The paper draws on Stephen Siegel (1984) to argue that, while paving the way for constitutionalizing the free market in Lochner v. New York (1905), the reproduction cost method that the Supreme Court established in Smyth v. Ames (1898) as the preferred technique for assessing the value of a business for regulatory purposes also exposed the conventional character of any valuation exercise, against the claims of objectivity made by classical economists and mainstream jurists. The inconsistency between recognizing that “value is not a fact” and the classical laissez-faire philosophy underlying the Court’s jurisprudence did not escape progressive critics, who concluded that government could legitimately fine-tune regulation in order to affect a business’s value and pursue alternative socio-economic goals.

中文翻译：

---

“价值不是事实”：在镀金时代的美国，复制成本和从古典到新古典监管的过渡

该论文借鉴斯蒂芬·西格尔 (Stephen Siegel) (1984) 的观点认为，在为美国自由市场宪法化铺平道路的同时洛克纳诉纽约案(1905)，最高法院在史密斯诉艾姆斯案（1898 年）作为为监管目的评估企业价值的首选技术，也暴露了任何估值活动的传统特征，反对古典经济学家和主流法学家提出的客观性主张。承认“价值不是事实”与法院判例基础的古典自由放任哲学之间的不一致并没有逃脱进步的批评者，他们得出结论认为政府可以合理地微调监管以影响企业的价值并追求替代社会-经济目标。