Who is to say what is "right"?
When something can be interpreted in two different ways, with each of those interpretations implying a diametrically opposite meaning, it's reasonably characterized as "wrong". Clarity and unambiguity are two ways to be "right" - there should be no dispute as to these. If there are many ways to attain clarity and precision, then they may all very well be "right", but they aren't all equal. Some would be clearer and more precise than others, and it would suit us well to choose those.
English does change over time, so judging old writing based on today's standards doesn't make sense. But it's ok to judge today's writings based on today's notions of clarity and precision.
I'd use this alternate: "This is contrary to law and to sound economic policy."
This alternate is certainly better, IMO, than my own recommendation to use the Oxford Comma.