With apologies to Professor Danielle Allen ’93 (On the Campus, Oct. 5), I humbly suggest that our Constitution’s lack of any mention of “worker rights” wreaked far more havoc than did her meaningful “missing period.”
Multiple mentions of “property rights” — and none protecting workers — left our courts without constitutional grounds to counter employers’ requests to grant injunctions that blocked strikes that deprived their companies of the profits from their properties. Courts routinely found no reason to send government troops and strikebreakers to protect employees’ property rights.
Published online November 30, 2016
With apologies to Professor Danielle Allen ’93 (On the Campus, Oct. 5), I humbly suggest that our Constitution’s lack of any mention of “worker rights” wreaked far more havoc than did her meaningful “missing period.”
Multiple mentions of “property rights” — and none protecting workers — left our courts without constitutional grounds to counter employers’ requests to grant injunctions that blocked strikes that deprived their companies of the profits from their properties. Courts routinely found no reason to send government troops and strikebreakers to protect employees’ property rights.