A Commentary on Professor Fisher’s Thesis: Ideology, Religion, Private Property and the Supreme Court 1987-88

The most important lessons to be learned from Professor Fisher's paper are that the ideologies central to American law have roots in religious thought and that the influence of ideologies can be found throughout American law, perhaps most especially in judicial decisions. To these lessons we ca...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: HUNTER, Howard
Format: text
Language:English
Published: Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University 1990
Subjects:
Law
Online Access:https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/2131
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sol_research/article/4083/viewcontent/CommentaryFisherThesis_39EmoryLJ135.pdf
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Singapore Management University
Language: English
Description
Summary:The most important lessons to be learned from Professor Fisher's paper are that the ideologies central to American law have roots in religious thought and that the influence of ideologies can be found throughout American law, perhaps most especially in judicial decisions. To these lessons we can add a third: the ideologies embodied in judicial decisions concerning private property in the period from the American Revolution to the Civil War are still with us. Three recent decisions of the United States Supreme Court' illustrate the continuing importance of the constitutional and ideological protection of private property, while offering an interesting interplay of the theories of "public easement" and "off-setting gains" as defined by Professor Fisher.4 There are differences, to be sure, between the property and takings issues considered recently by the Supreme Court and those contemplated in the cases discussed by Fisher - the contemporary cases lack the drama of slavery hovering in the background. Hardly any property case could have been decided prior to the Civil War without a concern for the impact of the decision on that most notorious of American institutions. More striking than the differences, however, are the similarities in tone, argument, and' substance.