Ryan has hit the issue squarely in writing that the mantra of law today is simple obedience to the state. Paul Rosenzweig a few years ago wrote that criminal law in this country has strayed far from its roots. At the founding of the country, criminal law dealt with harm that one individual visited upon another.

Today, unfortunately, most criminal prosecutions are made against people who either have transgressed a “public interest” statute or have failed to act in some sort of prescribed “public duty.” For example, people in prison for drug violations are not incarcerated because they harmed someone (or at least acted against that person’s will — in the case of selling drugs), but rather because it is considered a “public duty” not to use certain drugs.

Ryan brings up Martha Stewart, who is a classic example of this unfortunate phenomenon. Stewart harmed no one (and, that includes sale of her stocks, which later rose in value, so I don’t want to hear the “she sold bad stocks” argument). Moreover, the reason that she went to her fateful meeting with the feds is because prosecutors and others in the government were illegally leaking information (or maybe disinformation) that was hurting the stock price of Stewart’s company.

Remember, prosecutors declared that they wanted to “help” the stockholders of Martha Stewart Living. They “helped” those stockholders by lying about Stewart, imprisoning her, and depriving the company of her able services. Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?