自然资源与自然法第二部分:公共信托原则

R. Adler
{"title":"自然资源与自然法第二部分:公共信托原则","authors":"R. Adler","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3542342","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Natural Resources and Natural Law Part I: Prior Appropriation analyzed claims by some western ranchers, grounded in natural law, that they have property rights in grazing resources on federal public lands through prior appropriation. Those individuals advocated their position in part through civil disobedience and armed standoffs with federal officials. They also asserted that their duty to obey theistic natural law overrode any duty to obey the Nation’s positive law. Similar claims that individual religious beliefs override positive law have been made recently regarding a range of other controversial issues, such as same-sex marriage, public insurance for birth control, and the right to bear arms. Prior appropriation doctrine is consistent with secular natural law theory. Existing positive law, however, accepts prior appropriation for western water rights but rejects its application to grazing rights on federal public lands, for reasons consistent with secular natural law. Natural law doctrine allows citizens to advocate for change but requires them to respect the positive law of the societies in which they live. Separation of church and state also bars natural law claims based on religious doctrine unless those principles are also adopted in secular positive law.\n\nThis sequel addresses claims from the opposite side of the political-environmental spectrum, that natural law provides one justification for the public trust doctrine, and that courts should enforce an atmospheric public trust to redress catastrophic global climate change. Although some religious groups have embraced environmental agendas supported by religious doctrine, public trust claims are secular in origin. Just as natural law provides support for prior appropriation, it supports the idea that some resources, such as water, wildlife, and air, should be held in common rather than made available for private ownership. From this perspective, the two doctrines merge into a single issue of resource allocation. Which resources are best made available for appropriation as private property, and which are best left in common? Natural law theory helps to explain the liberty and welfare goals that inform those choices. Positive law embraces the public trust doctrine with respect to some natural resources, and does not preclude its applicability to the atmosphere or other common resources.","PeriodicalId":401480,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law","volume":"47 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Natural Resources and Natural Law Part II: The Public Trust Doctrine\",\"authors\":\"R. Adler\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3542342\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Natural Resources and Natural Law Part I: Prior Appropriation analyzed claims by some western ranchers, grounded in natural law, that they have property rights in grazing resources on federal public lands through prior appropriation. Those individuals advocated their position in part through civil disobedience and armed standoffs with federal officials. They also asserted that their duty to obey theistic natural law overrode any duty to obey the Nation’s positive law. Similar claims that individual religious beliefs override positive law have been made recently regarding a range of other controversial issues, such as same-sex marriage, public insurance for birth control, and the right to bear arms. Prior appropriation doctrine is consistent with secular natural law theory. Existing positive law, however, accepts prior appropriation for western water rights but rejects its application to grazing rights on federal public lands, for reasons consistent with secular natural law. Natural law doctrine allows citizens to advocate for change but requires them to respect the positive law of the societies in which they live. Separation of church and state also bars natural law claims based on religious doctrine unless those principles are also adopted in secular positive law.\\n\\nThis sequel addresses claims from the opposite side of the political-environmental spectrum, that natural law provides one justification for the public trust doctrine, and that courts should enforce an atmospheric public trust to redress catastrophic global climate change. Although some religious groups have embraced environmental agendas supported by religious doctrine, public trust claims are secular in origin. Just as natural law provides support for prior appropriation, it supports the idea that some resources, such as water, wildlife, and air, should be held in common rather than made available for private ownership. From this perspective, the two doctrines merge into a single issue of resource allocation. Which resources are best made available for appropriation as private property, and which are best left in common? Natural law theory helps to explain the liberty and welfare goals that inform those choices. Positive law embraces the public trust doctrine with respect to some natural resources, and does not preclude its applicability to the atmosphere or other common resources.\",\"PeriodicalId\":401480,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law\",\"volume\":\"47 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-02-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3542342\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3542342","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

自然资源与自然法第一部分:优先占有分析了一些西部牧场主在自然法基础上提出的主张,即他们通过优先占有对联邦公共土地上的放牧资源拥有产权。这些人在一定程度上通过非暴力反抗和与联邦官员的武装对峙来主张他们的立场。他们还断言,他们遵守有神论自然法的义务高于遵守国家实在法的任何义务。最近,在同性婚姻、节育公共保险和持枪权等一系列其他有争议的问题上,也出现了类似的主张,即个人宗教信仰凌驾于实在法之上。优先占有理论与世俗自然法理论是一致的。然而,现行的实在法接受对西部水权的预先占有,但拒绝将其适用于联邦公共土地上的放牧权,理由与世俗自然法一致。自然法学说允许公民倡导变革,但要求他们尊重他们所生活的社会的实在法。政教分离也禁止以宗教教义为基础的自然法主张,除非这些原则也被世俗的实在法所采用。这一续集中论述了政治-环境光谱的相反方面的主张,即自然法为公共信托原则提供了一个理由,法院应该强制执行大气公共信托来纠正灾难性的全球气候变化。虽然一些宗教团体已经接受了由宗教教义支持的环境议程,但公众信任的主张源于世俗。正如自然法支持优先占有一样,它也支持这样一种观点,即一些资源,如水、野生动物和空气,应该为公众所有,而不是为私人所有。从这个角度来看,这两种学说合并为一个单一的资源分配问题。哪些资源最好作为私有财产,哪些最好留给公众?自然法理论有助于解释自由和福利目标对这些选择的影响。成文法在某些自然资源方面采用公共信托原则,但并不排除其适用于大气或其他共同资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Natural Resources and Natural Law Part II: The Public Trust Doctrine
Natural Resources and Natural Law Part I: Prior Appropriation analyzed claims by some western ranchers, grounded in natural law, that they have property rights in grazing resources on federal public lands through prior appropriation. Those individuals advocated their position in part through civil disobedience and armed standoffs with federal officials. They also asserted that their duty to obey theistic natural law overrode any duty to obey the Nation’s positive law. Similar claims that individual religious beliefs override positive law have been made recently regarding a range of other controversial issues, such as same-sex marriage, public insurance for birth control, and the right to bear arms. Prior appropriation doctrine is consistent with secular natural law theory. Existing positive law, however, accepts prior appropriation for western water rights but rejects its application to grazing rights on federal public lands, for reasons consistent with secular natural law. Natural law doctrine allows citizens to advocate for change but requires them to respect the positive law of the societies in which they live. Separation of church and state also bars natural law claims based on religious doctrine unless those principles are also adopted in secular positive law. This sequel addresses claims from the opposite side of the political-environmental spectrum, that natural law provides one justification for the public trust doctrine, and that courts should enforce an atmospheric public trust to redress catastrophic global climate change. Although some religious groups have embraced environmental agendas supported by religious doctrine, public trust claims are secular in origin. Just as natural law provides support for prior appropriation, it supports the idea that some resources, such as water, wildlife, and air, should be held in common rather than made available for private ownership. From this perspective, the two doctrines merge into a single issue of resource allocation. Which resources are best made available for appropriation as private property, and which are best left in common? Natural law theory helps to explain the liberty and welfare goals that inform those choices. Positive law embraces the public trust doctrine with respect to some natural resources, and does not preclude its applicability to the atmosphere or other common resources.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信