Tag: Property Rights

On a Law Code

The history of the compilation of legal statutes is as old as the concept of ownership. In other words, the written law began with owning land and other property. Think of all the issues associated with owning land: Deciding who is the proper owner, where the boundaries of the land is, who owns things like mineral rights, how one accesses the property (what land you have to cross), etc. All of that requires regulation and thus, a written law code. And law codes mean adjudication. And that gave rise to things like courts, judges, and even lawyers. And it all began with ownership.

Today, the law continues to define what exactly constitutes property and the associated rights of it. The idea of something that is property also includes intellectual (that is, not physical) property and rights. We also think of land being lateral, but it can also be vertical as well. People have the rights to the space above their property as well–for example, I can’t build a bridge over your house if I own the property on either side of you. This concept is still being defined legally as time goes on.

Some people have been thinking about this concept of what is above you for almost a century. A Czech lawyer was one of the first to attempt to codify what legal rights people should have over the space above them. His name was Vladimir Mandl. He published his thoughts on it way back in 1932. Das Weltraum-Recht: Ein Problem der Raumfahrt was his treatise on the subject, published in German, and it was obviously way ahead of its time. As the 20th Century progressed, others added to Mandl’s propositions. Cases began to be heard in various courts around the world that added to and clarified the proposition. Now, international law is understandably dicey because of the various laws in the nations involved. But the idea is that international legal consensus be built so that rights can be applied equally across the globe. Think of the world-wide standards for things like war (the Geneva Convention, for example) and other issues that have global implications and applications.

The United Nations also took up the issue. The laws become more defined. Agreements were signed. Conventions were held. Universal agreement was reached. Courts have been hearing cases involving one major point of contention: The definition of what it is above you. How far do your rights go? Can I claim the air over my land to the point that I can tell drones or even airplanes that they can’t fly over me? Also, remember that, since we are on a globe, the are above us grows in a cone shape the higher up we go. Do we as individuals or nations own that? And thus, the law is evolving and changing as it always does. But we go back to the original concepts of Vladimir Mendl. He set the standard for how we view what’s above us and how it should be regulated, and he did it long before we began traveling so far “up” that we were actually “out.”

By the way, the translation of his publication in English is Space Law: A Problem of Space Travel.

On a Powerful Racist

Jim’s legacy remains that of one of America’s most infamous racists. From what historians can piece together from various stories, Jim came from St. Louis, Missouri, and was first received public notice on stages across the country performing blackface “minstrel shows” to the delight of white audiences in the years before the American Civil War.

After the war is when Jim turned to politics and really began his pernicious campaign of hate against Black Americans. Jim, feeding on the hatred most southerners felt towards the newly-freed slaves of the region and playing on whites’ fears and prejudices, worked to pass laws that gradually wore away the precious rights that had been bought with blood on battlefields across the country during the war. Even the passage of Constitutional amendments that were supposed to guarantee rights of equality and justice before the law, voting rights, and other freedoms were worn away by the enormous amount of racist-based work Jim did across almost all states in the old Confederacy.

For example, the voting rights that Black men had won after the war were taken away by Jim’s efforts. He worked to pass laws that created such things as poll taxes (which most Black voters couldn’t pay) and literacy tests (again, which most Black voters couldn’t pass but weren’t given to White voters), thus effectively depriving Blacks of their rights as citizens. These types of laws stayed on the books in some states until the 1960s and have seen a revival in legislation requiring specific types of voter identification that Black citizens often find difficult to procure. That’s how pervasive Jim’s lasting legacy has been.

Courts, stocked with Jim’s allies, consistently applied justice unfairly to Black lawbreakers compared to White defendants. Laws were passed in many states at Jim’s direction that eroded or severely limited the ability of Black citizens to own land, to own businesses, or to travel freely. It was as if Jim’s purpose was to return Black citizens to, if not a state of legal and physical enslavement, at least a social and economic one.

And Jim’s plan worked. Jim’s efforts are why people like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. had to, in his words, “fight for something that should have been mine since birth” through the 1960s and even today. So, it’s easy to see why Jim remains today the premier racist and bigot produced by this nation. However, Jim isn’t one person, or even a person, actually.

You know him as Jim Crow.