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
id sg-smu-ink.sol_research-4083
record_format dspace
spelling sg-smu-ink.sol_research-40832017-06-22T09:17:59Z A Commentary on Professor Fisher’s Thesis: Ideology, Religion, Private Property and the Supreme Court 1987-88 HUNTER, Howard 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. 1990-01-01T08:00:00Z text application/pdf https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/2131 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sol_research/article/4083/viewcontent/CommentaryFisherThesis_39EmoryLJ135.pdf http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law eng Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University Law Religion Law
institution Singapore Management University
building SMU Libraries
continent Asia
country Singapore
Singapore
content_provider SMU Libraries
collection InK@SMU
language English
topic Law
Religion Law
spellingShingle Law
Religion Law
HUNTER, Howard
A Commentary on Professor Fisher’s Thesis: Ideology, Religion, Private Property and the Supreme Court 1987-88
description 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.
format text
author HUNTER, Howard
author_facet HUNTER, Howard
author_sort HUNTER, Howard
title A Commentary on Professor Fisher’s Thesis: Ideology, Religion, Private Property and the Supreme Court 1987-88
title_short A Commentary on Professor Fisher’s Thesis: Ideology, Religion, Private Property and the Supreme Court 1987-88
title_full A Commentary on Professor Fisher’s Thesis: Ideology, Religion, Private Property and the Supreme Court 1987-88
title_fullStr A Commentary on Professor Fisher’s Thesis: Ideology, Religion, Private Property and the Supreme Court 1987-88
title_full_unstemmed A Commentary on Professor Fisher’s Thesis: Ideology, Religion, Private Property and the Supreme Court 1987-88
title_sort commentary on professor fisher’s thesis: ideology, religion, private property and the supreme court 1987-88
publisher Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
publishDate 1990
url https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/2131
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sol_research/article/4083/viewcontent/CommentaryFisherThesis_39EmoryLJ135.pdf
_version_ 1772829877257371648