Scott, it really seems to come down to what “rejected wholesale” means.

We rejected the underlying notion of the basis of the authority of common law in favor of another axiom set, we established a new set of basic assumptions that conflicted with many of the basic ideas of common law, and established a written Constitution that in all cases dominates over common law — if the Constitution and the common law don’t agree, the Constitution wins.

Then some states adopted common law — with the unstated, but very real, provision that it was adopted only if it didn’t conflict with the new basis of law we’d established.

If you say that’s not “rejected wholesale” I guess I can’t argue, but my opinion doesn’t change.