This essay is an attempt to uncover and reconstruct 19th-century legal notions of “public economy” and the “well-ordered market.” Through an analysis of 19th-century product and inspection laws, licensing cases and regulations, and public controls on the urban marketplace, the author argues that economic regulation was deeply rooted in American life and law throughout the pre-Civil War era. The pervasiveness of these regulations and accompanying legal rationales steeped in a vision of a “well-regulated society” call into question historical descriptions of this period as the golden age of market capitalism and possessive individualism Law's preeminent role in the construction of public economy also suggests the need to revise our inherited picture of antebellum law as pragmatic, instrumental, and wedded to classical conceptions of property, contract, and the market.

Using condominium owner and landowner narratives about their property, I consider how people answer the question, What does it mean to own something? These property narratives are framed around three sets of social practices, myths, and beliefs which I call rites of identity, rites of settlement, and rites of struggle—the rites of ownership. According to these narratives, ownership requires that the person possessing the property carry out these rites. Their sense of entitlement—ownership rights—is framed by these rites. Following the rites makes one a deserving property owner. Property rights are seen as protectors against arbitrary, unpredictable changes in status that violate these owners, sense that they are entitled to keep what they had worked so hard for and planned for so long. I conclude with a discussion of the value of property narratives for understanding the link between law and culture.

Through an intensive examination of the development and diffusion of a new legal device—the shareholder rights' plan or poison pill—this article demonstrates the entrepreneurial, lawmaking role of corporate lawyers. This study case suggests that corporate lawyers may act as legal entrepreneurs, developing and promoting new legal devices and strategies on behalf of actual and potential clients. If affirmed by the courts, these devices or techniques are rapidly diffused thereby contributing to the creation of new legal knowledge. The creation and successful defense of the shareholder rights' plan led to both new caselaw and statute law. In this way, corporate practitioners contribute to the creation of new legal knowledge, suggesting a bottom-up approach to knowledge creation rather than the conventional top-down view. It is suggested that legal innovations like the shareholder rights' plan are more likely to be developed in newer firms than in established firms and in specialized firms than general service law firms.

Japan's reputation for unusually strong emphasis on the avoidance of public conflict and therefore for deemphasis of legal institutions suggests an arid, hostile environment for litigators, especially those who lack substantial resources. In a study of a quasi-class action lawsuit by Japanese air pollution victims, we find that litigation can be developed as a tool in the pursuit of a social movement's wider objectives despite the paucity of resources within the Japanese legal system. Our research documents the many ways in which the delays, obstacles, and costs that characterize the litigation environment in Japan have been either neutralized or turned to the advantage of a social movement because of its commitment to longer-term political objectives rather than short-term victories. The special role of professions in general, and the legal profession in particular, in such litigation combines with class-oriented social movements to produce a political/legal pattern that is neither traditionally harmonious nor a conflict “difficult to contain.”

Antiliberal concepts calling the rule of law into question have an easy job with former leftists, for in those circles normative universals have never been esteemed. However, as experience in Germany in the past two centuries reveals, an element of natural law that lies within Marxism—a humanitarian normative element encompassing the ideas of equality, freedom, and justice—should and must be preserved.

Earlier studies haw shown that professional orientations are related to individual compliance with laws and regulations. However, no quantitative studies have focused on compliance at the organizational level and the professional orientations of the chief executive officer. Studies on dues and law breaking at the individual level have focused on professional orientations, but within an organization there are other aspects of professionalism that will be of import in determining the organization's compliance with the law. We posit that professionalism is a more complex notion for individuals located in an organizational setting. Utilizing data collected from 410 Australian nursing homes, which are characterized by a flat management structure, the data show that of three aspects of professionalism—orientation, values, and autonomy—it is professional autonomy that directly affects organizational compliance. However, the data do suggest that the relationship between professional orientations and organizational compliance are mediated by the complexity of the organization. Organizational culture is also shown to be an important factor in explaining compliance with the law.

While legal papers and case decisions have been the traditional focus of judicial biography, the family papers of Justice John Marshall Harlan the Elder demonstrate the importance for understanding a judge's conception of the polity of shifting our sights to the household. Historians of the 19th century have overestimated the distance between the private and the public spheres. The memoirs of Harlan's wife Malvina offer us unparalleled, and hitherto neglected, testimony. Her depiction of the antebellum Harlan household shows its two hierarchies based on assumptions of fundamental differences—those of gender and of race—and both positing a benevolent white male paternalist at their apex. Malvina Harlan's memoirs indicate the lifelong persistence of this paternalism in her own relationship with Justice Harlan and in his relationship with a black servant. These patterns of hierachy, separation, and mutual devotion were essential to Harlan's understanding of his family identity and personal duty. His famous dissents in favor of black civil rights protections and his lapses from his color-blind rule have their roots in this paternalism even as Harlan came to embrace the racial egalitarianism of the Civil War amendments.

The emergence of the American Federation of Labor in the 1880s and its ideology of voluntarism or “business unionism” transformed the mainstream American labor movement. Voluntarism, however, had little impact on the formation of the pre-New Deal labor policy. I suggest that members of the progressive movement developed “responsible unionism” as an alternative to “business unionism” and that it was the progressives' alternative that shaped later developments in labor policy. (1) Progressive state and federal court judges relied on the principles of agency, a fiduciary term, to make unions competent contracting parties and enforce collective trade agreements. (2) Although the AFL had long lobbied for anti-injunction legislation sup ported by an underlying ideology of voluntarism, the progressive Republican-Democratic coalition that engineered passage of the Norris-LaGuardia Anti-Injunction Act of 1932 based the legislation on their notion of “responsible unionism.” These progressives interwove the principles of agency into the act. As a result, rather than withdrawing the American state from labor-management relations, the act caused unions to begin to lose their status as private, voluntary associations, thus creating the foundation for the construction of the statist regulatory apparatus, the National Labor Relations Board, during the New Deal.