There are problems with Robert Nozick’s derivation of a minimal state. First, it is not clear that anarchy would not be morally superior to a Nozickian minimal state. Second, it is predictively uncertain that people would form a dominant protective association and, ultimately, a minimal state. Third, there is no sufficiently unrisky way for the dominant protective association to rule out decision procedures, such as forms of legal adjudication, employed by non-dominant associations.