首页> 外文期刊>Urban Geography >PROPERTY RIGHTS, THE FIRST AMENDMENT, AND JUDICIAL ANTI-URBANISM: THE STRANGE CASE OF VIRGINIA V. HICKS
【24h】

PROPERTY RIGHTS, THE FIRST AMENDMENT, AND JUDICIAL ANTI-URBANISM: THE STRANGE CASE OF VIRGINIA V. HICKS

机译:产权,第一修正案和司法抗城市罪:维吉尼亚诉希克斯的奇怪案例

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Through a close examination of the case of Virginia v. Hicks—from Kevin Hicks's arrests for trespassing on streets near a Richmond, Virginia, public housing project in 1998 and 1999 to the unanimous Supreme Court decision upholding these arrests on the grounds that no harm was done to the First Amendment—this paper explores how the rights of private property are made, through the judicial process, to "trump" other kinds of rights and interests. It examines the implications of both dominant property practices and discourses and a more general judicial anti-urbanism for city life. The paper shows that one of the things at risk given the judiciary's love affair with private property rights is the right of some people simply to be present in public space. By implication, the paper argues that legal geographies need to examine more than just final court decisions (as is often the case), but also uncover the full legal history—the strange twists and turns—of the cases examined.
机译:通过仔细研究Virginia v。Hicks案-从凯文·希克斯(Kevin Hicks)因涉嫌在弗吉尼亚州里士满附近的街道上闯入而被捕,这是1998年和1999年的公共住房项目,直到最高法院一致裁定以无害为由逮捕这些人本文是针对《第一修正案》所做的研究,探讨了如何通过司法程序使“私有”其他种类的权益成为“私有财产”。它研究了主导财产做法和话语的含义以及更普遍的司法反城市主义对城市生活的影响。该文件表明,鉴于司法部门与私人财产权的恋情,某些人面临的风险之一就是某些人仅仅存在于公共场所的权利。言外之意,该论文认为,法律地域不仅需要审查最终的法院裁决(通常是这种情况),而且还需要揭示所审查案件的完整法律历史(奇怪的曲折)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号