The theory that one’s home is a psychologically special form of property has become a cherished principle of property law, cited by legislators and touted extensively in the legal scholarship. Influential scholars, most notably Margaret Radin, have asserted that ongoing control over one’s home is necessary for an individual’s very personhood and ability to flourish in society. Other commentators have expounded a communitarian vision of the home as rooting e is evidence, as discussed in Part III, that dislocation that results in reduced social interaction and relationships is detrimental. Also, dislocation that separates families or impacts family relations is likely to impose psychmacy of the home has encouraged the overproduction of home-protective legislation and added a gloss of moral legitimacy to rent seeking. In light of the political ground swell to “save homes” and the social costs of residential protectionism, it is time for a critical reexamination of the psychological importance attributed to the home. Drawing on the research literature in psychology, sociology, and demography, this Article argues that there is scant evidence to support the theory that one’s home is a special object that constitutes psychological personhood or enables a rich web of territorial relationships.
Can Courts Repair the Crumbling Foundation of Good Citizenship? An Examination of Potential Legal Challenges to Social Studies Cutbacks in Public Schools
In the wake of No Child Left Behind, many public schools have cut or eliminated social studies instruction to allot more time for math and literacy. Given courts’ repeated celebration of education as the “foundation of good citizenship,” this Note examines potential legal claims and litigation strategies that could be used to compel social studies instruction in public schools. This Note contends that the federal judiciary’s civic conception of education leaves the door slightly ajar for a Fourteenth Amendment challenge on behalf of social studies-deprived students, but the Supreme Court’s refusal in San Antonio v. Rodriguez to recognize education as a fundamental right leaves potential federal challenges with substantial barriers to success.