Great insight yesterday from friend Wayne Mumford of WillFishForWork, commenting on the Supreme Court hearing arguments in PPL Montana v Montana yesterday:
I’m a little surprised to hear that the U of M professors chose to side with PPL on the extent of what constitutes a a useful channel of commerce. Any student of the exploration and fur trade era knows that a stream deep enough to float a canoe in it was used as a means to transport furs and trade goods. And anyone that has spent any time in a canoe knows that it takes damn little water to float one.
While I’m fairly confident in my assumption that we have few esteemed legal scholars reading Chi Wulff these days, perhaps they should be.
Wayne may have very well distilled the useful channel of commerce debate into two sentences. Well done.
