Why Professor Lessig’s 'Dependence Corruption' Is Not a Founding-Era Concept

Tillman, Seth Barrett

Download This Paper

Open PDF in Browser

Add Paper to My Library

Why Professor Lessig’s 'Dependence Corruption' Is Not a Founding-Era Concept

13 Election Law Journal 336-45 (2014) (peer reviewed)

National Constitution Center Constitution Daily (Oct. 23, 2013, 7:00 AM)

19 Pages Posted: 22 Oct 2013 Last revised: 11 Sep 2014

See all articles by Seth Barrett Tillman

Seth Barrett Tillman

National University of Ireland, Maynooth (NUI Maynooth) - Faculty of Law

Date Written: March 14, 2014

Abstract

This paper is a response to Professor Lessig's dependence corruption scholarship, appearing in his scholarly articles (e.g., Reply to Hasen), in his recent book (Republic Lost), and in his amicus brief in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission.

An earlier version of this essay was published in Seth Barrett Tillman, Why Professor Lessig’s “dependence corruption” is not a founding-era concept, National Constitution Center Constitution Daily (Oct. 23, 2013, 7:00 AM).

It was republished -- in expanded form in -- in Seth Barrett Tillman, Why Professor Lessig’s “Dependence Corruption” Is Not a Founding-Era Concept, 13 Election Law Journal 336-45 (2014) (peer reviewed).

Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation

Tillman, Seth Barrett, Why Professor Lessig’s 'Dependence Corruption' Is Not a Founding-Era Concept (March 14, 2014). 13 Election Law Journal 336-45 (2014) (peer reviewed) , National Constitution Center Constitution Daily (Oct. 23, 2013, 7:00 AM), Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2342945