Anal. (2022 Aug 26)
• Fairfield, Tokenized: The law of non-fungible tokens and unique digital property, Ind. LJ 97, 1261 (2022)
  • Other articles by Fairfield
• “Dr” [sic] ¹ Craig S Wright, “Blockchain and Digital Assets: A New Paradigm for Copyright and Patent Distribution through Micropayments” (29 Nov 2023)
• Ana Mercedes López Rodríguez, “Law Applicable to Virtual Real Estate in the Metaverse Proceedings of the International Congress Towards a Responsible Development of the Metaverse,” June 2024

A new article is out from Craig “Satoshi” Wright, “You Don’t Own Your Digital Stuff. NFTs Could Actually Fix That — Without Intellectual Property.“, Craig’s Substack (Feb 10, 2026). Subtitled: “Why the “right-click save” crowd and the IP maximalists are both wrong, and how a 150-year-old economic tradition explains what digital ownership really means.”

I mentioned this in a tweet:
Craig Wright

Oh, I just noticed this is faketoshi, haha.

It doesn’t start out auspiciously: “There’s a dirty secret lurking behind every digital purchase you’ve ever made. That Kindle book you bought? You don’t own it. That film on your iTunes library? Not yours either.”

Well there are two…

— Stephan Kinsella (@NSKinsella) February 12, 2026

[continue reading…]

1. KOL234 | Vin Armani Show: Live from London: Kinsella vs. Craig Wright Debate on Intellectual Property: “during the debate I referred to him as Dr. Wright, since he claims to have several PhDs, but now I am not sure he has any legitimate PhDs, other perhaps than one in “theology”, so I should not have called him “Dr.” That was too deferential. … Wright claims over 16 master’s degrees (e.g., in statistics from the University of Newcastle, LLM from Northumbria University) and numerous certifications, but these have faced similar scrutiny. His LLM dissertation was found heavily plagiarized in the 2024 court case, with the judge calling it “extensive and methodical.” Court Context: In COPA v Wright [2024] EWHC 1198 (Ch), the judge ruled Wright lied “extensively and repeatedly” about being Satoshi Nakamoto, including forging documents. While degrees weren’t the focus, the judgment notes his “wholesale forgery, fabrication, and exaggeration” could extend to qualifications, but proceeded assuming they were real.” Grok re Wright PhDs (“In the 2024 UK High Court judgment in COPA v Wright (where Wright was ruled not to be Bitcoin’s creator Satoshi Nakamoto), the judge noted Wright’s pattern of forgery and plagiarism in other academic work (e.g., his 2008 LLM dissertation had 45 of 58 paragraphs copied verbatim), casting indirect doubt on his degrees. However, the court assumed his qualifications were true for the case, as they weren’t directly challenged.“); Wikipedia; Craig Wright, “The quantification of information systems risk: A look at quantitative responses to information security issues,” Doctoral Thesis, “Charles Sturt University” (2017); 2024 UK High Court judgment in COPA v Wright (pdf), ¶¶ 565–568, 582–585, on pattern of dishonesty,” ¶¶ 127–128, 393–395, 400, 926. [↩]