I've been surprised to find several writers say that Libertarianism is committed to the view that undetermined free actions are not covered by laws of nature. In some cases, the writer is a Libertarian; in others, the writer thinks that this view is, unfortunately for Libertarians, something to which they are committed. I haven't found much of an argument for thinking that Libertarianism entails any such commitment.
All of the writers I have in mind take Libertarianism to be at least metaphysically possible. Thus, they think there is some possible solution to the problem of luck. Perhaps the idea is that a solution to that problem requires that undetermined free actions be lawless. But why think that?
Any ideas? Also, has anyone else seen much discussion of this question?