From A Stitch in Haste, Kip asks a useful question based on the Fifth Circuit Court’s ruling (pdf) that overturned a Texas statute banning the sale of sex toys [emphasis in original]:
Wouldn’t it be nice if, rather than perpetually litigating, re-litigating, appealing, re-appealing, circuit-splitting and certiorari-petitioning the question of what the right to privacy (i.e., sexual substantive due process) does and does not mean, we instead recognized the right of property and simply allowed individuals to buy or rent a plot of land, build or rent a store on it, and sell whatever he pleased, at least to competent consenting adults (i.e., economic substantive due process)?
Indeed.