Source: (2007) Marquette Law Review. 91(1): 263-294.

An individual's right to exchange his property by mutual agreement with others is considered a first principle of libertarianism and the basis for the creation of wealth and the achievement of social prosperity. ... How could a supporter of free markets object to a voluntary exchange like this, with the defendant trading his constitutional rights for the dismissal of charges or a reduced sentence? Assuming that the resulting punishment conforms with its espoused justification of punishment - supposedly retribution, or maybe compensation - the values of libertarianism would seem to be served in full. ... Does it all necessarily devolve into punishment anarchy? I think not, given libertarianism's conception of individual rights and a minimal state, supplemented by a few modest assumptions. ... And that is why libertarianism should find it illegitimate for the state to impose its justification of punishment in opposition to the views of the victim and other affected individuals. ... Does this mean that the victim may demand any sanction, or none at all, applying his own justification of punishment to the rights violation at hand? That doesn't seem correct - the offender has rights, too, which have been forfeited only to the extent of his crime. ... Instead, a libertarian approach to punishment might find disconcerting several other aspects of plea bargaining in action. ... To be clear, restorative justice programs like family group conferencing and victim-offender mediation do have conceptual limitations. (Excerpt).