I haven't. But there are obvious power dynamics when large market actors can get people to waive their right to sue. There's a reason they're called "inalienable." They're not supposed to be self-alienable either.
Too bad it is probably too late on these issues; we're approaching a situation where an increasing amount of "little people" law will be handled in arbitration.
Justice in the US has always provided the best justice money can buy. They're just starting to implement a sort of buyers-club.
This is far more minor by comparison and protects the rights of people to enter into contracts, even those they don't like.
Alas, no. If this were really about money only, you could design a much better system. This ain't the best money can buy. (Perhaps look at some actual business-friendly jurisdictions for examples.)
It's a whole hodge-podge of incentives.
When this was all going down, RobinHood was a plucky startup being praised all around the valley, not a 'large market actor'.
> There's a reason they're called "inalienable." They're not supposed to be self-alienable either.
Not sure which founding father suggested the inalienable right to tort, but apparently he was overruled since it didn't make it's way into any founding documents.